Re: Updates lacking descriptions
On 08/14/2009 07:32 AM, Jesse Keating wrote: On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 05:41 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: I strongly think Fedora would be better without Rahul and Kevin, two persons I have learned to be doing a good job on certain subjects, but to be a miscast on certain jobs and failure of the system in Fedora. I strongly feel that Fedora would be better without this negative attitude, and the appearance that this kind of attitude is tolerated. OK, do * you feel FESCo is functional and the people within FESCo are qualified for the positions they are trying to fill? * you think Fedora 11 was of good quality? * you think rel-eng and the Fedora infrastructure is working smoothly? ... I don't, but do think many of the issues related to these topics are related to certain people being involved. It's not. Your continued poisonous and rude attitude on these lists have gone unchecked for far too long. Please keep it in check, or spend some time somewhere else. First of all I do not consider my answers to be rude, but to be open. OK, I might not always be using the correct wording (I am not a native English speaker) and phrases people from the US might consider appropriate phrases (German is a much direct language than US-English) - My appologies for that. However, I also think some of you are trying to wipe issues under the carpet, try to play issue down and try to flame folks who don't share your opinions, instead of wanting to address them. Ralf -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Updates lacking descriptions
On 08/14/2009 09:11 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: I strongly think Fedora would be better without Rahul and Kevin, two persons I have learned to be doing a good job on certain subjects, but to be a miscast on certain jobs and failure of the system in Fedora. Of course, noone can hold a opinion that is different from yours and still acknowledged to be even reasonable. Yes and all the private flames (not that the public behaviour is any better) you have been sending for years have been quite an inspiration. I doubt anyone can change your behaviour but I do agree that continuing to tolerate it is a failure of the system in Fedora. No more from me on this topic. Rahul -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Cannot rely on /dev being present in %post scripts?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 David Woodhouse wrote: According to bug #517013, %post scripts should not assume that /dev is available -- so we can't do anything that requires the existence of /dev/null, /dev/urandom, etc. Is this a known and expected packaging rule, or is it a bug in the way that the user is attempting to install the packages? It's been pretty common since forever for various scriptlets to redirect output of stderr/stdout to /dev/null, so I think it'd be a bit of an ugly mess if there was a mandatory packaging rule you couldn't use at least /dev/null I hope post scripts wont have to test for /dev/null and create a device node for it if it isn't present, before redirecting to it. ;o) - -- Mike A. Harris http://mharris.ca | https://twitter.com/mikeaharris -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFKhSxZ4RNf2rTIeUARAjPWAJ962g89WlN4q+rn92c+IR2rzft/9gCgoFHy dOV7pNYrcGQPgIWIuvfenkU= =nV29 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Changing the default 32-bit x86 arch for Fedora 12 (#2)
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Bill Nottinghamnott...@redhat.com wrote: Martin Langhoff (martin.langh...@gmail.com) said: To note: it _is_ reported as a 586, so at least ancillary work in yum/anaconda/rpm will be needed so that installing F12 on these supported but not quite 686 CPUs is possible, avoiding the hackery of installing it on a true 686 and then transferring the image to the XO. diff --git a/rpmrc.in b/rpmrc.in index 4a6cca9..d62ddaf 100644 --- a/rpmrc.in +++ b/rpmrc.in @@ -281,7 +281,7 @@ arch_compat: alphaev5: alpha arch_compat: alpha: axp noarch arch_compat: athlon: i686 -arch_compat: geode: i586 +arch_compat: geode: i686 arch_compat: pentium4: pentium3 arch_compat: pentium3: i686 arch_compat: i686: i586 That should do the trick. :) I've just been testing this with my Fit-PC geode box and it hasn't made it into rawhide and hence doesn't work. I've filed a bug [1] and added it to the alpha blocker as its a pretty large miss for the x86 recompile feature. Peter [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517475 -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: F12 to require i686, but which CPUs do not qualify?
Kevin Kofler wrote: Joachim wrote: I do not understand then, that there exist i686 packages which have higher requirements. Those packages need to be fixed. I know there are some audio production packages which are building with SSE enabled (and required, those packages don't do runtime detection), IIRC in both Fedora and RPM Fusion, in blatant violation of the guidelines, and the packager(s) refuse(s) to fix this (they even do it intentionally for new packages, despite my objections in the reviews). If I'm not mistaken, most of the offenders are owned by oget (Orcan Ogetbil), but if I were you, I'd check all the audio production packages. Look at the ATLAS library for which I had filed a bug because only SSE/SSE2/SSE3 variants are provided This one needs to get fixed too, of course. I've looked at how Debian is handling this, but they're stuck at an old version (3.6.0), maybe exactly because of this issue. :-( We need to provide architectural defaults for plain i686, even crappy ones, they just need to work at all. I think there's a valid case for making an exception to this: when a package is an accelerated version of a particular library. That is, when the basic functionality of a library is available in a i686 Fedora package, but a special SSEx version of the library makes use of faster instructions. Andrew. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Updates lacking descriptions
2009/8/14 Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de: On 08/14/2009 07:32 AM, Jesse Keating wrote: On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 05:41 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: I strongly think Fedora would be better without Rahul and Kevin, two persons I have learned to be doing a good job on certain subjects, but to be a miscast on certain jobs and failure of the system in Fedora. I strongly feel that Fedora would be better without this negative attitude, and the appearance that this kind of attitude is tolerated. First of all I do not consider my answers to be rude, but to be open. OK, I might not always be using the correct wording (I am not a native English speaker) and phrases people from the US might consider appropriate phrases (German is a much direct language than US-English) - My appologies for that. Erm.. I'm German as well, and what you wrote in this thread (and other stuff you wrote on this list) *is* rude. Do not try to excuse your behavior with you're German. You do a lot of discredit to the other Germans on this list with it. -- LG Thomas Dubium sapientiae initium -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Error while installing firefox from source build cpio: MD5 sum mismatch
Hi all, I have been trying to build firefox 3.0.13 on Fedora-10, i was successfull in building it but during installation i end up with following md5sum mismatch. This is happening continously with even fresh builds and i don't have firefox installed also. RegardsPreparing... ### [100%] 1:firefox### [100%] error: unpacking of archive failed on file /usr/lib64/firefox-3.0.13/firefox;4a854232: cpio: MD5 sum mismatch Has any one seen this error? is there a way out? I have also tried enabling the following parameters in my rpm macros file. But still after that a fresh build fails. %_source_filedigest_algorithm 1 %_binary_filedigest_algorithm 1 Can any one give me few more pointers to debug this problem?. Thanks Regards -- Harshavardhana Gluster - http://www.gluster.com -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
rawhide report: 20090814 changes
Compose started at Fri Aug 14 06:15:05 UTC 2009 Updated Packages: cups-1.4-0.rc1.15.fc12 -- * Tue Aug 11 2009 Tim Waugh twa...@redhat.com 1:1.4-0.rc1.15 - Avoid empty BrowseLocalProtocols setting (bug #516460, STR #3287). * Mon Aug 10 2009 Tim Waugh twa...@redhat.com 1:1.4-0.rc1.14 - Fixed ppds.dat handling of drv files (bug #515027, STR #3279). - Fixed udev rules file to avoid DEVTYPE warning messages. - Fixed cupsGetNamedDest() so it does not fall back to the default printer when a destination has been named (bug #516439, STR #3285). - Fixed MIME type rules for image/jpeg and image/x-bitmap (bug #516438, STR #3284). - Clear out cache files on upgrade. - Require acl. * Thu Aug 06 2009 Tim Waugh twa...@redhat.com 1:1.4-0.rc1.13 - Ship udev rules to allow libusb to access printer devices. - Fixed duplex test pages (bug #514898, STR #3277). libvirt-0.7.0-4.fc12 * Thu Aug 13 2009 Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com - 0.7.0-4 - Rewrite policykit support (rhbz #499970) - Log and ignore NUMA topology problems (rhbz #506590) virt-manager-0.8.0-2.fc12 - * Thu Aug 13 2009 Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com - 0.8.0-2.fc12 - Remove obsolete dep on policykit agent Summary: Added Packages: 0 Removed Packages: 0 Modified Packages: 3 Broken deps for i386 -- 389-ds-1.1.3-4.fc12.noarch requires 389-ds-admin R-RScaLAPACK-0.5.1-19.fc11.i586 requires openmpi-libs asterisk-fax-1.6.1-0.24.rc1.fc12.i686 requires libspandsp.so.1 bigboard-0.6.4-12.fc12.i686 requires mugshot = 0:1.1.90-1 clutter-cairomm-0.7.4-2.fc11.i586 requires libclutter-cairo-0.8.so.0 clutter-cairomm-0.7.4-2.fc11.i586 requires libcluttermm-0.8.so.2 clutter-cairomm-0.7.4-2.fc11.i586 requires libclutter-glx-0.8.so.0 clutter-cairomm-devel-0.7.4-2.fc11.i586 requires pkgconfig(cluttermm-0.8) clutter-cairomm-devel-0.7.4-2.fc11.i586 requires pkgconfig(clutter-0.8) clutter-gtkmm-0.9.4-1.fc12.i586 requires libclutter-glx-0.9.so.0 clutter-gtkmm-0.9.4-1.fc12.i586 requires libclutter-gtk-0.9.so.0 clutter-gtkmm-devel-0.9.4-1.fc12.i586 requires pkgconfig(clutter-gtk-0.9) cluttermm-0.9.4-1.fc12.i586 requires libclutter-glx-0.9.so.0 cluttermm-devel-0.9.4-1.fc12.i586 requires pkgconfig(clutter-0.9) dap-hdf4_handler-3.7.9-2.fc11.i586 requires libdap.so.9 dap-hdf4_handler-3.7.9-2.fc11.i586 requires libdapserver.so.6 entertainer-0.4.2-5.fc12.noarch requires pyclutter-cairo octave-forge-20080831-10.fc12.i686 requires octave(api) = 0:api-v32 perl-DBIx-Class-Schema-Loader-0.04006-4.fc12.noarch requires perl(DBIX::Class) php-layers-menu-3.2.0-0.2.rc.fc12.noarch requires php-pear(HTML_Template_PHPLIB) plplot-octave-5.9.4-1.fc12.i586 requires octave(api) = 0:api-v32 ppl-yap-0.10.2-5.fc12.i686 requires libYap.so python-repoze-what-quickstart-1.0-2.fc12.noarch requires python-repoze-who-plugins-sql qtparted-0.4.5-19.fc11.i586 requires libparted-1.8.so.8 rubygem-main-2.8.4-3.fc12.noarch requires rubygem(fattr) = 0:1.0.3 sems-1.1.1-2.fc12.i586 requires libspandsp.so.1 sems-g722-1.1.1-2.fc12.i586 requires libspandsp.so.1 sems-gsm-1.1.1-2.fc12.i586 requires libspandsp.so.1 sems-speex-1.1.1-2.fc12.i586 requires libspandsp.so.1 serpentine-0.9-5.fc12.noarch requires gnome-python2-nautilus-cd-burner showimg-pgsql-0.9.5-22.fc11.i586 requires libpqxx-2.6.8.so sugar-pippy-34-2.fc12.i686 requires libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) sugar-pippy-34-2.fc12.i686 requires libc.so.6()(64bit) sugar-pippy-34-2.fc12.i686 requires libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) sugar-pippy-34-2.fc12.i686 requires libm.so.6()(64bit) sugar-pippy-34-2.fc12.i686 requires libm.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) sugar-pippy-34-2.fc12.i686 requires libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) sugar-pippy-34-2.fc12.i686 requires libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) sugar-pippy-34-2.fc12.i686 requires libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4)(64bit) sugar-pippy-34-2.fc12.i686 requires libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) thunderbird-lightning-1.0-0.8.20090513hg.fc12.i686 requires thunderbird 0:3.0-3.6.b4 Broken deps for x86_64 -- 389-ds-1.1.3-4.fc12.noarch requires 389-ds-admin R-RScaLAPACK-0.5.1-19.fc11.x86_64 requires openmpi-libs asterisk-fax-1.6.1-0.24.rc1.fc12.x86_64 requires libspandsp.so.1()(64bit) bigboard-0.6.4-12.fc12.x86_64 requires mugshot = 0:1.1.90-1 clutter-cairomm-0.7.4-2.fc11.i586 requires libclutter-cairo-0.8.so.0 clutter-cairomm-0.7.4-2.fc11.i586 requires libcluttermm-0.8.so.2 clutter-cairomm-0.7.4-2.fc11.i586 requires libclutter-glx-0.8.so.0 clutter-cairomm-0.7.4-2.fc11.x86_64 requires
Re: Updates lacking descriptions
On Fri, 14 Aug 2009, Ralf Corsepius wrote: forth on this now. And censorship doesn't make it better. I strongly think Fedora would be better without Rahul and Kevin, two persons I have learned to be doing a good job on certain subjects, but to be a miscast on certain jobs and failure of the system in Fedora. This thread is now closed. -sv -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Updates lacking descriptions
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009, Jesse Keating wrote: On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 05:41 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: I strongly think Fedora would be better without Rahul and Kevin, two persons I have learned to be doing a good job on certain subjects, but to be a miscast on certain jobs and failure of the system in Fedora. I strongly feel that Fedora would be better without this negative attitude, and the appearance that this kind of attitude is tolerated. It's not. Your continued poisonous and rude attitude on these lists have gone unchecked for far too long. Please keep it in check, or spend some time somewhere else. This thread is now closed. -sv -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Updates lacking descriptions
On Fri, 14 Aug 2009, Thomas Janssen wrote: 2009/8/14 Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de: On 08/14/2009 07:32 AM, Jesse Keating wrote: On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 05:41 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: I strongly think Fedora would be better without Rahul and Kevin, two persons I have learned to be doing a good job on certain subjects, but to be a miscast on certain jobs and failure of the system in Fedora. I strongly feel that Fedora would be better without this negative attitude, and the appearance that this kind of attitude is tolerated. First of all I do not consider my answers to be rude, but to be open. OK, I might not always be using the correct wording (I am not a native English speaker) and phrases people from the US might consider appropriate phrases (German is a much direct language than US-English) - My appologies for that. Erm.. I'm German as well, and what you wrote in this thread (and other stuff you wrote on this list) *is* rude. Do not try to excuse your behavior with you're German. You do a lot of discredit to the other Germans on this list with it. this thread is now closed. -sv -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Updates lacking descriptions
On Fri, 14 Aug 2009, Chris Adams wrote: Once upon a time, Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de said: On 08/13/2009 06:55 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: Two wrongs does not make a right. Everyone needs to stop the back and forth on this now. And censorship doesn't make it better. Asking people to try to be polite or to take a break when discussions get heated is not censorship. I strongly think Fedora would be better without ... That is far over the line for acceptable behavior. This thread is now closed. -sv -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Updates lacking descriptions
On Fri, 14 Aug 2009, Rahul Sundaram wrote: On 08/14/2009 09:11 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: I strongly think Fedora would be better without Rahul and Kevin, two persons I have learned to be doing a good job on certain subjects, but to be a miscast on certain jobs and failure of the system in Fedora. Of course, noone can hold a opinion that is different from yours and still acknowledged to be even reasonable. Yes and all the private flames (not that the public behaviour is any better) you have been sending for years have been quite an inspiration. I doubt anyone can change your behaviour but I do agree that continuing to tolerate it is a failure of the system in Fedora. No more from me on this topic. This thread is now closed. -sv -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Package groups vs metapackages
On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 14:38 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 12:53 -0700, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote: I've been working recently on bringing Fedora up to snuff as a platform to build Haskell software on: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Haskell#Haskell_Platform_support In my ideal world, it would be possible to install all of the necessities for decent Haskell development via a single short command line. I can see two ways to do this: * Create a haskell-devel (or something) package that simply depends on all of the Haskell Platform's component packages. This would have the nice property of being versioned, just as the Haskell Platform itself is. * Create a Haskell Development group in comps. This is unknown territory to me: I don't know if it's a good idea, how it would work, how I'd edit it to add new dependencies when the Haskell Platform gets updates, or ... well, anything. What's the collective wisdom about the best approach for doing this? I wondered about this too when I joined, and several people told me metapackages are generally discouraged in favour of package groups. I don't know the rationale behind that decision, but that's what I was told. I prefer comps groups. Here are the benefits of each approach as I see it: Comps Groups * visible through anaconda * configurable between products * allows for mandatory/default/optional/conditional packages * cleaner - i.e. comps groups were meant for this purpose whereas metapackages are more of a kludge Metapackages * allow for versioned package listings Cheers -- Dennis p.s. If you decide to create a metapackage, don't name it *-devel. Packages with those names are assumed to contain development libraries and are automatically marked as multilib. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: F12 to require i686, but which CPUs do not qualify?
I'm late replying -- had trouble with my mail server -- so I'm moving all my replies to Bill Nottingham's post, as I think he can fix the wiki pages most authoritatively to not say that Athlons will not work, if that is indeed the proper thing to do, given that so many packages depend on packages that are only built for SSE2. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/F12X86Support https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Talk:Features/F12X86Support If necessary, I can install Rawhide and see if it boots, and then edit the above wiki page and the Alpha release notes, but I'd prefer if someone who already uses an Athlon-core processor on Rawhide did it. On 09-08-13 10:34:58, Peter Robinson wrote: Tony Nelson wrote: ... Is there a simple way for ordinary users to know if their CPU is expected to work on F12 (as an i686 according to GCC)? Is there a tool to run that doesn't require downloading F12? https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/F12X86Support Its outlined in the link above. An athlon should be fine. Basically if its i586 + cmov it should work. You can tell if you have cmov by looking at /proc/cpuinfo. According to that link, an Athlon is specifically excluded. According to the Talk:Features/F12X86Support link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Talk:Features/F12X86Support, SSE2 is required. Originally it wasn't planned to support them but there was enough discussion to change peoples minds :-) If that has changed, then those wiki pages need updating, as well as the Release Notes and release announcements. Thanks. On 09-08-13 10:35:29, Jon Ciesla wrote: Quoting Bill Nottingham: Given the loud feedback, I've updated the proposal at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/F12X86Support The revised proposal: - Build all packages for i686 (this requires cmov) - Optimize for Atom Why? ... That doesn't actually quite say about SSE2, but at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Talk:Features/F12X86Support: _Bill Nottingham_ Once a set has been decided on, this should be pretty trivial. With respect to the proposal, 'grep sse2 /proc/ cpuinfo' should work. Bill? -- TonyN.:' mailto:tonynel...@georgeanelson.com ' http://www.georgeanelson.com/ -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: F12 to require i686, but which CPUs do not qualify?
Not Bill, but from my understanding, SSE2 was originally going to be required and that question must have been presented and answered at that point. Once the main page got updated after discussion, the original questions that no longer apply have not been removed. 2009/8/14 Tony Nelson That doesn't actually quite say about SSE2, but at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Talk:Features/F12X86Support: _Bill Nottingham_ Once a set has been decided on, this should be pretty trivial. With respect to the proposal, 'grep sse2 /proc/ cpuinfo' should work. Bill? -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Lower Process Capabilities
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 12:38 PM, Till Maasopensou...@till.name wrote: $ sudo -i sudo: /etc/sudoers is mode 00, should be 0440 sudo: no valid sudoers sources found, quitting This is sudo checking the permissions of it's own sudoers file. Since they aren't what it expects, it bails. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: F12 to require i686, but which CPUs do not qualify?
I think there's a valid case for making an exception to this: when a package is an accelerated version of a particular library. That is, when the basic functionality of a library is available in a i686 Fedora package, but a special SSEx version of the library makes use of faster instructions. Andrew. Right now, there exist a number of packages which explicitly pull in atlas instead of the also available generic packages blas/lapack which do not exhibit these severe restrictions. Earlier versions of the Fedora atlas package actually supported a wider range of processors including even such offering 3dnow! and also plain x86. The current behaviour (code depending on lapack aborts because of illegal instructions) is a regression which has been introduced by the packager. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
New, improved FESCo trac instance
As one of the features implemented out of a complaint that the FESCo wiki information was outdated since our move to a Trac-based workflow, there are now templates for various types of tickets in the FESCo trac instance at https://fedorahosted.org/fesco. If you attempt to file a ticket, a template will appear. If you change the type of ticket, it will ask if you wish to reload the template for that ticket type. Click OK. and you have a relevant template to fill out. Delete the explanatory text in the template, and fill in the requested information. This will enhance the ability for FESCo to provide prompt resolution to issues. Thanks for your cooperation! -Jon -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Lower Process Capabilities
On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 21:27 -0400, Steve Grubb wrote: On Thursday 13 August 2009 05:53:37 pm John Poelstra wrote: Can you update the feature page to reflect the reduced scope of the feature and its completion percentage? All I see since FESCo met was the change to the detailed description related to the permissions. That *is* the reduction in scope - other than what I have time to actually work on. If I can fix dhcp, that is a major win. That is the item that stands out as the biggest problem when running netcap. Steve: With my paranoid/QA hat on, I think the How to Test section needs some more items. It covers testing that each specific change being made works as expected, but it doesn't also cover testing that there weren't unexpected side effects. I added some questions to this end to the discussion page: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Talk:Features/LowerProcessCapabilities Hope this is helpful Dave -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: An error while using livecd-creator
On Tuesday, August 11 2009, Kushal Das said:
I am using livecd-creator on a F-11 box. I have 27GB free on my / partition.
The error I am getting is given below:
[snip]
Error creating Live CD : Unable to install: [('installing package
bug-buddy-1:2.26.0-2.fc11.i586 needs 684KB on the
/var/tmp/imgcreate-rScTyr/install_root filesystem', (9,
[snip]
Any pointer on how to fix this ?
As the message says, there's not enough space in the root fs of the
livecd (/var/tmp/imgcreate-X/install_root) to install the packages.
If you were overriding the size of the / partition, be sure you have the
latest pykickstart package installed as there was a bug there that broke
the overriding
Jeremy
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: F12 to require i686, but which CPUs do not qualify?
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Joachimjoachim.frie...@googlemail.com wrote: I think there's a valid case for making an exception to this: when a package is an accelerated version of a particular library. That is, when the basic functionality of a library is available in a i686 Fedora package, but a special SSEx version of the library makes use of faster instructions. Andrew. Right now, there exist a number of packages which explicitly pull in atlas instead of the also available generic packages blas/lapack which do not exhibit these severe restrictions. Earlier versions of the Fedora atlas package actually supported a wider range of processors including even such offering 3dnow! and also plain x86. The current behaviour (code depending on lapack aborts because of illegal instructions) is a regression which has been introduced by the packager. Correction: The current behaviour was not introduced by the packager, it is because of changes in the upstream's design of the package; unless of course you mean we should be stuck with the old version. The only way to produce atlas binary for architectures not provided for in the upstream tarball, is to bootstrap it on that particular arch. Unfortunately none of Fedora build infrastructure is based on PII or less. Deji -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: F12 to require i686, but which CPUs do not qualify?
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 10:38:58AM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote: Kevin Kofler wrote: We need to provide architectural defaults for plain i686, even crappy ones, they just need to work at all. I think there's a valid case for making an exception to this: when a package is an accelerated version of a particular library. That is, when the basic functionality of a library is available in a i686 Fedora package, but a special SSEx version of the library makes use of faster instructions. The run-time linker on i386 can already pick up an SSE2-specific build of a shared library if it's available -- the i386 gmp package makes use of this. Of course, both builds have to provide the same interfaces for that to work, and I'm not sufficiently familiar with this set of libraries to know if they do. If they do, and if the libc maintainers think it's worth doing, this support could be extended to cover SSE- and SSE3-specific versions. We could then package these optimized versions of the library with the fallback works-everywhere version and let ld.so sort out the details at runtime. That's quite a few ifs, and I'm not one of the people who'd have to actually do the work, so I'll shut up now. HTH, Nalin -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Printing test day coming up...
Another week, another Fit and Finish test day. This time around, we want to look at printing. See http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2009-08-18_Fit_and_Finish:Printing Both Marek Kasik and Tim Waugh have kindly agreed to be around, so we'll have sufficient expertise for all of the printing stack. Drop in #fedora-fit-and-finish on Freenode on Tuesday, Aug 14, to join in the fun. Matthias -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
[ANNOUNCEMENT] dracut-0.9
dracut-0.9 == - let plymouth attach to the terminal (nice text output now) - new kernel command line parameter rdinfo show dracut output, even when quiet is specified - rd_LUKS_UUID is now handled correctly - dracut-gencmdline: rd_LUKS_UUID and rd_MD_UUID is now correctly generated - now generates initrd-generic with around 15MB - smaller bugfixes dracut-0.8 == - iSCSI with username and password - support for live images (dmsquashed live images) - iscsi_firmware fixes - smaller images - bugfixes dracut-0.7 == - dracut: strip binaries in initramfs --strip strip binaries in the initramfs (default) --nostrip do not strip binaries in the initramfs - dracut-catimages Usage: ./dracut-catimages [OPTION]... initramfs base image [image...] Creates initial ramdisk image by concatenating several images from the command line and /boot/dracut/ -f, --force Overwrite existing initramfs file. -i, --imagedirDirectory with additional images to add (default: /boot/dracut/) -o, --overlaydir Overlay directory, which contains files that will be used to create an additional image --nooverlay Do not use the overlay directory --noimagedir Do not use the additional image directory -h, --helpThis message --debug Output debug information of the build process -v, --verbose Verbose output during the build process - s390 dasd support dracut-0.6 == - dracut: add --kernel-only and --no-kernel arguments --kernel-only only install kernel drivers and firmware files --no-kernel do not install kernel drivers and firmware files All kernel module related install commands moved from install to installkernel. For --kernel-only all installkernel scripts of the specified modules are used, regardless of any checks, so that all modules which might be needed by any dracut generic image are in. The basic idea is to create two images. One image with the kernel modules and one without. So if the kernel changes, you only have to replace one image. Grub and the kernel can handle multiple images, so grub entry can look like this: title Fedora (2.6.29.5-191.fc11.i586) root (hd0,0) kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.29.5-191.fc11.i586 ro rhgb quiet initrd /initrd-20090722.img /initrd-kernel-2.6.29.5-191.fc11.i586.img /initrd-config.img initrd-20090722.img the image provided by the initrd rpm one old backup version is kept like with the kernel initrd-kernel-2.6.29.5-191.fc11.i586.img the image provided by the kernel rpm initrd-config.img optional image with local configuration files - dracut: add --kmoddir directory, where to look for kernel modules -k, --kmoddir [DIR] specify the directory, where to look for kernel modules -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Fedora 12 Alpha Blocker Meeting Recap
Meeting log available at http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-bugzappers/2009-08-14/fedora-bugzappers.2009-08-14-15.13.html = Attendees = jlaska, poelcat, rjune_wrk, stickster, jeff_hann = https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=516941 = State: MODIFIED Anyone using the radeon driver is asked to help verify the fix against kernel-2.6.31-0.145.2.1.rc5.git3.fc12. = https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517171 = State: MODIFIED Anaconda-12.15 did not arrive in last nights rawhide, so QA is unable to verify the fix for this issue. = https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517475 = State: NEW The group was not able to reach a conclusion. Several people questioned whether a downstream project should block the Alpha. Another concern reflected the number of Alpha testers impacted by the geode failure. == UPDATES == SMOLT geode stats - http://smolts.org/reports/view_devices?device=Geodesearch=Submit+Query After discussing with Jkeating, the proposed rpm patch is limited to geode and does not appear to affect other platforms (see http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2009-June/msg01641.html). Jkeating felt the bug was worth addressing to unblock OLPC/XO testers using the Alpha. Jlaska expressed concern why this patch hadn't been applied yet, but indicated the issue was a 'nice to have' for the alpha. = Action items = [jlaska] - follow-up in bug#517 with additional information = Open discussion = == Verifying MODIFIED bugs == poelcat asked what the recommended practice was for monitoring what bugs need testing. Jlaska indicated he was asking QA folks to keep an eye on MODIFIED bugs on the blocker list. Additionally, there is a NEEDSRETESTING keyword available. == Rawhide install test run == Jlaska provided results from a test run initiated by lili and rhe last night against rawhide. This provides a more recent snapshot of installer status with anaconda-12.14 (see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Fedora_12_Alpha_TCRegression_Install_Test_Results). No new alpha blockers have been escalated from this testing. Thanks, James 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: Printing test day coming up...
On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 11:38 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote: Another week, another Fit and Finish test day. This time around, we want to look at printing. See http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2009-08-18_Fit_and_Finish:Printing Both Marek Kasik and Tim Waugh have kindly agreed to be around, so we'll have sufficient expertise for all of the printing stack. Drop in #fedora-fit-and-finish on Freenode on Tuesday, Aug 14, to join in the fun. ...and of course, when I was talking about Aug 14, I meant Aug 18. Sorry, Matthias -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Another linux kernel NULL pointer vulnerability ( exploit here )
Hello guy's for the people who don't have updated the kernel. http://grsecurity.net/%7Espender/wunderbar_emporium.tgz -- 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
FESCo meeting summary for 2009-08-14
Minutes: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2009-08-14/fedora-meeting.2009-08-14-17.01.html Minutes (text): http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2009-08-14/fedora-meeting.2009-08-14-17.01.txt Log: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2009-08-14/fedora-meeting.2009-08-14-17.01.log.html -- 17:01:23 jds2001 #startmeeting FESCo meeting 2009/08/14 17:01:25 jds2001 #chair dgilmore jwb notting nirik sharkcz jds2001 j-rod skvidal Kevin_Kofler 17:01:41 * nirik is here. 17:01:43 jds2001 so notting and skvidal are unhere 17:02:04 Kevin_Kofler Present. 17:02:44 * dgilmore is here 17:03:02 * j-rod here 17:03:27 jds2001 cool 17:03:42 jds2001 #topic apcuspd static linking 17:03:47 jds2001 .fesco 235 17:04:16 Kevin_Kofler Can't the libs go to /lib instead? 17:04:26 Kevin_Kofler Static linking sounds like a bad solution to me. 17:04:44 j-rod please to be not the linking of static 17:04:46 jds2001 how many are there? 17:04:47 Kevin_Kofler But there clearly is a problem there, stuff in / must not require libs from /usr. 17:04:57 nirik .bugzilla bug 346271 17:04:59 bugbot Bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=346271 low, low, ---, notting, ASSIGNED, halt initscript does not properly handle apcupsd shutdowns 17:05:28 nirik it's other packages /usr/lib/ libs that it's linked to... 17:05:45 nirik snmp and sensors 17:05:53 Kevin_Kofler Those need to be moved to /lib. 17:06:09 jds2001 well my rootfs is typically like 1GB 17:06:10 Kevin_Kofler Statically linking strikes me as the wrong solution to a real problem. 17:06:19 dgilmore i thought we had already agreed that we dont support /usr of a seperate filesystem 17:06:39 jds2001 so if we move everything in the world to /lib, then I've got a problem. 17:07:01 nirik dgilmore: yeah, I wonder how many people aside from jds2001 do seperate /usr anymore. 17:07:23 * jds2001 doesnt think i'm unique :) 17:07:36 nirik the guide suggests against it. 17:07:37 dgilmore jds2001: but you are 17:07:39 nirik http://docs.fedoraproject.org/install-guide/f11/en-US/html/s2-diskpartrecommend-x86.html#sn-partitioning-advice 17:07:48 * jds2001 can point to several thousand systems at $DAYJOB that have a separate /usr 17:07:49 nirik Do not place /usr on a separate partition 17:08:08 nirik jds2001: is that seperate /usr on local disk? or via net? 17:08:15 jds2001 local disk 17:08:17 dgilmore im pretty sure last release we said that /usr on a seperate filesystem was not supported 17:08:38 nirik then in this case I don't think it matters. This is only a problem if we shut down net and can't use /usr/lib/ 17:08:39 jds2001 and they're RHEL/Solaris, but the point remains. 17:09:03 jds2001 I think remote /usr isn't supported. 17:09:05 nirik so this case is not 'seperate /usr' but 'seperate /usr on network' 17:09:11 nirik (unless I am reading this wrong) 17:09:29 jds2001 pretty much how i read it too. 17:09:42 dgilmore nirik: which is really not supported 17:10:01 nirik humm... or is it... does it umount other fses before it runs that? 17:11:17 * nirik re-reads the patch and halt script. 17:12:22 nirik no, it's all non root mounts I think... 17:12:23 Kevin_Kofler How much of the static libs gets linked in if we do the static linking? If it doesn't actually save space, then it's a no-brainer to -1 it and tell them to just move the stuff to /lib instead if they want to support this usecase. 17:13:07 dgilmore its a seperate /usr 17:13:18 nirik yeah, I don't know how far it goes adding those 2 packages and their deps to /lib 17:13:26 Kevin_Kofler One advantage of moving to /lib is that it costs essentially nothing for those who don't have separate /usr unlike static linking. 17:13:53 Kevin_Kofler So for the vast majority of people, if the problem is to be solved, moving to /lib is the best solution. 17:13:57 dgilmore the answer here i believe is dont have a seperate /usr 17:14:49 dgilmore it doesnt make sense like it used to anymore 17:14:55 Kevin_Kofler Why can't we just move the libs to /lib? For all those without a separate /usr, it won't change a thing. 17:15:13 dgilmore Kevin_Kofler: where do we stop? 17:15:25 Kevin_Kofler For those few folks with a separate /usr, it'll solve their problem, and if their / is not big enough, they'll just have to fix it. 17:15:50 Kevin_Kofler dgilmore: Good question. Maybe we should drop /usr entirely like HURD or make it an alias for / like MSYS? ;-) 17:15:51 nirik if it's just 2 packages for this I'd be ok with moving them to /lib... but if it pulls in a bunch of stuff we should just say no. 17:16:21 nirik in any case I don't think we should static link unless there is a more compelling reason. 17:16:27 jds2001 yeah, I'm wondering how much stuff it drags in 17:16:39 jds2001 static linking is bad, mmmkkaayyy :) 17:16:42 dgilmore Do not place /usr on a separate partition If /usr is on a separate partition from /, the boot process becomes much more complex, and in some situations (like installations on iSCSI drives), might not
Re: Another linux kernel NULL pointer vulnerability ( exploit here )
Am Freitag, den 14.08.2009, 14:39 -0300 schrieb Itamar Reis Peixoto:
Hello guy's
for the people who don't have updated the kernel.
I'm running kernel-2.6.29.6-217.2.3.fc11.x86_64 and this one is not
supposed to be fixed, however...
http://grsecurity.net/%7Espender/wunderbar_emporium.tgz
... it doesn't work here. Although the author claims it's not stopped by
SELinux (he even mentions Dan by name), SELinux one more time saves the
world:
$ su -c 'setenforce 0'
$ LANG=C sh wunderbar_emporium.sh
runcon: invalid context:
unconfined_u:unconfined_r:initrc_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023: Invalid argument
[+] MAPPED ZERO PAGE!
[+] Resolved selinux_enforcing to 0x81874374
[+] Resolved selinux_enabled to 0x815a0a60
[+] Resolved security_ops to 0x81871b20
[+] Resolved default_security_ops to 0x815a0080
[+] Resolved sel_read_enforce to 0x8118934c
[+] Resolved audit_enabled to 0x8182e804
[+] Resolved commit_creds to 0x810615c3
[+] Resolved prepare_kernel_cred to 0x810614a4
[+] got ring0!
[+] detected 2.6 style 4k stacks
sh: mplayer: command not found
[+] Disabled security of : nothing, what an insecure machine!
[+] Got root!
sh-4.0# setenforce 1
sh-4.0# exit
exit
$ LANG=C sh wunderbar_emporium.sh
runcon: invalid context:
unconfined_u:unconfined_r:initrc_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023: Invalid argument
UNABLE TO MAP ZERO PAGE!
The log entry:
node=wicktop.localdomain type=AVC msg=audit(1250276339.135:27494):
avc: denied { mmap_zero } for pid=16293 comm=exploit
scontext=unconfined_u:unconfined_r:unconfined_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023
tcontext=unconfined_u:unconfined_r:unconfined_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023
tclass=memprotect node=wicktop.localdomain type=SYSCALL
msg=audit(1250276339.135:27494): arch=c03e syscall=9 success=yes
exit=0 a0=0 a1=1000 a2=7 a3=32 items=0 ppid=16273 pid=16293 auid=500
uid=500 gid=500 euid=500 suid=500 fsuid=500 egid=500 sgid=500
fsgid=500 tty=pts4 ses=1 comm=exploit
exe=/home/chris/Downloads/wunderbar_emporium/exploit
subj=unconfined_u:unconfined_r:unconfined_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023 key=(null)
So I suggest to calm down and not believer everything you read.
Regards,
Christoph
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: naive live USB question
On 13/08/09 17:06, Adam Williamson wrote: On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 12:12 +0100, psmith wrote: jeez when i brought up the idea of fedora using hybrid iso's a few months back i was basically lambasted by most on this list, now all of a sudden it's a new F12 feature? wtf??? Didn't you know? That's how Fedora works. First everyone tells you you're insane, crazy, probably a drooling idiot, and there's ten reasons your idea will never work and would eat babies if it did. Then they implement it. :) heh thanks adam, you just brought a big smile to my face :D just when i needed one too lol phil -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: F12 to require i686, but which CPUs do not qualify?
On 09-08-14 09:20:04, Naheem Zaffar wrote: Not Bill, but from my understanding, SSE2 was originally going to be required and that question must have been presented and answered at that point. Once the main page got updated after discussion, the original questions that no longer apply have not been removed. Apparantly I'm not making myself clear. That page specifically excludes all AMD processors before the Geode LX, thus it excludes the Athlon: * pre-AMD Geode processors It may be that discussions have happened elsewhere, but the current F12 Feature page does exclude the Athlon and similar processors. 2009/8/14 Tony Nelson That doesn't actually quite say about SSE2, but at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Talk:Features/F12X86Support: _Bill Nottingham_ Once a set has been decided on, this should be pretty trivial. With respect to the proposal, 'grep sse2 /proc/ cpuinfo' should work. Bill? -- TonyN.:' mailto:tonynel...@georgeanelson.com ' http://www.georgeanelson.com/ -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: F12 to require i686, but which CPUs do not qualify?
On Aug 14, 2009, at 14:01, Tony Nelson tonynel...@georgeanelson.com wrote: On 09-08-14 09:20:04, Naheem Zaffar wrote: Not Bill, but from my understanding, SSE2 was originally going to be required and that question must have been presented and answered at that point. Once the main page got updated after discussion, the original questions that no longer apply have not been removed. Apparantly I'm not making myself clear. That page specifically excludes all AMD processors before the Geode LX, thus it excludes the Athlon: * pre-AMD Geode processors It may be that discussions have happened elsewhere, but the current F12 Feature page does exclude the Athlon and similar processors. Pretty sure this meant any geode before AMD picked them up, not any amd processor before the geode. -- Jes -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: F12 to require i686, but which CPUs do not qualify?
On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 17:01 -0400, Tony Nelson wrote: On 09-08-14 09:20:04, Naheem Zaffar wrote: Not Bill, but from my understanding, SSE2 was originally going to be required and that question must have been presented and answered at that point. Once the main page got updated after discussion, the original questions that no longer apply have not been removed. Apparantly I'm not making myself clear. That page specifically excludes all AMD processors before the Geode LX, thus it excludes the Athlon: * pre-AMD Geode processors You're reading it wrong. That doesn't mean 'AMD processors before the Geode', it means 'Geode processors before AMD bought out the Geode line from NatSemi'. Since someone's read it wrong, that's a good indication it should be worded more clearly on the page :) -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Lower Process Capabilities
Quoting Steve Grubb (sgr...@redhat.com): On Sunday 26 July 2009 07:32:36 pm Steve Grubb wrote: What can be done is that we program the application to drop some of the capabilities so that its not all powerful. There's just one flaw in this plan. The directory for /bin is 0755 root root. So, even if we drop all capabilities, the root acct can still trojan a system. If we change the bin directory to 005, then root cannot write to that directory unless it has the CAP_DAC_OVERRIDE capability. The idea with this project is to not allow network facing or daemons have CAP_DAC_OVERRIDE, but to only allow it from logins or su/sudo. As discussed at the Fesco meeting last week, the lower process capabilities project is going to reduce the scope of this part of the proposal. At this point, we are going to tighten up perms on the directories in $PATH, /lib[64], /boot, and /root. A sample srpm can be found here for anyone wanting to try it out before alpha is unfrozen. http://people.redhat.com/sgrubb/files/filesystem-2.4.24-1.fc12.src.rpm Any feedback would be appreciated. Hi Steve, downloading and looking at filesystem.spec in the above rpm, I don't see any special treatment for boot, root, or /lib Is the right rpm at that link? If so, then I must be misunderstanding - can you give me a diff or something to explain how it's supposed to work? thanks, -serge -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Rebuilding mysql 5.1.30-1 fails under fc11
Howard Wilkinson how...@cohtech.com writes: I am trying to regenerate the RPM packages for Mysql 5.1.30-1 as currently available for FC11. But the build fails a large number of the test cases. Is there a specific trick for getting this package to build properly? rpl.rpl_relay_space_innodb [ pass ]913 rpl.rpl_relayrotate [ pass ] 16282 rpl.rpl_slave_grp_exec [ pass ] 3933 timer 21378: expired after 18000 seconds Test suite timeout! Terminating... After digging around, it seems that what you hit here is an arbitrary upper limit that the mysql folks put on how long it should take the regression tests to run. In my experience the 5.1.x tests normally take something close to 2 hours, on a reasonably current desktop machine with nothing else going on. I speculate that your machine was busy running a lot of other builds concurrently, and it just plain took more than 5 hours :-(. The sum of the per-test times shown in your log is about 221 minutes; after allowing for between-tests overhead, that seems to match up reasonably well with the default 300-minute timeout. I'm going to add a patch to increase the timeout to 12 hours, which I hope will be enough for mass-rebuild scenarios like this one. In the meantime, you'd probably find that it rebuilds okay if you do it by itself. regards, tom lane -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Build fails in koji, but not anywhere else ... how to debug?
I've been pursuing, with increasing frustration, the seemingly simple goal of getting mysql to rebuild in rawhide since the mass rebuild. It failed in the mass rebuild (on the same source code which had worked fine a few weeks before), and has failed multiple attempts since then, for example http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=1596536name=build.log http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=1606630name=build.log http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=1606834name=build.log The symptoms are not consistent, although there is some repetition; for example the first and third runs above encountered the same failure. It's usually the x86_64 build that dies, but I think that may just be a reflection of the x86_64 builder being faster than the others. What is frustrating me is that I can't reproduce the problem outside koji where I might have a shot at debugging it. It works fine in F-10, F-11, rawhide, rawhide-via-mock, and everything else I've tried on my own machines. I've tried to try it on RHTS machines, but since neither F-11 nor rawhide install successfully on those machines, that attempt didn't get far either. (And shouldn't somebody be paying closer attention to that?) I'm starting to wonder about corrupted ccache on the koji machines, although unless they all share a common cache that theory doesn't seem to hold much water. I wonder if anyone else has a theory, or at least a suggestion how to debug this problem? BTW, the last time mysql started unexplainably failing its regression tests in koji, it turned out to be because the build machines had been switched to new RHEL-5 kernels that had a different page size on PPC machines. mysql is unduly sensitive to things like that :-( So I'd also be interested in information about any low-level changes that might have been applied to the build machines a month or so ago. regards, tom lane -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
[Change Request] Enable rw /mnt/fedora on puppet1
Currently we're mounting /mnt/fedora ro on puppet1. I think that this
was a change committed in puppet that affected the /etc/fstab file.
That didn't come into play until we rebooted puppet1 last night -- the
reboot caused the new fstab to be used and mount /mnt/fedora ro.
Here's the changeset that caused that:
Date: Fri Jun 26 22:53:26 2009 +
e mount instead of nfs.
diff --git a/modules/puppet/manifests/init.pp
b/modules/puppet/manifests/init.pp
index 21b8d62..0af2273 100644
--- a/modules/puppet/manifests/init.pp
+++ b/modules/puppet/manifests/init.pp
@@ -75,9 +75,12 @@ class puppet::master::mounts {
ensure = directory,
}
-nfs { /mnt/fedora:
+mount { /mnt/fedora:
device = ntap-fedora1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/vol/fedora/,
-require = File[/mnt/fedora/],
+fstype = nfs,
+ensure = mounted,
+options = defaults,ro,soft,intr,
+require = File[/mnt/fedora],
}
}
I'd like to make the following change to this:
-options = defaults,ro,soft,intr,
+options = defaults,rw,soft,intr,
Can I get two +1's for my change?
-Toshio
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Re: [Change Request] Enable rw /mnt/fedora on puppet1
On 2009-08-14 11:43:37 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: Currently we're mounting /mnt/fedora ro on puppet1. I think that this was a change committed in puppet that affected the /etc/fstab file. That didn't come into play until we rebooted puppet1 last night -- the reboot caused the new fstab to be used and mount /mnt/fedora ro. Yow, that was my mistake, +1 to fixing it :-) Thanks, Ricky pgplowCRel5Xd.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Recompile kernel without SMP
Hi there,
I am trying to recompile kernel without SMP. So far I've been
unsuccessful. Meaning I am able to compile, but it was still SMP..
Can someone tell me what I am doing wrong?
And why I don't get kernel-headers build?
It is probably related to spec parameters
So far this is what I've done:
cd ~/
rpmdev-setuptree # as regular user
cd rmpbuild
yumdownloader --source kernel # as regular user
cd ~/rpmbuild/BUILD/kernel-2.6.29/linux-2.6.29.i686/
cp configs/kernel-2.6.29.6-i586.config .config
make menuconfig # console setup
Select option: Processor type and features.
Disable Symmetric multi-processing support (SMP)
cp .config ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/config-i686-generic
cp .config ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/config-i686
cd ~/rpmbuild/SPECS
nano kernel.spec
Add line:
% define buildid .NONSMP
Replace:
# Allow kernel-firmware building
#%define with_firmware %{?_with_firmware: 1} %{?!_with_firmware: 0}
%define with_firmware %{?_with_firmware: 0} %{?!_with_firmware: 1}
#%define with_firmware %{?_without_firmware: 0} %{?!_without_firmware:
1}
%define with_firmware %{?_without_firmware: 1} %{?!_without_firmware:
0}
# Allow kernel-headers building
# Allow kernel-devel building
# Create RPM package
rpmbuild -bb --with firmware --target=i686 kernel.spec
# To actually install kernel
su
rpm -ivh kernel-firmware-2.6.29.6-217.2.3.nonsmp.fc11.i686.rpm
kernel-PAE-2.6.29.6-217.2.3.nonsmp.fc11.i686.rpm
kernel-PAE-devel-2.6.29.6-217.2.3.nonsmp.fc11.i686.rpm
Just in case:
$ cat config-i686-PAE | egrep -i smp | more
CONFIG_BROKEN_ON_SMP=y
# CONFIG_SMP is not set
CONFIG_X86_FIND_SMP_CONFIG=y
# CONFIG_X86_VSMP is not set
CONFIG_SCSI_SAS_HOST_SMP=y
CONFIG_VIDEO_VP27SMPX=m
Best,
Paul
___
Fedora-kernel-list mailing list
Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
RE: Recompile kernel without SMP
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 14:35:22 -0400
From: pgrinb...@nyc.saic.com
To: fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com
Subject: Recompile kernel without SMP
Hi there,
I am trying to recompile kernel without SMP. So far I've been
unsuccessful. Meaning I am able to compile, but it was still SMP..
Can someone tell me what I am doing wrong?
And why I don't get kernel-headers build?
It is probably related to spec parameters
So far this is what I've done:
cd ~/
rpmdev-setuptree # as regular user
cd rmpbuild
yumdownloader --source kernel # as regular user
cd ~/rpmbuild/BUILD/kernel-2.6.29/linux-2.6.29.i686/
cp configs/kernel-2.6.29.6-i586.config .config
make menuconfig # console setup
Select option: Processor type and features.
Disable Symmetric multi-processing support (SMP)
cp .config ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/config-i686-generic
cp .config ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/config-i686
cd ~/rpmbuild/SPECS
nano kernel.spec
Add line:
% define buildid .NONSMP
Replace:
# Allow kernel-firmware building
#%define with_firmware %{?_with_firmware: 1} %{?!_with_firmware: 0}
%define with_firmware %{?_with_firmware: 0} %{?!_with_firmware: 1}
#%define with_firmware %{?_without_firmware: 0} %{?!_without_firmware:
1}
%define with_firmware %{?_without_firmware: 1} %{?!_without_firmware:
0}
# Allow kernel-headers building
# Allow kernel-devel building
# Create RPM package
rpmbuild -bb --with firmware --target=i686 kernel.spec
# To actually install kernel
su
rpm -ivh kernel-firmware-2.6.29.6-217.2.3.nonsmp.fc11.i686.rpm
kernel-PAE-2.6.29.6-217.2.3.nonsmp.fc11.i686.rpm
kernel-PAE-devel-2.6.29.6-217.2.3.nonsmp.fc11.i686.rpm
Just in case:
$ cat config-i686-PAE | egrep -i smp | more
CONFIG_BROKEN_ON_SMP=y
# CONFIG_SMP is not set
CONFIG_X86_FIND_SMP_CONFIG=y
# CONFIG_X86_VSMP is not set
CONFIG_SCSI_SAS_HOST_SMP=y
CONFIG_VIDEO_VP27SMPX=m
Best,
Paul
I just got bit by a similar problem in trying to build
kernel-2.6.31-0.125.4.2.rc5.git2.fc12.src.rpm
I followed the steps outlined in
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/CustomKernel
I only wanted to build i686 architecture
- without SMP
- without cpu id support
- without multicore support
- without hyperthreading support
- with kernel config support
- with kernel config via /proc support
- with frequency default governor set to Performance
- with preemptible kernel
- with rt2860 module support
- with NTFS read/write support
Well, it ended up building i686-PAE Debug kernel with SMP support.
It seems as if the architecture is i686, then only i686 PAE Debug gets built.
I do not know where the problem lies, but SOURCES/Makefile.config
might be the place where the target kernel build is being selected.
To get around it, I edited
...SOURCES/Makefile.config and removed all rules and definitions pertaining to
i686-PAE and only left the simple i686 def and rule.
PS: I do not know if this is necessary, but after I copied .config to
...SOURCES/config-i686
I also copied it to
...SOURCES/config-x86-generic
Then running rpmbuild -v -bb --target=i686 kernel.spec
is proceeding without problems
MK
_
Windows Live™: Keep your life in sync.
http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=PID23384::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:NF_BR_sync:082009
___
Fedora-kernel-list mailing list
Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
RE: Recompile kernel without SMP
Markus,
Thank you for your reply! I already feel better knowing that I'm not
alone :)
Maybe someone might have a clue Why
Best,
Paul
-Original Message-
From: Markus Kesaromous [mailto:remotes...@live.com]
Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 4:52 PM
To: Paul Grinberg; Linux Kernel List
Subject: RE: Recompile kernel without SMP
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 14:35:22 -0400
From: pgrinb...@nyc.saic.com
To: fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com
Subject: Recompile kernel without SMP
Hi there,
I am trying to recompile kernel without SMP. So far I've been
unsuccessful. Meaning I am able to compile, but it was still SMP..
Can someone tell me what I am doing wrong?
And why I don't get kernel-headers build?
It is probably related to spec parameters
So far this is what I've done:
cd ~/
rpmdev-setuptree # as regular user
cd rmpbuild
yumdownloader --source kernel # as regular user
cd ~/rpmbuild/BUILD/kernel-2.6.29/linux-2.6.29.i686/
cp configs/kernel-2.6.29.6-i586.config .config
make menuconfig # console setup
Select option: Processor type and features.
Disable Symmetric multi-processing support (SMP)
cp .config ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/config-i686-generic
cp .config ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/config-i686
cd ~/rpmbuild/SPECS
nano kernel.spec
Add line:
% define buildid .NONSMP
Replace:
# Allow kernel-firmware building
#%define with_firmware %{?_with_firmware: 1} %{?!_with_firmware: 0}
%define with_firmware %{?_with_firmware: 0} %{?!_with_firmware: 1}
#%define with_firmware %{?_without_firmware: 0} %{?!_without_firmware:
1}
%define with_firmware %{?_without_firmware: 1} %{?!_without_firmware:
0}
# Allow kernel-headers building
# Allow kernel-devel building
# Create RPM package
rpmbuild -bb --with firmware --target=i686 kernel.spec
# To actually install kernel
su
rpm -ivh kernel-firmware-2.6.29.6-217.2.3.nonsmp.fc11.i686.rpm
kernel-PAE-2.6.29.6-217.2.3.nonsmp.fc11.i686.rpm
kernel-PAE-devel-2.6.29.6-217.2.3.nonsmp.fc11.i686.rpm
Just in case:
$ cat config-i686-PAE | egrep -i smp | more
CONFIG_BROKEN_ON_SMP=y
# CONFIG_SMP is not set
CONFIG_X86_FIND_SMP_CONFIG=y
# CONFIG_X86_VSMP is not set
CONFIG_SCSI_SAS_HOST_SMP=y
CONFIG_VIDEO_VP27SMPX=m
Best,
Paul
I just got bit by a similar problem in trying to build
kernel-2.6.31-0.125.4.2.rc5.git2.fc12.src.rpm
I followed the steps outlined in
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/CustomKernel
I only wanted to build i686 architecture
- without SMP
- without cpu id support
- without multicore support
- without hyperthreading support
- with kernel config support
- with kernel config via /proc support
- with frequency default governor set to Performance
- with preemptible kernel
- with rt2860 module support
- with NTFS read/write support
Well, it ended up building i686-PAE Debug kernel with SMP support.
It seems as if the architecture is i686, then only i686 PAE Debug gets
built.
I do not know where the problem lies, but SOURCES/Makefile.config
might be the place where the target kernel build is being selected.
To get around it, I edited
...SOURCES/Makefile.config and removed all rules and definitions
pertaining to i686-PAE and only left the simple i686 def and rule.
PS: I do not know if this is necessary, but after I copied .config to
...SOURCES/config-i686
I also copied it to
...SOURCES/config-x86-generic
Then running rpmbuild -v -bb --target=i686 kernel.spec
is proceeding without problems
MK
_
Windows Live(tm): Keep your life in sync.
http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=PID23384::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:NF_B
R_sync:082009
___
Fedora-kernel-list mailing list
Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: [Fedora-legal-list] Fedora and MS-PL (Dynamic Language Runtime)
On 08/14/2009 10:49 PM, C.J. Adams-Collier wrote: Hey all, We (the Debian CLI Libraries Team) are packaging IronRuby, IronPython and the Dynamic Language Runtime for Debian. Much of the source in this package is released under the Microsoft Public License: http://git.debian.org/?p=pkg-cli-libs/packages/dlr-languages.git;a=blob;f=debian/copyright;h=74dc4d7f7144e9a0251fa2a32177332a01558d84;hb=f3c10b84cf5f12cb670d14232263ac81662ff714 I asked my friend Brett if he would help us get it packaged up in RPM format for Fedora. He tells me that the MS-PL is not on the approved list for Redhat packages: 14:55 wakko666 cj: my main concern about packaging ironruby is licensing. Fedora will accept packages under the MS-Shared-Source license, but the MS-PL isn't on their list of acceptable license. This is actually not correct, MS-Shared-Source is not a Free license and is not acceptable for Fedora. I'll run MS-PL past Red Hat Legal to see what they think about it. Thanks, ~tom ___ Fedora-legal-list mailing list Fedora-legal-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legal-list
Re: Unmatched Entries
On 14/08/09 01:04, Cameron Simpson wrote: On 13Aug2009 23:55, Erik P. Olsen epod...@gmail.com wrote: | In the Smartd section of Logwatch I get the following messages: | | **Unmatched Entries** | Problem creating device name scan list | Device /dev/sda: using '-d sat' for ATA disk behind SAT layer. | Device /dev/sdb: using '-d sat' for ATA disk behind SAT layer. | Device /dev/sdc: using '-d sat' for ATA disk behind SAT layer. | Device /dev/sdd: using '-d sat' for ATA disk behind SAT layer. | | What is it that these entries do not match? They don't match LogWatch's pattern matches. LogWatch parses your logs and summarises their content. To do that it must recognise each line and decide to ignore it or summarise it. Lines it doesn't recognise get reported explicitly as above because it doesn't know how to treat them. For safety it shows them to you. Cheers, Thanks a lot. That led me to believe that the file used to recognise smartd messages is /usr/share/logwatch/scripts/services/smartd which is a file written in a language I am not familiar with. I wonder if there is an easier and safer way to modify this file other than coding, perhaps by a file somewhere in /etc/logwatch? -- Erik. -- 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: Problem with mount.nfs4 on latest Fedora 10 updates
Chuck Lever wrote: On Aug 13, 2009, at 12:50 PM, Howard Wilkinson wrote: I have just upgraded a couple of servers from FC9 to FC10 and I am seeing a major problem with mount.nfs4. This occurs when autofs calls the mount program. It then runs at 100% CPU and never terminates. I have VMs that are running similar configuration successfully, so this is something driven by being on bare metal. Kernel is 2.6.27.29-170.2.78.fc10.i686.PAE nfs-utils is nfs-utils-1.1.4-8.fc10.i386 autofs is autofs-5.0.3-41.i386 Command running is /sbin/mount.nfs4 battleaxe:/ /hosts/battleaxe -s -o rw,nosuid,nodev,tcp,rsize=32768,wsize=32768,hard,intr The autofs mount has worked and the directories under /hosts/battleaxe have been successfully accessed prior to the problem occuring - I suspect this is a remount after and expire has occurred. Anybody seen this before? Anybody know what I can do to get round this? [I am on the way to FC11 but will have to live with FC10 for a while (a week or so)] Any extra information I can acquire to diagnose this? There is nothing in the log files to indicate anything going wrong, I could turn debug on if I knew what to set and which messages to strip once I do. You could start with sudo rpcdebug -m nfs -s mount and look in /var/log/messages, or you can strace the running mount command. -- Chuck Lever chuck[dot]lever[at]oracle[dot]com The mount.nfs4 involvement is a red-herring! It would seem that the problem is in the kernel - probably in the NFS4 code path. I have now seem bash, df, and cfagent all exhibit the same failure. The processes go to 100% and hang up probably in a kernel thread. This happens some time after the kernel has booted so may still involve something to do with the autofs timing out the mount. If I revert the kernel (and nothing else) to the latest FC9 version then everything goes back to working as it was. Does anybody recognise these symptoms? I am going to see if an strace will work, but once the system has failed it is difficult to get other processes to run to completion. Howard. -- 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
text versus gui (why sound is broken)
Having spent yet another few hours trying to get sound to work on my system -- I'm back to a state where I need to reboot to get it to work again -- I've decided the problems with the sound system are at least partly because it's almost entirely managed by gui tools. If there were a full set of command-line tools for managing sound, it would be much easier to diagnose problems, and much easier to fix them. Instead, we need to fiddle with gui interfaces (X11 or ncurses) in system-config-soundcard, pavucontrol, gst-mixer, alsamixer, etc. to work out whether it's a problem with drivers, with muting somewhere, with applications talking to the wrong sound system, or something else. (Again, does anyone have any recommendations for a cheap sound card that will work reliably with Fedora? Maybe a third of my sound problems are driver/module problems where system-config-soundcard won't make a sound and a reboot is required.) 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
How to check
How to make my own network stability? Because I surf on the Internet by using Fedora 10 and doing yum update on the terminal , sometimes a sudden break, or become unusually slow network. So would like to ask , how to make my network more stable and will not suddenly become unusually slow, or no warning of the disconnection -- 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
How to check the information is true or false?
Many people tell me, You should check the answer on the Google Search Engine before you ask a question , but How do I know that information is true or false? When I first time ask a question on Debian IRC Channel, they usually tell me this sentence, and now the mailing list guide tell every want to ask a question on the mailing list try to google your answer, but how should we know the asnwer is true or false? -- 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: How to check the information is true or false?
On 14/08/09 09:35, Clarence Huang wrote: Many people tell me, You should check the answer on the Google Search Engine before you ask a question , but How do I know that information is true or false? When I first time ask a question on Debian IRC Channel, they usually tell me this sentence, and now the mailing list guide tell every want to ask a question on the mailing list try to google your answer, but how should we know the asnwer is true or false? Just the same as on this list, many answers can be given to the same question. As users have tried various method to fix problems. Method A: may work for user b, but not c,a. Method B: may work for user cb, but not a Method C: May work for user bca -- 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: system-config-printer not authenticating properly
On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 17:24 -0500, Hooker, Jonathan wrote: I am trying to get system-config-printer to authenticate as a sudo user (one that is a part of the wheel group) instead of the root user when trying to add or modify a printer in fedora 10. I have been unsuccessful in finding any help on this topic anywhere on the internet. What you need to do is adjust your CUPS policy so that it counts your special user as a 'system' user. In /etc/cups/cupsd.conf you'll see a section that starts: Policy default In that section are sub-sections like this: Limit CUPS-Add-Modify-Printer CUPS-Delete-Printer ... Require user @SYSTEM Order deny,allow /Limit Here, '@SYSTEM' means 'in one of the system groups', and the default CUPS system groups are sys, root, and system. In order to make 'wheel' one of the system groups, add a line near the top (not in any section) like this: SystemGroup sys root system wheel Hmm, perhaps 'wheel' should be one of the default groups... In previous versions the authentication used was consolehelper but this does not seem to be the case in FC10. The last release where that was the case was Fedora Core 5. :-) It also seems that it does not use PolicyKit either which other system-config type programs are now doing. Not in Fedora 10 -- that was added in Fedora 11. I wrote about it a few days ago here: http://cyberelk.net/tim/2009/08/11/policykit-and-printing/ Tim. */ 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: nm/nm-applet - how to stop automatic connections
Rick Stevens-3 wrote: Gee, on mine, I... Right-click on the NM icon in the toolbar Click on Edit Connections Click on the appropriate tab (Wireless, etc.) Click on a network, then click Edit In that edit window, there's a little checkbox marked Connect automatically. Just uncheck it and click Apply. Works for me. Does this stop it connecting first time as well as subsequent occasions? -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/nm-nm-applet---how-to-stop-automatic-connections-tp24930332p24968475.html Sent from the Fedora List mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: firefox open containing folder
On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 19:08 -0700, Skunk Worx wrote: If I right-click the item and select Open Containing Folder it pops up an application named Launch Application and it makes the statement This link needs to be opened with an application. Send to: and I can choose / remember choice / cancel. I think this used to work in F10 but now the association fails. I was hoping it would bring up in File Browser. Is there a specific place to fix this? If it's the same thing as an older problem, then you've probably associated opening folders with another application, instead of the usual thing happening (Nautilus opening a list of the folder, on Gnome, and KDE doing something similar). If so, you could try the following: On your desktop, or in a file browser, right-click on a folder, open the properties for it, and change the open-with preference to something more sensible. It was common, and perhaps still is, to suffer that problem if you right-clicked on a folder, and opened the folder with something like a music player, or picture viewer program. It became a permanent setting, rather than something that only happened there and then. -- [...@localhost ~]$ uname -r 2.6.27.25-78.2.56.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: How to check the information is true or false?
On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 16:35 +0800, Clarence Huang wrote: How do I know that information is true or false? You have asked a good question. The same applies here. You only hope we have the right answers. You need to use common sense. Do several different websites offer the same advice? Have you tried our own website, first? http://fedoraproject.org/ There's lots of things on there (FAQs, guides, etc.). When you find advice on websites, are there replies to the advice? And do they confirm or refute the advice? Does it sound sensible? Look for advice that explains, rather than just a list of things to do. Try narrowing your search to locations that you feel you can rely upon. For example, you could add site:fedoraproject.org to your Google query to make Google search that site for answers. Or, to search just this mailing list, site:www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/ e.g. http://www.google.com.au/search?q=faq+site%3Awww.redhat.com%2Farchives%2Ffedora-list%2F -- [...@localhost ~]$ uname -r 2.6.27.25-78.2.56.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
BCPL compiler in LINUX/Fedora?
Hi all, I'm looking for a BCPL compiler realized in LINUX, especially Fedora, for i386 CPUs. Somebody knows where to download a rpm, or the compiler source? All hints are welcome. -- Joachim Backes joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de http://www.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic 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: thunderbird pdf association
On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 19:03 -0700, Skunk Worx wrote: I have Fedora 11 X86_64 and when I get a PDF in email via Thunderbird I double click the PDF attachment and it pops up with : somefile.pdf could not be opened, because the associated helper application does not exist. Change the association in your preferences. Have a look at the source for a problem message, and look for a content-type header above the PDF attachment. If it's a PDF content type, you've got a problem with associating the right program with the file. If it's octet-stream, the mail author stuffed it up, and you're left with manually saving the file and opening it with something else. Octet-stream is a generic content type for ANY type of binary file. It simply means this file is some sort of binary. You can't associate a program with that type, because it could be used for anything. You could try associating it with a PDF viewer, then you'd get stuck, again, when someone sent you a JPEG, or document, as octet-stream, later on. If you use Gnome, you could try associating it with gnome-open, and hope that it can handle the file type, itself, as a middle man. This is a common problem, and it'd be helpful if mail programs let you set up a list of open-with program handlers for unidentified binary files (e.g. open with evince, open with eog, open with openoffice.org) that would pop-up when you clicked on such attachments, letting you choose the most likely one. -- [...@localhost ~]$ uname -r 2.6.27.25-78.2.56.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
Anyone wit a Intel DG33* mobo has sound on headphones on F11?
Hi, I have an Intel DG33BU mobo, and headphone sound stopped working on F11 (it worked on F10, and still works on WinXP). It seems I've been bitten by bug #500418 [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500418] (I've post some detailed info there). To make a long story short: I've tried both options snd-hda-intel model=ref and options snd-hda-intel model=3stack-6ch-intel (according to this page: http://www.mjmwired.net/kernel/Documentation/sound/alsa/HD-Audio-Models.txt) and none of them fixed the problem. Any suggestions? This seems to be a recurring problem (I've had it with F10 as well for some time, and it had been fixed there), and it is affecting lots of people judging by the number of bug reports: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=headphone . I know no one is breaking it on purpose, and I know there's people working on it as I write this, but couldn't there be more testing regarding this before it is released on the wlld? It sucks this now it works-now it doesn't cycle keeps repeating... Regards, Andre -- 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: Internal laptop Microphone with very low gain - HDA-Intel SigmaTel STAC9228
On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 01:41 +1000, Vini Engel wrote: I was wondering if anyone has ever been able to resolve the issues that exist with the sound card below and the low gain of the internal microphone of the laptop. The mic works and so does the external one when plugged, the problem is that the volume of everything captured by the internal mic extremely low and almost impossible to hear sometimes. Are their hidden mixer options which include a mic boost? It increases the gain of the input amplifier. You may need it off to record really loud sounds (where turning the level down doesn't stop the pre-amp from clipping ahead of the level control), or you may need it on to increase the gain. It's an option that's often needed. -- [...@localhost ~]$ uname -r 2.6.27.25-78.2.56.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: How to check the information is true or false?
On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 20:42 +0930, Tim wrote: to search just this mailing list, site:www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/ e.g. http://www.google.com.au/search?q=faq+site%3Awww.redhat.com% 2Farchives%2Ffedora-list%2F Hmm, that might have been clearer if I hadn't copied an encoded URI to the message. This might be more obvious: http://www.google.com.au/search?q=faq+site:www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/ That's a search for a faq somewhere on this list. Adjust to suit... -- [...@localhost ~]$ uname -r 2.6.27.25-78.2.56.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
Testdisk error for LVM partition recover
Dear All, Recently I have loaded Fedora 11, but yesterday fedora refused to boot. on googling I have found that testdisk is the best tool to recover the data, but end of it ... My steps are as attached finally it give me error as follows : The harddisk (80 GB/74Gib) seems too small (84GB / 78GiB) Can any Testdisk expert help me … regards Arun recovery.odt Description: application/vnd.oasis.opendocument.text -- 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: Sorting Music by Composer
2009/8/12 R. G. Newbury newb...@mandamus.org: Around 07:51pm on Monday, August 10, 2009 (UK time), R. G. Newbury scrawled: Does anyone know of a program with the flexibility to set things up this way? Banshee can sort by composer, or any other tag. Â You will need to right click on the headings, and add composer as a column. Â Its yum installable, too. Steve Right you are...Unfortunately, it won't handle flac files I should have mentioned that. I haven't used it in a while, but possibly Quod Libet (should be available from add/remove software). Well I couldn't even get it to recognize any of my music files, much less play them. I'm a bit surprised if that's really the case, I can use it to play FLAC no problem. If no files show up in the library after importing you could try hitting the search button to refresh the list. Slightly counter-intuitively you'll need to go to Music|Browse and select one of the options there to get a second window if you want to drag files from the library to a playlist. Enter 'composer' in the 'other' field in the music|preferences|song list tab. And I find that RhythmBox has an incredibly obtuse interface. I was eventually able to create a Playlist consisting of only one album after realizing that the damn thing wants to dump all my music into one list. And I still have no idea which magic series of clicks and keypresses got it to actually play the music. Double click on a track name to play. It will play through all files in the current collection (highlighted bold in the left side pane), whether it's a playlist or the main library. If there's something in the 'Play Queue' that will get switched to once the current track completes. Double clicking on a collection or track will switch to that collection (and toggle play/pause). I am NOT impressed at the opacity of the interface. Nor am I impressed with the requirements of importing and creating a playlist for each album. Tedious boring work which computers never get tired of doing.. There's no need for a an album playlist. Select Library|Music view, select the album in the album pane and 'all X artists' in the artists pane (or select the artist too if you want to filter within the album). Sort by track (for multi-disc albums this should take the DISCNUMBER tag into account), Double click on the first track. Anyone got any better ideas for a program which will deal with a tree of composers, with albums as leaves underneath? Hasn't been written so far as I know. The artist - name model is so pervasive in music tagging that everyone who listens to classical music eventually gives up and puts the 'composer' in the artist tag and performers (if they care) in the album name. -- imalone -- 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: How to check
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 1:17 AM, Clarence Huanga9wh6...@yahoo.com.tw wrote: How to make my own network stability? Because I surf on the Internet by using Fedora 10 and doing yum update on the terminal , sometimes a sudden break, or become unusually slow network. So would like to ask , how to make my network more stable and will not suddenly become unusually slow, or no warning of the disconnection Tell us how is your computer connected. Are you using DSL, cable modem, or dial-up? Is that connection shared with other computers, i.e. is it part of a network? -- 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: How to check the information is true or false?
On Friday 14 August 2009 12:12:06 Tim wrote: On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 16:35 +0800, Clarence Huang wrote: How do I know that information is true or false? You have asked a good question. The same applies here. You only hope we have the right answers. You need to use common sense. Do several different websites offer the same advice? Have you tried our own website, first? http://fedoraproject.org/ There's lots of things on there (FAQs, guides, etc.). When you find advice on websites, are there replies to the advice? And do they confirm or refute the advice? Does it sound sensible? Look for advice that explains, rather than just a list of things to do. And if you're still not certain, take the same thing one step further. Take what look like the most significant words or commands from the answer you see, and do a google search on that. If there's a problem with it you are sure to find a message somewhere that says 'I did foo and now my computer won't boot' or some other disaster story. One other thing - before you click on an entry from the google search, take a look at the url that it is going to load. If at all possible, stick with ones that imply either a distro-created message (whether, for instance, and official Fedora one or from a Fedora mailing list) or from a reputable Linux forum. Avoid anything from individual people's sites unless you have reason to know that they are probably OK. It's time-consuming, yes, but if you follow the advice in this thread you should be fine. Anne -- New to KDE4? - get help from http://userbase.kde.org Just found a cool new feature? Add it to UserBase 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
Testing upload/download bandwidth speeds for verification
I have been testing my residential ISP/DSL-Landline connections and wanted to make sure that I was getting what I am paying for. Supposedly, one can use the various website based speed test tools to determine their upload and download speeds. Are these speed test tools credible and can they be trusted? Of the several sites I have tried, they all more or less seemed to be in close agreement with one another in terms of the bandwidth speeds, i.e. my connection speed is quoted at 768KB/s up and 3MB/s down, and the farther away from central, the more reduced is the speeds are. The average speed tools says that I have measured speeds of 720-30 KB/s up and 2.0-5MB/s down. Why is it however, that when downloading software from the various Linux/M$ and other downloads sites I am seeing on average, speeds of 200-320(max) KB/s and never see anything much faster than that? Is this normal? Has anyone gotten download speeds any faster that what I have reported? What I am trying to determine is if my ISP only shows un-throttled speeds between me them, but then somehow throttles my bandwidth usage when I am using the Internet, or is it more probable that download speeds are being throttled from the download site itself? Other than by using `speed testers', I have yet to find a download site that pushes out more than 2-300KB/s? I have tried HTTP, FTP Bittorent and there is very little or no speed improvements as far as I can tell. Just wondering, Dan -- 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: Testing upload/download bandwidth speeds for verification
Daniel B. Thurman wrote: I have been testing my residential ISP/DSL-Landline connections and wanted to make sure that I was getting what I am paying for. Supposedly, one can use the various website based speed test tools to determine their upload and download speeds. Are these speed test tools credible and can they be trusted? Of the several sites I have tried, they all more or less seemed to be in close agreement with one another in terms of the bandwidth speeds, i.e. my connection speed is quoted at 768KB/s up and 3MB/s down, and the farther away from central, the more reduced is the speeds are. The average speed tools says that I have measured speeds of 720-30 KB/s up and 2.0-5MB/s down. Why is it however, that when downloading software from the various Linux/M$ and other downloads sites I am seeing on average, speeds of 200-320(max) KB/s and never see anything much faster than that? Is this normal? Yes, very normal First, the download speed get from any site can only be as high as their upload speed. Second, run the web based speed checks from 2 or 3 different sites simultaneously and/or the same site multiple times simultaneously and see what the results are then. Those two things should shed some light as to why it is normal. Oh, and third, the software download sites probably also have rate limits on each upload (from their point of view) so that everyone gets the same level of service. All of these reasons are the driving force behind the development of bittorrent... Has anyone gotten download speeds any faster that what I have reported? What I am trying to determine is if my ISP only shows un-throttled speeds between me them, but then somehow throttles my bandwidth usage when I am using the Internet, or is it more probable that download speeds are being throttled from the download site itself? Other than by using `speed testers', I have yet to find a download site that pushes out more than 2-300KB/s? I have tried HTTP, FTP Bittorent and there is very little or no speed improvements as far as I can tell. Just wondering, Dan -- Q: What's hard going in and soft and sticky coming out? A: Chewing gum. mei-mei.gres...@greshko.com http://tw.youtube.com/watch?v=cCSz_koUhSg 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: Computer Slowing down on F11-X86_64
On 08/13/2009 07:44 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 15:59 -0400, Jim wrote: F11/X86_64. Thunderbird, Firefox, everything is being slowed down. Running ps aux give me this , root 2141 1.5 24.0 1349116 243972 tty1 Ss+ Aug09 95:17 /usr/bin/X -br -nolisten tcp :0 vt1 -auth /var/run/xauth/A:0-rJsTly mickey2325 0.8 5.7 1048920 58852 ? Sl Aug09 49:08 /usr/bin/plasma-desktop These are the two that seem to be taking up a lot of time. Any Ideals ? Another thing to look at is memory and swapping. Use the top(1) command and see if there might be either a memory or cpu hog. Over the years I've found that lack of memory is one of the biggest causes of system slowness. The vmstat(8) command may also show give you some useful informaition. -- Jerry Feldman g...@blu.org Boston Linux and Unix PGP key id: 537C5846 PGP Key fingerprint: 3D1B 8377 A3C0 A5F2 ECBB CA3B 4607 4319 537C 5846 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: Testing upload/download bandwidth speeds for verification
Ed Greshko wrote: Daniel B. Thurman wrote: I have been testing my residential ISP/DSL-Landline connections and wanted to make sure that I was getting what I am paying for. Supposedly, one can use the various website based speed test tools to determine their upload and download speeds. Are these speed test tools credible and can they be trusted? Of the several sites I have tried, they all more or less seemed to be in close agreement with one another in terms of the bandwidth speeds, i.e. my connection speed is quoted at 768KB/s up and 3MB/s down, and the farther away from central, the more reduced is the speeds are. The average speed tools says that I have measured speeds of 720-30 KB/s up and 2.0-5MB/s down. Why is it however, that when downloading software from the various Linux/M$ and other downloads sites I am seeing on average, speeds of 200-320(max) KB/s and never see anything much faster than that? Is this normal? Yes, very normal First, the download speed get from any site can only be as high as their upload speed. So, does that mean I am wasting money by going from 768KB/s Up / 768KB/s Down to 768KB/s Up / 3MB/s Down since I will never obtain download speeds faster than the Upload limit of 768KB/s ??? The only way to get more speed is to increase the Upload speeds to be more closer to the Download speeds which is always higher? Perhaps I should downgrade my connection speeds to 768KB/s Up / 768KB/s Down since I cannot get higher than 768KB/s Up and I am losing $$$ or am I missing something here? I wondered why ISPs do not offer matching Up/Down speeds, so as to snare an ignorant dupe? Second, run the web based speed checks from 2 or 3 different sites simultaneously and/or the same site multiple times simultaneously and see what the results are then. Those two things should shed some light as to why it is normal. Oh, and third, the software download sites probably also have rate limits on each upload (from their point of view) so that everyone gets the same level of service. All of these reasons are the driving force behind the development of bittorrent... Has anyone gotten download speeds any faster that what I have reported? What I am trying to determine is if my ISP only shows un-throttled speeds between me them, but then somehow throttles my bandwidth usage when I am using the Internet, or is it more probable that download speeds are being throttled from the download site itself? Other than by using `speed testers', I have yet to find a download site that pushes out more than 2-300KB/s? I have tried HTTP, FTP Bittorent and there is very little or no speed improvements as far as I can tell. Just wondering, Dan -- 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
Recompile kernel without SMP
Hi there,
I am trying to recompile kernel without SMP. So far I've been
unsuccessful. Meaning I am able to compile, but it was still SMP..
Can someone tell me what I am doing wrong?
And why I don't get kernel-headers build?
It is probably related to spec parameters
So far this is what I've done:
cd ~/
rpmdev-setuptree # as regular user
cd rmpbuild
yumdownloader --source kernel # as regular user
cd ~/rpmbuild/BUILD/kernel-2.6.29/linux-2.6.29.i686/
cp configs/kernel-2.6.29.6-i586.config .config
make menuconfig # console setup
Select option: Processor type and features.
Disable Symmetric multi-processing support (SMP)
cp .config ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/config-i686-generic
cp .config ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/config-i686
cd ~/rpmbuild/SPECS
nano kernel.spec
Add line:
% define buildid .NONSMP
Replace:
# Allow kernel-firmware building
#%define with_firmware %{?_with_firmware: 1} %{?!_with_firmware: 0}
%define with_firmware %{?_with_firmware: 0} %{?!_with_firmware: 1}
#%define with_firmware %{?_without_firmware: 0} %{?!_without_firmware:
1}
%define with_firmware %{?_without_firmware: 1} %{?!_without_firmware:
0}
# Allow kernel-headers building
# Allow kernel-devel building
# Create RPM package
rpmbuild -bb --with firmware --target=i686 kernel.spec
# To actually install kernel
su
rpm -ivh kernel-firmware-2.6.29.6-217.2.3.nonsmp.fc11.i686.rpm
kernel-PAE-2.6.29.6-217.2.3.nonsmp.fc11.i686.rpm
kernel-PAE-devel-2.6.29.6-217.2.3.nonsmp.fc11.i686.rpm
--
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: Audacious play/stop/pause continuously while playing mp3 files...
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 12:52:52 -0700, Paul wrote: Are you using audacious with pulseaudio? You may need to go into the configuration files if so, here is a wiki on a Perfect Setup for pulseaudio: http://www.pulseaudio.org/wiki/PerfectSetup A lot you will not need, i.e.: The zeroconf/avahi section only applies if you are doing networked audio, which most people don't do, they just want this one machine to play media files. Note especially the configuration details for Audacious, as it mentions stuttering problems. Note that a buffer size of 500 here works fine with Audacious and Pulse Audio plugin, and it's not a recent machine with lots of cpu power. It may be helpful to collect some details about what audio hardware there are problems with, what drivers, what cpu speed, whether disabling Pulse Audio and switching to ALSA output plugin works. Browse existing tickets about problems with Pulse Audio and ALSA drivers. http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/pulseaudio http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/alsa-lib http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/kernel -- 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: Testing upload/download bandwidth speeds for verification
On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 08:29 -0700, Daniel B. Thurman wrote: I have been testing my residential ISP/DSL-Landline connections and wanted to make sure that I was getting what I am paying for. Supposedly, one can use the various website based speed test tools to determine their upload and download speeds. Are these speed test tools credible and can they be trusted? Of the several sites I have tried, they all more or less seemed to be in close agreement with one another in terms of the bandwidth speeds, i.e. my connection speed is quoted at 768KB/s up and 3MB/s down, and the farther away from central, the more reduced is the speeds are. The average speed tools says that I have measured speeds of 720-30 KB/s up and 2.0-5MB/s down. Why is it however, that when downloading software from the various Linux/M$ and other downloads sites I am seeing on average, speeds of 200-320(max) KB/s and never see anything much faster than that? Yes. 3 megaBITs per second is just over 300 kiloBYTEs per second. There are 8 bits per byte, plus there's packet and protocol overhead, so a 10:1 ratio between the numbers is normal. So, does that mean I am wasting money by going from 768KB/s Up / 768KB/s Down to 768KB/s Up / 3MB/s Down since I will never obtain download speeds faster than the Upload limit of 768KB/s ??? No, if you downgraded to 768 kilobit/sec service you would expect a maximum download speed of around 75-80 kilobytes per second. -Chris -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
RE: Testing upload/download bandwidth speeds for verification
Hi, I'd like to suggest a tool that I am usually using to check bandwidth speed. It is called iperf. It does not rely on usual HTTP download (most online checkers use it), but rather on pure TCP session bandwith. Your ISP maybe permits high HTTP downloads, but then throttles SSH or ESP based traffic. I think if you really want to measure, then you'll have to go with iperf. Best, Paul -Original Message- From: fedora-list-boun...@redhat.com [mailto:fedora-list-boun...@redhat.com] On Behalf Of Chris Tyler Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 12:42 PM To: Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using Fedora. Subject: Re: Testing upload/download bandwidth speeds for verification On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 08:29 -0700, Daniel B. Thurman wrote: I have been testing my residential ISP/DSL-Landline connections and wanted to make sure that I was getting what I am paying for. Supposedly, one can use the various website based speed test tools to determine their upload and download speeds. Are these speed test tools credible and can they be trusted? Of the several sites I have tried, they all more or less seemed to be in close agreement with one another in terms of the bandwidth speeds, i.e. my connection speed is quoted at 768KB/s up and 3MB/s down, and the farther away from central, the more reduced is the speeds are. The average speed tools says that I have measured speeds of 720-30 KB/s up and 2.0-5MB/s down. Why is it however, that when downloading software from the various Linux/M$ and other downloads sites I am seeing on average, speeds of 200-320(max) KB/s and never see anything much faster than that? Yes. 3 megaBITs per second is just over 300 kiloBYTEs per second. There are 8 bits per byte, plus there's packet and protocol overhead, so a 10:1 ratio between the numbers is normal. So, does that mean I am wasting money by going from 768KB/s Up / 768KB/s Down to 768KB/s Up / 3MB/s Down since I will never obtain download speeds faster than the Upload limit of 768KB/s ??? No, if you downgraded to 768 kilobit/sec service you would expect a maximum download speed of around 75-80 kilobytes per second. -Chris -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines -- 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: Testing upload/download bandwidth speeds for verification
Chris Tyler wrote: On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 08:29 -0700, Daniel B. Thurman wrote: I have been testing my residential ISP/DSL-Landline connections and wanted to make sure that I was getting what I am paying for. Supposedly, one can use the various website based speed test tools to determine their upload and download speeds. Are these speed test tools credible and can they be trusted? Of the several sites I have tried, they all more or less seemed to be in close agreement with one another in terms of the bandwidth speeds, i.e. my connection speed is quoted at 768KB/s up and 3MB/s down, and the farther away from central, the more reduced is the speeds are. The average speed tools says that I have measured speeds of 720-30 KB/s up and 2.0-5MB/s down. Why is it however, that when downloading software from the various Linux/M$ and other downloads sites I am seeing on average, speeds of 200-320(max) KB/s and never see anything much faster than that? Yes. 3 megaBITs per second is just over 300 kiloBYTEs per second. There are 8 bits per byte, plus there's packet and protocol overhead, so a 10:1 ratio between the numbers is normal. So, does that mean I am wasting money by going from 768KB/s Up / 768KB/s Down to 768KB/s Up / 3MB/s Down since I will never obtain download speeds faster than the Upload limit of 768KB/s ??? No, if you downgraded to 768 kilobit/sec service you would expect a maximum download speed of around 75-80 kilobytes per second. -Chris Duh-Oh. That makes more sense. I just posted a follow up before receiving this message and I thought I get it, but apparently I missed the boat :P Thanks for clarifying this! Dan -- 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: Testing upload/download bandwidth speeds for verification
Paul Grinberg wrote: Hi, I'd like to suggest a tool that I am usually using to check bandwidth speed. It is called iperf. It does not rely on usual HTTP download (most online checkers use it), but rather on pure TCP session bandwith. Your ISP maybe permits high HTTP downloads, but then throttles SSH or ESP based traffic. I think if you really want to measure, then you'll have to go with iperf. Best, Paul Interesting! Thanks for the tip! -Original Message- From: fedora-list-boun...@redhat.com [mailto:fedora-list-boun...@redhat.com] On Behalf Of Chris Tyler Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 12:42 PM To: Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using Fedora. Subject: Re: Testing upload/download bandwidth speeds for verification On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 08:29 -0700, Daniel B. Thurman wrote: I have been testing my residential ISP/DSL-Landline connections and wanted to make sure that I was getting what I am paying for. Supposedly, one can use the various website based speed test tools to determine their upload and download speeds. Are these speed test tools credible and can they be trusted? Of the several sites I have tried, they all more or less seemed to be in close agreement with one another in terms of the bandwidth speeds, i.e. my connection speed is quoted at 768KB/s up and 3MB/s down, and the farther away from central, the more reduced is the speeds are. The average speed tools says that I have measured speeds of 720-30 KB/s up and 2.0-5MB/s down. Why is it however, that when downloading software from the various Linux/M$ and other downloads sites I am seeing on average, speeds of 200-320(max) KB/s and never see anything much faster than that? Yes. 3 megaBITs per second is just over 300 kiloBYTEs per second. There are 8 bits per byte, plus there's packet and protocol overhead, so a 10:1 ratio between the numbers is normal. So, does that mean I am wasting money by going from 768KB/s Up / 768KB/s Down to 768KB/s Up / 3MB/s Down since I will never obtain download speeds faster than the Upload limit of 768KB/s ??? No, if you downgraded to 768 kilobit/sec service you would expect a maximum download speed of around 75-80 kilobytes per second. -Chris -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: FC 11 Boot mode single user [recovery password]
On 08/11/2009 10:04 AM, Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote: Jerry Feldman wrote: Actually, before the umount, you probably want to exit the chroot shell. umount is important in that it forces all data to be written. If you did a proper shutdown, the file system mounted on /mnt/sysimage would be unmounted during the shutdown process, but my background goes back to older Unix systems where things were less stable than they are today. Would you even be able to run umount before exiting the chroot shell? I would expect you to run into problems with the file system being in use, the mount point not being visible, and the mount not listed in mtab until you exit the chroot shell. (Though I would expect it to be listed in /proc/mounts.) On the other hand, I would expect synce to flush the buffers to disk even in the chroot shell. But what I normally do is use exit to get out of the chroot shell, and exit again to get out of the rescue shell. This does a proper shutdown of the system. Mikkel Certainly, a proper shutdown (exit, exit) should do the trick. A sync will flush the buffers, and probably exiting chroot will force a sync. I personally prefer to unmount volumes manually just as a paranoid precaution. And you certainly would not be permitted to unmount the volume while in the chroot session. -- Jerry Feldman g...@blu.org Boston Linux and Unix PGP key id: 537C5846 PGP Key fingerprint: 3D1B 8377 A3C0 A5F2 ECBB CA3B 4607 4319 537C 5846 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: Testing upload/download bandwidth speeds for verification
On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 09:21 -0700, Daniel B. Thurman wrote: First, the download speed get from any site can only be as high as their upload speed. So, does that mean I am wasting money by going from 768KB/s Up / 768KB/s Down to 768KB/s Up / 3MB/s Down since I will never obtain download speeds faster than the Upload limit of 768KB/s ??? The only way to get more speed is to increase the Upload speeds to be more closer to the Download speeds which is always higher? I suggest you re-read what Ed said, which isn't what you seem to have understood. Think of it this way: your download is the server's upload. the maximum bandwidth you can get out of the connection between them is the lower of these two numbers. However there are multiple other factors: * The server usually isn't just serving you, so it's upload speed is shared among the multiple clients it typically has at a given time. * You may be using your download link for several other things that you might not even be aware of, e.g. mail updating, browser page reloads, or even other parallel downloads (not forgetting other machines on your local net which share your ISP connection). * The intermediate connections on the net also have resource limitations. If one of these is congested, you'll see lower speeds. This is often the reason for discrepancies between the measured speed of near and far speed testing sites. * If some connections are unreliable, packets will be retransmitted, leading to a lower aggregate speed. * Your link speed (what your ISP sells you) is -- in the best case -- the speed of bits over the wire. Even if they actually give you those speeds (and there are several reasons why they might not), actual downloads also have several levels of protocol overhead, so your end-to-end data transfer will always be less than the rated speed of the connection, even if all other factors have no effect. * Lastly, downloads are almost always TCP connections. Every TCP segment you receive has to be acknowledged by a correspond ACK going the other way. The ACKs are small relative to the data segments, but they still use upload bandwidth and this can affect your data throughout. poc -- 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: Testing upload/download bandwidth speeds for verification
On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 12:42 -0400, Chris Tyler wrote: Yes. 3 megaBITs per second is just over 300 kiloBYTEs per second. There are 8 bits per byte, plus there's packet and protocol overhead, so a 10:1 ratio between the numbers is normal. Actually not. Even discounting protocol overhead, a 3Mbps connection is 3 million (3x10^6) bits per second. 300KB of data is 300 kilobytes (300x2^10) bytes. The fact that communications and computer people have different interpretation of kilo and mega (and giga and ...) is a source of much confusion. In computing we're supposed to use kebi, mebi etc. (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_prefix) for the powers of 2, but not many do. poc -- 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: Recompile kernel without SMP
Paul Grinberg wrote: # Create RPM package rpmbuild -bb --with firmware --target=i686 kernel.spec Have you checked that the .config in the BUILD dir still actually contains what you want, after building? IIRC, rpmbuild -bb recreates the BUILD directory, and your changes are lost. Try editing the config files in SOURCES, instead. Best regards. -- Roberto Ragusamail at robertoragusa.it -- 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: Recompile kernel without SMP
Roberto, Actually it does have all my changes: [j...@panther linux-2.6.29.i686]$ pwd /home/josh/rpmbuild/BUILD/kernel-2.6.29/linux-2.6.29.i686 [j...@panther linux-2.6.29.i686]$ cat config-i686-PAE | grep SMP CONFIG_BROKEN_ON_SMP=y # CONFIG_SMP is not set CONFIG_X86_FIND_SMP_CONFIG=y # CONFIG_X86_VSMP is not set CONFIG_SCSI_SAS_HOST_SMP=y CONFIG_VIDEO_VP27SMPX=m [j...@panther linux-2.6.29.i686]$ Best, Paul -Original Message- From: fedora-list-boun...@redhat.com [mailto:fedora-list-boun...@redhat.com] On Behalf Of Roberto Ragusa Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 1:46 PM To: Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using Fedora. Subject: Re: Recompile kernel without SMP Paul Grinberg wrote: # Create RPM package rpmbuild -bb --with firmware --target=i686 kernel.spec Have you checked that the .config in the BUILD dir still actually contains what you want, after building? IIRC, rpmbuild -bb recreates the BUILD directory, and your changes are lost. Try editing the config files in SOURCES, instead. Best regards. -- Roberto Ragusamail at robertoragusa.it -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: boost-build/boost-jam
PS = Pete Stieber PS Is there some reason these are not packaged PS for Fedora 11? I found the answer in bugzilla... https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=325931 Pete -- 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
Local cache / 'repo' of updates and added RPM's
I had to re-install Fedora 10 on a home desktop PC. In regard to this: Is it possible to have a local cache/ repository of all 1) Updates (Critical, Security, Bug-fixes), and 2) Additional installed rpm's (that were installed through PackageKit), e.g. Opera, Adobe Reader, etc. so that I do not have to download all those again (800 MB + D/L) This would be similar to the 'aptonCD' package in Ubuntu ( http://aptoncd.sourceforge.net/) APTonCD is a tool with a graphical interface which allows you to create one or more CDs or DVDs (you choose the type of media) with all of the packages you've downloaded via APT-GET or APTITUDE, creating a removable repository that you can use on other computers. APTonCD will also allow you to automatically create media with all of your .deb packages located in one specific repository, so that you can install them into your computers without the need for an internet connection. Thanks, Jay -- Fedora 10, Ubuntu 9.04 (i686) -- 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: firefox open containing folder
On 08/14/2009 03:45 AM, Tim wrote: On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 19:08 -0700, Skunk Worx wrote: If I right-click the item and select Open Containing Folder it pops up an application named Launch Application and it makes the statement This link needs to be opened with an application. Send to: and I can choose / remember choice / cancel. I think this used to work in F10 but now the association fails. I was hoping it would bring up in File Browser. Is there a specific place to fix this? It was common, and perhaps still is, to suffer that problem if you right-clicked on a folder, and opened the folder with something like a music player, or picture viewer program. It became a permanent setting, rather than something that only happened there and then. I don't think I've ever changed it, in fact I remember noticing after the fresh install of F11 it was happening and assumed it would eventually be fixed by updates so I waited a couple months before asking. I set the association to /usr/bin/nautilus and checked the remember box and things seem ok now. Thanks, John -- 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
PCS Wireless card
I am looking for a inexpensive PCI wireless card that works with Fedora 11 out-of-the-box, any advice? I currently have a D-link DWL-520 but it does not work, mac address is all 0's. The NetGear WG311 looks good but I don't know it is works with FC11 out-of-the-box. -- Jamie Bohr -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: thunderbird pdf association
On 08/14/2009 04:21 AM, Tim wrote: On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 19:03 -0700, Skunk Worx wrote: I have Fedora 11 X86_64 and when I get a PDF in email via Thunderbird I double click the PDF attachment and it pops up with : somefile.pdf could not be opened, because the associated helper application does not exist. Change the association in your preferences. Have a look at the source for a problem message, and look for a content-type header above the PDF attachment. If it's a PDF content type, you've got a problem with associating the right program with the file. If it's octet-stream, the mail author stuffed it up, and you're left with manually saving the file and opening it with something else. It's Content-Type: application/pdf; so if I follow what you are saying the association to Document Viewer was not working for some reason. Octet-stream is a generic content type for ANY type of binary file. It simply means this file is some sort of binary. You can't associate a program with that type, because it could be used for anything. You could try associating it with a PDF viewer, then you'd get stuck, again, when someone sent you a JPEG, or document, as octet-stream, later on. If you use Gnome, you could try associating it with gnome-open, and hope that it can handle the file type, itself, as a middle man. This is a common problem, and it'd be helpful if mail programs let you set up a list of open-with program handlers for unidentified binary files (e.g. open with evince, open with eog, open with openoffice.org) that would pop-up when you clicked on such attachments, letting you choose the most likely one. It appears to have been something funky in the association handling, as this is not a generic octet stream. I say have been and was not because I had problems with DVD/CD writing crashing X and logging me out (thus making a lot of coasters) if Desktop Effects were enabled (ati based system). After I removed my .gconf* directories last night to get rid of the last of the compiz effects, the same attachment/email is now working. Solved! Thanks, John -- 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: PCS Wireless card
look in ebay http://stores.ebay.com/Goezshopping intel is a good choice, you need to buy a mini-pci adapter, so you can install in your desktop machine. On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Jamie Bohrjamieb...@gmail.com wrote: I am looking for a inexpensive PCI wireless card that works with Fedora 11 out-of-the-box, any advice? I currently have a D-link DWL-520 but it does not work, mac address is all 0's. The NetGear WG311 looks good but I don't know it is works with FC11 out-of-the-box. -- Jamie Bohr -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines -- 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-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Configuration of 'desktop daemons'
Hello all, For the last few months I have been running a F10 system which has some binaries renamed to stop them from being run. These include: /usr/sbin/console-kit-daemon-RENAMED /usr/bin/gnome-keyring-daemon-RENAMED /usr/libexec/gvfsd-RENAMED /usr/libexec/gvfs-fuse-daemon-RENAMED /usr/libexec/gnome-vfs-daemon-RENAMED /usr/libexec/gvfs-gphoto2-volume-monitor-RENAMED /usr/libexec/gvfs-hal-volume-monitor-RENAMED Everything still works fine even without dummy replacements, even gphoto2. The reason I went to such nonstandard measures are that I don't run a 'full desktop' but just a window manager or a very thin desktop such as WindowMaker. I also don't run gdm but xdm. Consolekit I don't want since I don't need anyone managing my 'seats', in particular not a daemon that creates 63 useless threads. I also don't want any daemons to interfere with security or permissions - there are already enough subystems that are doing that. Consolekit used to be service in previous Fedoras, but today the only way to stop it seems to remove it. The others are all related to a desktop I don't use, and one of them even to a specific application. If each and every app starts running daemons like this (even before it is started) we'll end up with a complete mess. My question is: where is all of this configured ? Which process is launching all those daemons ? I scanned all the scripts used by xdm and X11, and found no reference to these daemons. They seem to be hard-coded somewhere, which is *evil*. TIA, -- FA Io lo dico sempre: l'Italia è troppo stretta e lunga. -- 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: Sorting Music by Composer
Ian Malone wrote Anyone got any better ideas for a program which will deal with a tree of  composers, with albums as leaves underneath? Hasn't been written so far as I know. The artist - name model is so pervasive in music tagging that everyone who listens to classical music eventually gives up and puts the 'composer' in the artist tag and performers (if they care) in the album name. Yes, I just gave up and set up a Playlist for each Composer in RhythmBox, which already treats the composer as the 'Artist', I suppose because that is the tree structure I use. I quickly read your instructions for Quodlibet. The fact that one has to go through such steps is, I think, adequate evidence that the UIi needs some re-thinking. But I have already trashed the program. When I cannot get a program to do a thing which it clearly must do, but that 5 or 6 different methods or attempts fail to work, then, 'the fault lies not in us'And it's gone! Forever! Geoff Why yes, I do have a low irritation threshold for this sort of thing! -- Please let me know if anything I say offends you. I may wish to offend you again in the future. Tux says: Be regular. Eat cron flakes. -- 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: Recompile kernel without SMP
Paul Grinberg on 08/14/2009 11:37 AM wrote: I am trying to recompile kernel without SMP. No need to recompile. Add nosmp to your kernel command line on bootup. -- 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: Recompile kernel without SMP
Thank you Michael, I will follow your advice. Thanks a lot...didn't quite think about this option : Although I would like to understand why I can't build it properly. Maybe my steps are wrong... The reason why I need it without SMP, is that I need Cisco VPN client to work, but it does not work on SMP or 64-bit kernels. Best, Paul -Original Message- From: fedora-list-boun...@redhat.com [mailto:fedora-list-boun...@redhat.com] On Behalf Of Michael Cronenworth Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 2:40 PM To: Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using Fedora. Subject: Re: Recompile kernel without SMP Paul Grinberg on 08/14/2009 11:37 AM wrote: I am trying to recompile kernel without SMP. No need to recompile. Add nosmp to your kernel command line on bootup. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F11 PulseAudio glitching, yes, for real
2009/8/13 Michael Cronenworth m...@cchtml.com: Every so often (every 5-10 minutes) I'll get a stutter from Rhythmbox. This can be during a song or when someone IMs me (Pidgin sound). pulseaudio-0.9.15-14.fc11.x86_64 Fully up to date F11 64-bit machine. Intel Xeon E3110 3ghz (Dual-Core Core 2) 4 gigs of DDR2 You don't mention your sound card/device which is probably more than important than CPU/RAM. Whilst the glitch might make you think your system is struggling power-wise, it's probably a driver issue. You might want to have a look at this page to check it's not on there: http://pulseaudio.org/wiki/BrokenSoundDrivers I'd also suggest running dmesg (or looking at /var/log/messages as root) to see if anything pertinent is in there. In fact, try running - as root - tail -f /var/log/messages. Keep it in sight whilst you're playing music and see if a glitch occurs, check if an error came out in the log. Then you might want to join and send a message to the pulseaudio list with details of the messages, your sound device, and the stuff you mentioned in your email. Cheers, Chris. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
What replaces system-config-display
Does anyone knows what replaces system-config-display for troubleshooting purposes? I know you can yum install system-config-display but if Fedora left it out it means that future EL release will also. If that's the case what will be used instead to troubleshoot X problems as it was in the past releases? I'm asking this because on RHEL 6 future RHCT/RHCE certification troubleshooting exam? What utility will be used instead of system-config-display? Thanks in advance. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |E|d|u|a|r|d|o| |L|a|n|d|a|v|e|r|i| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+ |G|N|U|-|L|i|n|u|x| |U|s|e|r| |4|3|3|5|1|2| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+ FREE 3D MARINE AQUARIUM SCREENSAVER - Watch dolphins, sharks orcas on your desktop! Check it out at http://www.inbox.com/marineaquarium -- 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: Testing upload/download bandwidth speeds for verification
It should also be noted that there is latency related to physical transmission speeds, so if the upload or download does checksums and verify handshaking, then there will be a delay of the roundtrip at the speed of light. Now this seems very fast to most folks, but electronically it is measurable, and on lines of several miles in length, it amounts to microseconds per block. If the block size is say 4K, and you download 4M, that is 1000 blocks. If the delay is 1usec, the total delay added is 1ms, or nearly 5000 bytes decrease at 5Mhz. Also there is additional overhead on normal transmissions that may not be in place on the speed test, and the speed test probably relates the bits/sec, which is not the same as the number of usable bytes, since the TCP uses quite a few bytes per block to specify various things about the transfer. All of this slows the response for actual file transfer, in addition to loading of the sending computer. On the speed tests, check both local responders and remote. I am in California, I regularly use Irvine and a system in New York. there is quite a difference. Regards, Les H On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 23:41 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote: Daniel B. Thurman wrote: I have been testing my residential ISP/DSL-Landline connections and wanted to make sure that I was getting what I am paying for. Supposedly, one can use the various website based speed test tools to determine their upload and download speeds. Are these speed test tools credible and can they be trusted? Of the several sites I have tried, they all more or less seemed to be in close agreement with one another in terms of the bandwidth speeds, i.e. my connection speed is quoted at 768KB/s up and 3MB/s down, and the farther away from central, the more reduced is the speeds are. The average speed tools says that I have measured speeds of 720-30 KB/s up and 2.0-5MB/s down. Why is it however, that when downloading software from the various Linux/M$ and other downloads sites I am seeing on average, speeds of 200-320(max) KB/s and never see anything much faster than that? Is this normal? Yes, very normal First, the download speed get from any site can only be as high as their upload speed. Second, run the web based speed checks from 2 or 3 different sites simultaneously and/or the same site multiple times simultaneously and see what the results are then. Those two things should shed some light as to why it is normal. Oh, and third, the software download sites probably also have rate limits on each upload (from their point of view) so that everyone gets the same level of service. All of these reasons are the driving force behind the development of bittorrent... Has anyone gotten download speeds any faster that what I have reported? What I am trying to determine is if my ISP only shows un-throttled speeds between me them, but then somehow throttles my bandwidth usage when I am using the Internet, or is it more probable that download speeds are being throttled from the download site itself? Other than by using `speed testers', I have yet to find a download site that pushes out more than 2-300KB/s? I have tried HTTP, FTP Bittorent and there is very little or no speed improvements as far as I can tell. Just wondering, Dan -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Local cache / 'repo' of updates and added RPM's
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 23:32:48 +0530, Jay Mistry jaylinu...@gmail.com wrote: I had to re-install Fedora 10 on a home desktop PC. In regard to this: Is it possible to have a local cache/ repository of all 1) Updates (Critical, Security, Bug-fixes), and 2) Additional installed rpm's (that were installed through PackageKit), e.g. Opera, Adobe Reader, etc. so that I do not have to download all those again (800 MB + D/L) Sure. Just put the rpms of interest in a directory, run createrepo on the directory and set up an appropriate repo description in /etc/yum.repos.d/*.repo for some value of *. For myself I usually mirror the relevant arch parts of updates and updates-testing and only put a few special things in a local repo. -- 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: Testing upload/download bandwidth speeds for verification
On Friday 14 August 2009 18:23:41 Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 12:42 -0400, Chris Tyler wrote: Yes. 3 megaBITs per second is just over 300 kiloBYTEs per second. There are 8 bits per byte, plus there's packet and protocol overhead, so a 10:1 ratio between the numbers is normal. Actually not. Even discounting protocol overhead, a 3Mbps connection is 3 million (3x10^6) bits per second. 300KB of data is 300 kilobytes (300x2^10) bytes. I don't understand your point. However you choose the base for M and K prefixes, the ratio is roughly 10:1. I mean, 3 Mbits = 300 KBytes because there are 8 bits in a byte (or say 10 if you simplify and/or count the overhead). It has nothing to do with prefixes. Besides, 1 Ki = 2^10 = 1024 = (roughly) 10^3 = 1 K , and similarly 1 Mi = 2^20 = (roughly) 10^6 = 1 M, (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_prefix for details ;-) ...), so even if you mix them, 3Mbits = (roughly) 300 KiBytes, or any other combination you might think of. Even Gi:G is 1:1 within an 8% error. I would say Chris is completely correct. For the OP: don't worry, your ISP seems to be providing you with what you expect. HTH, :-) Marko -- 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: Partitioning tools and ext4?
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 8:37 PM, Jim mickey...@sbcglobal.net wrote: On 08/12/2009 12:44 PM, Mike Cloaked wrote: Does anyone know which partitioning tools will play nice with ext4 in F11? eg fdisk, parted, qtparted etc It would be nice to have a list of those tools that can be trusted to change partitions for F11 and for F12 upcoming. I guess there is always PartedMagic livecd/liveusb that presumably play nice with ext4 ? gparted. I have use gparted from a boot iso and made my partitions and then use f11 and customise and edit and specified the label //home swap and had no problems. Parted Magic has gparted + a lot of other utilities, http://partedmagic.com/programs.html. Jay -- Fedora 10, Ubuntu 9.04 (i686) -- 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: Looking for Shuttle recommendations
Gregory Hosler wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi all, I'm looking into buying a Shuttle XPC to run Fedora. I am curious to know if anyone is running Fedora on a Shuttle, and if so, which model? The models readily available near me are: SG31G2B SG33G5 Pro SG45H7 SP45H7 D10 Are any known to be fully Linux compatible ? Are any of the above known to have Linux compatibility issues? Actually I don't think I've ever had a Shuttle which didn't run Linux. Rather than my telling you which old versions I have, let me suggest that you go to Newegg.com and read the user comments on various models, most have reports from Linux users about their success, and you get the info on new models. I was looking at one for firewall, using the micro-ITX with ATOM, box looked very nice and low power, adding SSD still kept it under $400, although I just built a more powerful system for half that (which uses much more power). Go to the users of what you can click and buy today. -- Bill Davidsen david...@tmr.com We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked. - from Slashdot -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Testing upload/download bandwidth speeds for verification
Hi Daniel, Daniel B. Thurman wrote: Of the several sites I have tried, they all more or less seemed to be in close agreement with one another in terms of the bandwidth speeds, i.e. my connection speed is quoted at 768KB/s up and 3MB/s down, and the farther away from central, the more reduced is the speeds are. The average speed tools says that I have measured speeds of 720-30 KB/s up and 2.0-5MB/s down. Why is it however, that when downloading software from the various Linux/M$ and other downloads sites I am seeing on average, speeds of 200-320(max) KB/s and never see anything much faster than that? Is this normal? Pardon me if this seems rather dumb or has been addressed by another post in the thread (I haven't gone through the whole thread), but are the speeds for your ISP KBps/MBps or Kbps/Mbps? Note the capitalized/small `B's. If the speeds are in Kbps/Mbps, then what you get is normal. KBps/MBps would be Kilobytes/Megabytes whereas Kb/Mb would be Kilobits/Megabits. It is common practice to quote bandwidth speeds in bits rather than bytes. To convert between the two just divide by 8, i.e. 2Mbps / 8 = 256KBps -- Suvayu Open source is the future. It sets us free. -- 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: Looking for Shuttle recommendations
My wife's PC is a diskless Shuttle X27D with 2G ram. Runs Fedora 10 off the file server in the basement (PXE boot), with a DVI LCD monitor. Everything seems to work fine, although it's not a performance box (dual core Atom). We got it for quietness and low power. -- 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: Testing upload/download bandwidth speeds for verification
On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 20:25 +0100, Marko Vojinovic wrote: [...] I would say Chris is completely correct. For the OP: don't worry, your ISP seems to be providing you with what you expect. I didn't suggest that what the OP is seeing isn't normal to within a reasonable margin of error. I was simply making a (pedantic) point. I should have read Chris's post more carefully (what he says is strictly speaking correct), but the distinction between the two meanings of K or M is worth bearing in mind, i.e. 300KBps does *not* mean 300 kilobytes (in the computing sense) every second, it means 300,000 bytes, which is close but not the same. That's all. poc -- 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: Testing upload/download bandwidth speeds for verification
Suvayu Ali wrote: Hi Daniel, Daniel B. Thurman wrote: Of the several sites I have tried, they all more or less seemed to be in close agreement with one another in terms of the bandwidth speeds, i.e. my connection speed is quoted at 768KB/s up and 3MB/s down, and the farther away from central, the more reduced is the speeds are. The average speed tools says that I have measured speeds of 720-30 KB/s up and 2.0-5MB/s down. Why is it however, that when downloading software from the various Linux/M$ and other downloads sites I am seeing on average, speeds of 200-320(max) KB/s and never see anything much faster than that? Is this normal? Pardon me if this seems rather dumb or has been addressed by another post in the thread (I haven't gone through the whole thread), but are the speeds for your ISP KBps/MBps or Kbps/Mbps? Note the capitalized/small `B's. If the speeds are in Kbps/Mbps, then what you get is normal. KBps/MBps would be Kilobytes/Megabytes whereas Kb/Mb would be Kilobits/Megabits. It is common practice to quote bandwidth speeds in bits rather than bytes. To convert between the two just divide by 8, i.e. 2Mbps / 8 = 256KBps You are correct, over the wire Internet up/down speeds are Kb/s but when downloading via applications, i.e. via your download program, you see KB/s. I guess my eyes got crossed somewhere when I wrote :P -- 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: Testing upload/download bandwidth speeds for verification
Suvayu Ali wrote: Hi Daniel, Daniel B. Thurman wrote: Of the several sites I have tried, they all more or less seemed to be in close agreement with one another in terms of the bandwidth speeds, i.e. my connection speed is quoted at 768KB/s up and 3MB/s down, and the farther away from central, the more reduced is the speeds are. The average speed tools says that I have measured speeds of 720-30 KB/s up and 2.0-5MB/s down. Why is it however, that when downloading software from the various Linux/M$ and other downloads sites I am seeing on average, speeds of 200-320(max) KB/s and never see anything much faster than that? Is this normal? Pardon me if this seems rather dumb or has been addressed by another post in the thread (I haven't gone through the whole thread), but are the speeds for your ISP KBps/MBps or Kbps/Mbps? Note the capitalized/small `B's. If the speeds are in Kbps/Mbps, then what you get is normal. KBps/MBps would be Kilobytes/Megabytes whereas Kb/Mb would be Kilobits/Megabits. It is common practice to quote bandwidth speeds in bits rather than bytes. To convert between the two just divide by 8, i.e. 2Mbps / 8 = 256KBps To clarify, a capital B is used to indicate bytes per seconds (Bps), a lower case b to indicate bits per second (bps). bps was also known back in the day as the baud rate (although that's not completely accurate). (wistful) I remember my 300 baud (300bps) acoustic coupler modem. :-p On a more serious note, some sites limit download bandwidth on each connection made so the sites can handle more connections. Example, if a site has a 2Mbps connection and one person starts a download, that person could suck the entire 2Mbps pipe, thereby blocking others from downloading. If the site puts in a 256Kbps limit on each connection, they can handle eight simultaneous connections. kernel.org does this, for instance (I think they limit to 128Kbps). Some sites also vary the limit. They start out with a large limit, but narrow it down the longer the download takes. The idea is that if you need a download of something small, you get it fast. If you're downloading a bunch of stuff, they keep squeezing down until you hit the minimum they allow and the remainder of the download continues at that limited rate. These are some of the reasons things like BitTorrent were created. -- - Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer ri...@nerd.com - - AIM/Skype: therps2ICQ: 22643734Yahoo: origrps2 - -- - Millihelen, adj: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. - -- -- 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
Mouse single-click is double-click
I ran some updates yesterday on my Fedora 10 desktop. Starting today, my mouse confuses single-click and double click. When I single-click on a text-word, sometimes it highlights. When I single-click on a file, sometimes opens it. When I single-click on the mouse-test lightbulb, sometimes it lights up. Google says that this was a bugin Fedora 9. And after August 13th automatic update, I have this bug. Is there a work-around available? Would creating a Red Hat bugzilla issue help? 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
