Re: F14 : Samba Installation Issue

[Sawrub]

  On 10/30/2010 03:24 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 12:31 +0530, Saurabh Sharma wrote:
>
>>
>> Erased the 'samba-common' and installed samba, everything worked.
>> Probably it was a QA package that was pushed for testing and then
>> called back.
> It may be more to do with the problem with packages getting pushed to
> -stable going missing, that's discussed in the thread 'Re: F-14 Branched
> report: 20101028 changes'.
Seems like. thanks for pointing.

-- 
Saurabh Sharma
Linux user number: 490644
http://sawrub-blog.blogspot.com/
Open your doors...It's time to look beyond Windows

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: ot : _download_ requirements?

[cornel panceac]

2010/10/30 Adam Williamson 

> On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 14:53 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 08:41:50PM +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> >  > 2010/10/29 Dave Jones :
> >  > > On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 09:06:42AM +0300, cornel panceac wrote:
> >  > >  > here
> >  > >  > http://fedoraproject.org/
> >  > >  > i see a section called "Download requirements"
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > shouldn't it be "Install requirements" instead?
> >  > >
> >  > > Also the '400MHz pentium pro' part reads oddly, given the
> >  > > fastest pentium pro was 200MHz.
> >  >
> >  > Maybe "Runs fine on Atom 230?" - in terms of speed it's like 2000/2001
> >  > cpu. Sounds reasonable enough?
> >
> > I'd suggest just replacing with "a modern processor". It's ambiguous, but
> > it doesn't encourage people to go dig out things from last century.
>
> I'd like to just ditch the whole section and replace it with something
> vaguer. Maybe realistic minimums for the default desktop, and a note
> that the requirements will vary widely depending on what you're doing
> with the system. (My mailserver is currently using a princely 119MB of
> RAM, and that's a perfectly valid use case for Fedora. Well, that
> actually runs Mandriva, but I expect it'd be much the same on Fedora.)
>

unfortunately, anaconda itself has it's own minimum requirements, which are
bigger than the linux itself requirements . so i doubt anaconda will run on
systems with less than 256 mb of ram . maybe that's where 384 is coming
from.

>
> This should be filed as a request for the docs team, as they own the
> relevant document.
> --
> Adam Williamson
> Fedora QA Community Monkey
> IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
> http://www.happyassassin.net
>
>
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: no modue named yum

[cornel panceac]

2010/10/30 Adam Williamson 

> On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 12:07 +0300, cornel panceac wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > yes, that was it:
> >
> > yum-3.2.28-4.fc13
> >
> > however, yum could have figured that putting a fc14 package over a
> > fc13 one is  happening for one and only one reason 
>
> Trying to make yum 'smart' to deal with this kind of packaging problem
> is a really bad idea and would just lead to other stuff breaking in
> weird fashion, most likely. The correct fix is to not push updates like
> this, which will be sorted by AutoQA in future.
>
> This has been dealt with, now - a yum-3.2.28-5 has been pushed to f13
> and f14 which makes sure that the f14 package is versioned higher than
> f12's and f13's, so f12-f14 and f13-f14 upgrades should be okay now (as
> far as *this* problem is concerned), once the problem with updates not
> actually showing up in the updates repo is solved.
> --
> Adam Williamson
> Fedora QA Community Monkey
> IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
> http://www.happyassassin.net
>
> this is good news, thank you very much. btw, is there a newer install dvd
than rc1?
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: Fedora 12 updates-testing report

[Adam Williamson]

On Sat, 2010-10-30 at 01:00 -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 10/30/2010 12:05 AM, Genes MailLists wrote:
> >
> >> I just installed an F12 VM, updated it, then updated it from
> >> updates-testing, rebooted, and +1'ed all the critpath updates (since it
> >> works fine). We need at least one other person to do this to push all
> >> those critpath updates through, though.
> > 
> >  I'll take a look ...
> 
>  *) I did an update using testing repo on a real machine. Rebooted and
> exercised some basic tests.
> 
>  *) I checked the critpath ones (as shown by bodhi) that I could. The
> ones for hardware that I dont have I could not check.

I tend to +1 the obscure X input drivers on the basis that they're not
really part of critpath anyway, it's just a dependency chain issue (we
have the xorg-x11-drivers metapackage which is part of critpath because
you can't boot without graphics drivers, but wacom certainly doesn't
stop you booting).
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: Fedora 12 updates-testing report

[Genes MailLists]

On 10/30/2010 12:05 AM, Genes MailLists wrote:
>
>> I just installed an F12 VM, updated it, then updated it from
>> updates-testing, rebooted, and +1'ed all the critpath updates (since it
>> works fine). We need at least one other person to do this to push all
>> those critpath updates through, though.
> 
>  I'll take a look ...

 *) I did an update using testing repo on a real machine. Rebooted and
exercised some basic tests.

 *) I checked the critpath ones (as shown by bodhi) that I could. The
ones for hardware that I dont have I could not check.

 *) Also there are some things like findutils which bodhi shows 2
earlier versions in critpath - but a newer one was in testing which I
did some simple tests with.

   Versions findutils-4.4.2-[5, 7] should be removed from critpath


 *) util-linux-ng-2.16.2-9.fc12 was in testing - however bodhi has
2.6.2-4 in critpath which obviously has been superceded by -9.

*) binutils

   We need one more to test this one.


  gene/ (aka glists)



-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: test Digest, Vol 80, Issue 85

[Ed Greshko]

On 10/30/2010 11:09 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 19:26 -0400, Todd Zullinger wrote:
>> Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
>>> PS The guidelines don't go far enough. Replying to a digest even if
>>> you change the Subject line is still going to annoy a lot of people
>>> because it breaks list threading. Digests are an obsolete artefact
>>> that really only works for people who just read list traffic and
>>> never reply.
>> I don't think this is true -- at least not for if you use the
>> mime-style digest.  It's trivial in most clients to reply to
>> individual messages from the mime-style digest and have proper
>> threading, subject, etc.
> I wasn't aware of that. I think the last time I received a digest must
> be over 10 years ago. Does "most clients" include Evolution, Thunderbird
> and Kmail (which I'm guessing are probably the top three on these
> lists)?

Just because I *hate* speculation I subscribed my wife's email to the
digest of the fedora's user mailing list.  She uses T-Bird.

For each message in the digest there is a separate mime-part/attachment
and the list is shown in a frame at the bottom of the email.  All of the
mime-parts are display inline so you can scroll down and read them in
one "easy" motion.

One issue is that there is no number for each attachment that matches
the number in "Today's Topics" to make it easier to relate the numbers
to the attachment.  But, you can easily count, going left to right.

Assuming you pick the correct attachment, you simply double click on it
to read the individual email and you can reply to it and it alone and
the resulting subject is "correct" in that it isn't the digest subject.

The only thing I've not donesince I don't want to annoy the list
with a testis to actually reply to see if threading gets maintained. 
>> (We changed the users list to default to mime-style digests a few
>> months back.  We haven't had any complaints yet and I think that the
>> amount of replies to the standard digest have gone down.  We also
>> filter those, so they get flagged for moderator approval, which lets
>> us tell the poster not to reply to digests and saves long threads on
>> the merits of digests and etiquette. ;)
> So why not change the Test list as well?
>
Now that I read the above I guess I should have subscribed her to this
list's digest too...  :-)

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: Fedora 12 updates-testing report

[Genes MailLists]

On 10/29/2010 11:52 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 15:45 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> 
>>> Even though it is not as bad as it appears, it is still obvious that we
>>> lack the testing resources to properly enforce our current critical path
>>> policies for older stable releases.
>>
>> Especially since four of the fixes are security fixes.
> 
> I just installed an F12 VM, updated it, then updated it from
> updates-testing, rebooted, and +1'ed all the critpath updates (since it
> works fine). We need at least one other person to do this to push all
> those critpath updates through, though.

 I'll take a look ...
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: Fedora 12 updates-testing report

[Adam Williamson]

On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 15:45 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:

> > Even though it is not as bad as it appears, it is still obvious that we
> > lack the testing resources to properly enforce our current critical path
> > policies for older stable releases.
> 
> Especially since four of the fixes are security fixes.

I just installed an F12 VM, updated it, then updated it from
updates-testing, rebooted, and +1'ed all the critpath updates (since it
works fine). We need at least one other person to do this to push all
those critpath updates through, though.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: test Digest, Vol 80, Issue 85

[Adam Williamson]

On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 22:39 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
 
> > I don't think this is true -- at least not for if you use the
> > mime-style digest.  It's trivial in most clients to reply to
> > individual messages from the mime-style digest and have proper
> > threading, subject, etc.
> 
> I wasn't aware of that. I think the last time I received a digest must
> be over 10 years ago. Does "most clients" include Evolution, Thunderbird
> and Kmail (which I'm guessing are probably the top three on these
> lists)?

I suspect gmail's up there.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: test Digest, Vol 80, Issue 85

[Todd Zullinger]

Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> I wasn't aware of that. I think the last time I received a digest
> must be over 10 years ago. Does "most clients" include Evolution,
> Thunderbird and Kmail (which I'm guessing are probably the top three
> on these lists)?

AFAIK, it does.

>> (We changed the users list to default to mime-style digests a few
>> months back.  We haven't had any complaints yet and I think that
>> the amount of replies to the standard digest have gone down.  We
>> also filter those, so they get flagged for moderator approval,
>> which lets us tell the poster not to reply to digests and saves
>> long threads on the merits of digests and etiquette. ;)
>
> So why not change the Test list as well?

That's a fine question for test-ow...@lists.fedoraproject.org. ;)

Feel free to Cc me if you ask, I'm happy to share the configuration we
use on the users list for those things.

-- 
ToddOpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp
~~
If something doesn't feel right, you're not feeling the right thing.



pgprjEM3RDaKU.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: test Digest, Vol 80, Issue 85

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 19:26 -0400, Todd Zullinger wrote:
> Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > PS The guidelines don't go far enough. Replying to a digest even if
> > you change the Subject line is still going to annoy a lot of people
> > because it breaks list threading. Digests are an obsolete artefact
> > that really only works for people who just read list traffic and
> > never reply.
> 
> I don't think this is true -- at least not for if you use the
> mime-style digest.  It's trivial in most clients to reply to
> individual messages from the mime-style digest and have proper
> threading, subject, etc.

I wasn't aware of that. I think the last time I received a digest must
be over 10 years ago. Does "most clients" include Evolution, Thunderbird
and Kmail (which I'm guessing are probably the top three on these
lists)?

> (We changed the users list to default to mime-style digests a few
> months back.  We haven't had any complaints yet and I think that the
> amount of replies to the standard digest have gone down.  We also
> filter those, so they get flagged for moderator approval, which lets
> us tell the poster not to reply to digests and saves long threads on
> the merits of digests and etiquette. ;)

So why not change the Test list as well?

poc

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

[no subject]

[Marcos Granero Vaz]

-- 
Marcos G. Vaz
Tecnologia da Informação
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: test Digest, Vol 80, Issue 85

[Todd Zullinger]

Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> PS The guidelines don't go far enough. Replying to a digest even if
> you change the Subject line is still going to annoy a lot of people
> because it breaks list threading. Digests are an obsolete artefact
> that really only works for people who just read list traffic and
> never reply.

I don't think this is true -- at least not for if you use the
mime-style digest.  It's trivial in most clients to reply to
individual messages from the mime-style digest and have proper
threading, subject, etc.

(We changed the users list to default to mime-style digests a few
months back.  We haven't had any complaints yet and I think that the
amount of replies to the standard digest have gone down.  We also
filter those, so they get flagged for moderator approval, which lets
us tell the poster not to reply to digests and saves long threads on
the merits of digests and etiquette. ;)

-- 
ToddOpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp
~~
Happiness is like peeing on yourself. Everyone can see it, but only
you can feel its warmth



pgpDtKAjs9sVn.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: test Digest, Vol 80, Issue 85

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Sat, 2010-10-30 at 00:24 +0200, xcieja wrote:
> I have just joined the Fedora`s community

Welcome. For a fruitful and agreeable experience, the first thing is to
read this: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
particularly the part about not replying to digests.

poc

PS The guidelines don't go far enough. Replying to a digest even if you
change the Subject line is still going to annoy a lot of people because
it breaks list threading. Digests are an obsolete artefact that really
only works for people who just read list traffic and never reply. You're
almost certainly better off either subscribing normally to the list, or
accessing it via Gmane.

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: Fedora 12 updates-testing report

[Adam Williamson]

On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 18:30 -0400, Luke Macken wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 03:10:37PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 20:44 +, upda...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
> > > The following Fedora 12 Critical Path updates have yet to be approved:
> 
> [snip 59 critpath updates]
> 
> > Okay, this obviously sucks, and I'm really worried we cannot
> > realistically impose the critpath policy on F12 when we clearly don't
> > have the testing capability at present. We've discussed various things
> > to do about this; for now I propose we remove the critpath restrictions
> > on F12. From a *theoretical* point of view this makes no sense as we
> > should treat all stable releases the same, but from a *practical* point
> > of view, I can't see another way to handle the situation.
> 
> Okay, so it's not *as* bad as it seems.  Due to a bug in the query that
> is used to generate this list, obsolete updates are included as well.
> I ran a fixed query for F12, and there are only 20 unapproved critpath
> updates, as opposed to 59.
> 
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/critpath?release=F12&unapproved=True
> 
> Even though it is not as bad as it appears, it is still obvious that we
> lack the testing resources to properly enforce our current critical path
> policies for older stable releases.

Especially since four of the fixes are security fixes.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: ot : _download_ requirements?

[Adam Williamson]

On Sat, 2010-10-30 at 00:21 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:

> > I'd like to just ditch the whole section and replace it with something
> > vaguer. Maybe realistic minimums for the default desktop, and a note
> > that the requirements will vary widely depending on what you're doing
> > with the system. (My mailserver is currently using a princely 119MB of
> 
> This is from my home devel server
> Mem:   2028624k total,  1921892k used,   106732k free,97760k buffers
> 
> may be an appropriate slogan would be "This system can use as much
> memory as you can give"? :)
> 
> This system uses 256MB+ shortly after boot

When I say 'used' obviously I don't mean for caching. The output of
'free' can be pretty misleading. I like htop, which gives a simple and
pretty accurate view of how much memory is actually in use by
applications and how much is effectively free.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: Fedora 12 updates-testing report

[Luke Macken]

On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 03:10:37PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 20:44 +, upda...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
> > The following Fedora 12 Critical Path updates have yet to be approved:

[snip 59 critpath updates]

> Okay, this obviously sucks, and I'm really worried we cannot
> realistically impose the critpath policy on F12 when we clearly don't
> have the testing capability at present. We've discussed various things
> to do about this; for now I propose we remove the critpath restrictions
> on F12. From a *theoretical* point of view this makes no sense as we
> should treat all stable releases the same, but from a *practical* point
> of view, I can't see another way to handle the situation.

Okay, so it's not *as* bad as it seems.  Due to a bug in the query that
is used to generate this list, obsolete updates are included as well.
I ran a fixed query for F12, and there are only 20 unapproved critpath
updates, as opposed to 59.

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/critpath?release=F12&unapproved=True

Even though it is not as bad as it appears, it is still obvious that we
lack the testing resources to properly enforce our current critical path
policies for older stable releases.

luke
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: test Digest, Vol 80, Issue 85

[xcieja]

Hello everybody,
I have just joined the Fedora`s community - and i have few questions 
regarding to the tests:
Let`s assume situation i would like to test some feature i.e networking:
a)Do i create a test case or there is some team providing test cases for 
each versions for all features and i can choose one ???
b)If such team exists, where can i find list of the test cases ??
c)Why am i not receiving  particular e-mails but only Digests ?? I am 
using Thunderbird 3.1.2

Regards,
xcieja



W dniu 2010-10-29 19:01, test-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org pisze:
> Send test mailing list submissions to
>   test@lists.fedoraproject.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>   https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>   test-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>   test-ow...@lists.fedoraproject.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of test digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: question regarding TC1 (Claude Jones)
> 2. Re: selinux and file system check (Daniel J Walsh)
> 3. TC1 torrent? (Patrick O'Callaghan)
> 4. Re: F-14 Branched report: 20101028 changes (Bill Nottingham)
> 5. Re: selinux and file system check (cornel panceac)
> 6. [Fedora QA] #148: Alexjan Carraturo: Reqeust to join (Fedora QA)
> 7. Re: [Fedora QA] #148: Alexjan Carraturo: Reqeust to join
>(Fedora QA)
> 8. Re: [Fedora QA] #148: Alexjan Carraturo: Reqeust to join
>(Fedora QA)
> 9. Re: [Fedora QA] #148: Alexjan Carraturo: Reqeust to join
>(Fedora QA)
>10. Re: [Fedora QA] #148: Alexjan Carraturo: Reqeust to join
>(Fedora QA)
>11. F-14 Branched report: 20101029 changes (Branched Report)
>12. Re: selinux and file system check (Bruno Wolff III)
>13. [Test-Announce] Announcing 389 Directory Server 1.2.7 Alpha 3
>fortesting (Rich Megginson)
>14. Re: TC1 torrent? (Bruno Wolff III)
>15. Re: Fedora 13/14 and new Macbook Air - anyone tried?
>(Jesse Keating)
>16. Re: Fedora 13/14 and new Macbook Air - anyone tried?
>(Jesse Keating)
>
>
> --
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 06:53:39 -0400
> From: Claude Jones
> Subject: Re: question regarding TC1
> To: For testers of Fedora development releases
>   
> Message-ID:<201010290653.39411.cjonesli...@tehogeeservices.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> On Thursday, October 28, 2010, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> On Thu, 2010-10-28 at 22:49 -0400, Claude Jones wrote:
>>> I've had TC1 up and running for a couple of weeks , now; will
>>> I be good to just leave things as they are and have it morph
>>> into F14 when the official release occurs?
>> Yes. (If you're updating regularly, you essentially have F14
>> final already.)
> terrific - thanks for the quick response
>

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: ot : _download_ requirements?

[Michał Piotrowski]

2010/10/30 Adam Williamson :
> On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 14:53 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 08:41:50PM +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>>  > 2010/10/29 Dave Jones :
>>  > > On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 09:06:42AM +0300, cornel panceac wrote:
>>  > >  > here
>>  > >  > http://fedoraproject.org/
>>  > >  > i see a section called "Download requirements"
>>  > >  >
>>  > >  > shouldn't it be "Install requirements" instead?
>>  > >
>>  > > Also the '400MHz pentium pro' part reads oddly, given the
>>  > > fastest pentium pro was 200MHz.
>>  >
>>  > Maybe "Runs fine on Atom 230?" - in terms of speed it's like 2000/2001
>>  > cpu. Sounds reasonable enough?
>>
>> I'd suggest just replacing with "a modern processor". It's ambiguous, but
>> it doesn't encourage people to go dig out things from last century.
>
> I'd like to just ditch the whole section and replace it with something
> vaguer. Maybe realistic minimums for the default desktop, and a note
> that the requirements will vary widely depending on what you're doing
> with the system. (My mailserver is currently using a princely 119MB of

This is from my home devel server
Mem:   2028624k total,  1921892k used,   106732k free,97760k buffers

may be an appropriate slogan would be "This system can use as much
memory as you can give"? :)

This system uses 256MB+ shortly after boot

Kind regards,
Michal

> RAM, and that's a perfectly valid use case for Fedora. Well, that
> actually runs Mandriva, but I expect it'd be much the same on Fedora.)
>
> This should be filed as a request for the docs team, as they own the
> relevant document.
> --
> Adam Williamson
> Fedora QA Community Monkey
> IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
> http://www.happyassassin.net
>
> --
> test mailing list
> test@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: Fedora 12 updates-testing report

[Adam Williamson]

On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 20:44 +, upda...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
> The following Fedora 12 Critical Path updates have yet to be approved:
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/tzdata-2010n-1.fc12
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/selinux-policy-3.6.32-125.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mingetty-1.08-5.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/glibc-2.11.2-3
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/policycoreutils-2.0.82-5.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/iputils-20071127-13.fc12
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xorg-x11-drv-wacom-0.10.6-3.fc12
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/NetworkManager-0.8.1-8.git20100831.fc12
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nss-util-3.12.8-1.fc12,nss-softokn-3.12.8-1.fc12,nss-3.12.8-2.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/freetype-2.3.11-6.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/elfutils-0.149-1.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sudo-1.7.4p4-1.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/kernel-2.6.32.19-162.fc12
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/NetworkManager-0.8.1-4.git20100817.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nss-3.12.6-11.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-ethtool-0.4-1.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/yum-3.2.28-2.fc12
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mdadm-3.1.3-0.git20100722.2.fc12
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ModemManager-0.4-4.git20100720.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openldap-2.4.19-6.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-nss-0.9-8.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openldap-2.4.19-5.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/curl-7.19.7-11.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/findutils-4.4.2-7.fc12
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ModemManager-0.3-12.git20100504.fc12
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/NetworkManager-0.8.0-11.git20100503.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/kernel-2.6.32.11-104.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nss-softokn-3.12.4-16.fc12
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xorg-x11-drv-openchrome-0.2.904-7.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openssl-1.0.0-1.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/kernel-2.6.32.10-92.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/tzdata-2010f-2.fc12
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xorg-x11-drv-openchrome-0.2.904-4.fc12
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xorg-x11-drv-openchrome-0.2.904-2.fc12
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xorg-x11-drv-ati-6.13.0-0.22.20100316git819b4015.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gtk2-2.18.8-1.fc12
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xorg-x11-xinit-1.0.9-15.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/cyrus-sasl-2.1.23-7.fc12
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gnome-settings-daemon-2.28.1-13.fc12
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/binutils-2.19.51.0.14-38.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sudo-1.7.2p2-4.fc12
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/totem-2.28.5-4.fc12,gstreamer-0.10.26-1.fc12,gstreamer-plugins-base-0.10.26-1.fc12,gstreamer-plugins-good-0.10.18-1.fc12,gstreamer-plugins-bad-free-0.10.17-1.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sudo-1.7.2p2-3.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openssh-5.3p1-18.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openssh-5.3p1-16.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nss-3.12.5-7.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sudo-1.7.2p2-2.fc12
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/control-center-2.28.1-13.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openssh-5.3p1-14.fc12
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/util-linux-ng-2.16.2-4.fc12
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xorg-x11-drv-synaptics-1.2.0-3.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/hal-0.5.14-1.fc12
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/selinux-policy-3.6.32-52.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/dracut-003-1.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-5.10.0-85.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/findutils-4.4.2-5.fc12
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openssl-1.0.0-0.12.beta4.fc12
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/policycoreutils-2.0.74-16.fc12
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/yum-utils-1.1.24-1.fc12 

Okay, this obviously sucks, and I'm really worried we cannot
realistically impose the critpath policy on F12 when we clearly don't
have the testing capability at present. We've discussed various things
to do about this; for now I propose we remove the critpath restrictions
on F12. From a *theoretical* point of view this makes no sense as we
should treat all stable releases the same, but from a *practi

Re: ot : _download_ requirements?

[Adam Williamson]

On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 14:53 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 08:41:50PM +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>  > 2010/10/29 Dave Jones :
>  > > On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 09:06:42AM +0300, cornel panceac wrote:
>  > >  > here
>  > >  > http://fedoraproject.org/
>  > >  > i see a section called "Download requirements"
>  > >  >
>  > >  > shouldn't it be "Install requirements" instead?
>  > >
>  > > Also the '400MHz pentium pro' part reads oddly, given the
>  > > fastest pentium pro was 200MHz.
>  > 
>  > Maybe "Runs fine on Atom 230?" - in terms of speed it's like 2000/2001
>  > cpu. Sounds reasonable enough?
>  
> I'd suggest just replacing with "a modern processor". It's ambiguous, but
> it doesn't encourage people to go dig out things from last century.

I'd like to just ditch the whole section and replace it with something
vaguer. Maybe realistic minimums for the default desktop, and a note
that the requirements will vary widely depending on what you're doing
with the system. (My mailserver is currently using a princely 119MB of
RAM, and that's a perfectly valid use case for Fedora. Well, that
actually runs Mandriva, but I expect it'd be much the same on Fedora.)

This should be filed as a request for the docs team, as they own the
relevant document.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: Fedora 14 updates-testing report

[Adam Williamson]

On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 10:09 +0100, José Matos wrote:
> On Thursday 28 October 2010 23:24:12 upda...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
> > ===
> > = hdf5-1.8.5.patch1-4.fc14 (FEDORA-2010-16889)
> >  A general purpose library and file format for storing scientific data
> > ---
> > - Update Information:
> > 
> > Build parallel hdf5 packages for mpich2 and openmpi.
> > ---
> > - ChangeLog:
> > 
> > * Wed Oct 27 2010 Orion Poplawski  1.8.5.patch1-4
> > - Really fixup all permissions
> > * Wed Oct 27 2010 Orion Poplawski  1.8.5.patch1-3
> > - Add docs to the mpi packages
> > - Fixup example source file permissions
> > * Tue Oct 26 2010 Orion Poplawski  1.8.5.patch1-2
> > - Build parallel hdf5 packages for mpich2 and openmpi
> > - Rework multiarch support and drop multiarch patch
> > * Tue Sep  7 2010 Orion Poplawski  1.8.5.patch1-1
> > - Update to 1.8.5-patch1
> > * Wed Jun 23 2010 Orion Poplawski  1.8.5-4
> > - Re-add rebased tstlite patch - not fixed yet
> > * Wed Jun 23 2010 Orion Poplawski  1.8.5-3
> > - Update longdouble patch for 1.8.5
> > * Wed Jun 23 2010 Orion Poplawski  1.8.5-2
> > - Re-add longdouble patch on ppc64 for EPEL builds
> > ---
> > - References:
> > 
> >   [ 1 ] Bug #646043 - Parallel Support for HDF5
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=646043
> 
> This update breaks R-hdf5 that requires hdf5==1.8.5
> 
> yum tries to satisfy this dependency loading the corresponding i686 library.
> 
> Resolving Dependencies
> --> Running transaction check
> --> Processing Dependency: hdf5 = 1.8.5 for package: R-
> hdf5-1.6.9-8.fc14.x86_64
> ---> Package hdf5.x86_64 0:1.8.5.patch1-4.fc14 set to be updated
> ---> Package hdf5-devel.x86_64 0:1.8.5.patch1-4.fc14 set to be updated
> --> Running transaction check
> ---> Package hdf5.i686 0:1.8.5-1.fc14 set to be installed
> --> Processing Dependency: libgfortran.so.3 for package: 
> hdf5-1.8.5-1.fc14.i686
> --> Processing Dependency: libgfortran.so.3(GFORTRAN_1.0) for package: 
> hdf5-1.8.5-1.fc14.i686
> --> Running transaction check
> ---> Package libgfortran.i686 0:4.5.1-4.fc14 set to be installed
> --> Finished Dependency Resolution
> 
> Dependencies Resolved
> 
> =
>  Package Arch 
>   
> VersionRepository 
>   
> Size
> =
> Updating:
>  hdf5x86_64   
>   
> 1.8.5.patch1-4.fc14updates-testing
>  
> 1.4 M
>  hdf5-devel  x86_64   
>   
> 1.8.5.patch1-4.fc14updates-testing
>  
> 569 k
> Installing for dependencies:
>  hdf5i686 
>   
> 1.8.5-1.fc14   fedora 
>  
> 1.2 M
>  libgfortran i686 
>   
> 4.5.1-4.fc14   fedora 
>  
> 199 k
> 
> Transaction Summary
> =
> Install   2 Package(s)
> Upgrade   2 Package(s)
> 
> Total download size: 3.3 M
> Is this ok [y/N]: n

Thanks for this, but the best place to file such feedback is in Bodhi,
where it will definitely be seen by the update maintainer:

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/hdf5-1.8.5.patch1-4.fc14

Login with the 'Login' link in the blue bar on the left (use your FAS
login), then file feedback with a -1 ('does not work') vote. thanks!
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: no modue named yum

[Adam Williamson]

On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 12:07 +0300, cornel panceac wrote:
> 
> 
> 2010/10/29 cornel panceac 
> 
> 
> 2010/10/29 cornel panceac 
> 
> 
> 
> 2010/10/29 Stephen John Smoogen 
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 01:20, cornel panceac
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Doubtful. What is the version of yum on the
> system and what is it on the DVD
> 
> rpm -qa | grep yum
> 
> 
> 
> yum-3.2.28-3.fc14
> on the dvd, and i'll try to discover what _was_ on the system
> since it's been replaced by rpm --oldpackage .
>  
> 
> 
> yes, that was it:
> 
> yum-3.2.28-4.fc13
> 
> however, yum could have figured that putting a fc14 package over a
> fc13 one is  happening for one and only one reason 

Trying to make yum 'smart' to deal with this kind of packaging problem
is a really bad idea and would just lead to other stuff breaking in
weird fashion, most likely. The correct fix is to not push updates like
this, which will be sorted by AutoQA in future.

This has been dealt with, now - a yum-3.2.28-5 has been pushed to f13
and f14 which makes sure that the f14 package is versioned higher than
f12's and f13's, so f12-f14 and f13-f14 upgrades should be okay now (as
far as *this* problem is concerned), once the problem with updates not
actually showing up in the updates repo is solved.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: F14 : Samba Installation Issue

[Adam Williamson]

On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 12:31 +0530, Saurabh Sharma wrote:

> 
> Erased the 'samba-common' and installed samba, everything worked.
> Probably it was a QA package that was pushed for testing and then
> called back.

It may be more to do with the problem with packages getting pushed to
-stable going missing, that's discussed in the thread 'Re: F-14 Branched
report: 20101028 changes'.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Fedora 12 updates-testing report

[updates]

The following Fedora 12 Security updates need testing:

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/bzip2-1.0.6-1.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/glpi-0.72.4-3.svn11497.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/tomcat6-6.0.26-3.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/freetype-2.3.11-6.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openldap-2.4.19-6.fc12

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/firefox-3.5.15-1.fc12,xulrunner-1.9.1.15-1.fc12,mozvoikko-1.0-14.fc12,gnome-web-photo-0.9-11.fc12,perl-Gtk2-MozEmbed-0.08-6.fc12.17,gnome-python2-extras-2.25.3-22.fc12,galeon-2.0.7-27.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/horde-3.3.9-1.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mailman-2.1.12-10.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/seamonkey-2.0.9-1.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pidgin-2.7.4-1.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gif2png-2.5.1-1202.fc12

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sunbird-1.0-0.26.20090916hg.fc12,thunderbird-3.0.10-1.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xpdf-3.02-16.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/luci-0.22.4-2.0.b9faf868074git.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/cvs-1.11.23-9.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/clamav-0.96.3-1200.fc12

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nss-util-3.12.8-1.fc12,nss-softokn-3.12.8-1.fc12,nss-3.12.8-2.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/bristol-0.40.7-7.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pyftpdlib-0.5.2-1.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/glibc-2.11.2-3
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/banshee-1.6.1-4.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/moodle-1.9.10-1.fc12


The following Fedora 12 Critical Path updates have yet to be approved:

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/tzdata-2010n-1.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/selinux-policy-3.6.32-125.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mingetty-1.08-5.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/glibc-2.11.2-3
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/policycoreutils-2.0.82-5.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/iputils-20071127-13.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xorg-x11-drv-wacom-0.10.6-3.fc12

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/NetworkManager-0.8.1-8.git20100831.fc12

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nss-util-3.12.8-1.fc12,nss-softokn-3.12.8-1.fc12,nss-3.12.8-2.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/freetype-2.3.11-6.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/elfutils-0.149-1.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sudo-1.7.4p4-1.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/kernel-2.6.32.19-162.fc12

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/NetworkManager-0.8.1-4.git20100817.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nss-3.12.6-11.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-ethtool-0.4-1.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/yum-3.2.28-2.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mdadm-3.1.3-0.git20100722.2.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ModemManager-0.4-4.git20100720.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openldap-2.4.19-6.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-nss-0.9-8.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openldap-2.4.19-5.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/curl-7.19.7-11.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/findutils-4.4.2-7.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ModemManager-0.3-12.git20100504.fc12

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/NetworkManager-0.8.0-11.git20100503.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/kernel-2.6.32.11-104.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nss-softokn-3.12.4-16.fc12

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xorg-x11-drv-openchrome-0.2.904-7.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openssl-1.0.0-1.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/kernel-2.6.32.10-92.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/tzdata-2010f-2.fc12

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xorg-x11-drv-openchrome-0.2.904-4.fc12

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xorg-x11-drv-openchrome-0.2.904-2.fc12

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xorg-x11-drv-ati-6.13.0-0.22.20100316git819b4015.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gtk2-2.18.8-1.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xorg-x11-xinit-1.0.9-15.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/cyrus-sasl-2.1.23-7.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gnome-settings-daemon-2.28.1-13.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/binutils-2.19.51.0.14-38.fc12
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sudo-1.7.2p2-4.fc12

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/totem-2.28.5-4.fc12,gstreamer-0.10.26-1.fc12,gstreamer-plugins-base-0.10.26-1.fc12,gstreamer-plugins-good-0.10.18-1.fc1

Fedora 13 updates-testing report

[updates]

The following Fedora 13 Security updates need testing:

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/glpi-0.72.4-3.svn11497.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/banshee-1.6.1-4.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-libwww-perl-5.837-2.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/monotone-0.48.1-1.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/horde-3.3.9-1.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mailman-2.1.12-16.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/luci-0.22.4-2.0.b9faf868074git.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xpdf-3.02-16.fc13

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sunbird-1.0-0.30.b2pre.fc13,thunderbird-3.1.6-1.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/clamav-0.96.3-1400.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/tomcat6-6.0.26-11.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/bristol-0.40.7-7.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/moodle-1.9.10-1.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/seamonkey-2.0.9-1.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pidgin-2.7.4-1.fc13


The following Fedora 13 Critical Path updates have yet to be approved:

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/chkconfig-1.3.48-1.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/tzdata-2010n-1.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gnome-settings-daemon-2.30.1-9.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/selinux-policy-3.7.19-69.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mingetty-1.08-5.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/upstart-0.6.5-7.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libgsf-1.14.18-1.fc13

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/goddard-kde-theme-13.1.0-1.fc13,fedora-logos-13.0.2-2.fc13,generic-logos-13.0.1-2.fc13,kde-settings-4.4-21.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mash-0.5.20-1.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openldap-2.4.21-11.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/policycoreutils-2.0.83-25.fc13

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nss-3.12.7-4.fc13,nss-util-3.12.7-2.fc13,nss-softokn-3.12.7-3.fc13,nspr-4.8.6-1.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/linux-firmware-20100806-3.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nss-3.12.6-11.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-ethtool-0.4-1.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nss-3.12.6-9.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/lvm2-2.02.72-4.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xorg-x11-drv-wacom-0.10.8-1.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mdadm-3.1.3-0.git20100722.2.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mash-0.5.17-2.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xorg-x11-drv-wacom-0.10.7-2.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xorg-x11-drv-vmmouse-12.6.9-3.fc13

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/iscsi-initiator-utils-6.2.0.872-6.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/selinux-policy-3.7.19-13.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gnome-keyring-2.30.1-1.fc13

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xorg-x11-drv-openchrome-0.2.904-7.fc13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openldap-2.4.21-5.fc13


The following builds have been pushed to Fedora 13 updates-testing

edb-0.9.16-1.fc13
erlang-mustache-0.1.0-2.fc13
ettercap-0.7.3-36.fc13
febootstrap-2.10-1.fc13
gdcm-2.0.16-5.fc13
perl-WWW-Curl-4.14-1.fc13
python-soaplib-0.8.1-4.fc13
pytrailer-0.4-2.fc13
quvi-0.2.7-1.fc13
rubygem-deltacloud-client-0.1.0-1.fc13
rubygem-deltacloud-client-0.1.0-2.fc13
rubygem-gio2-0.90.4-2.fc13
rubygem-ruby-debug-0.10.4-1.fc13
rubygem-ruby-debug-base-0.10.4-1.fc13
schroedinger-1.0.10-1.fc13
soundconverter-1.5.3-2.fc13
sunbird-1.0-0.30.b2pre.fc13
themonospot-gui-qt-0.1.3-7.fc13
thunderbird-3.1.6-1.fc13
xavante-2.2.1-1.fc13

Details about builds:



 edb-0.9.16-1.fc13 (FEDORA-2010-16919)
 A debugger based on the ptrace API and Qt4

Update Information:

Update to 0.9.16

ChangeLog:

* Thu Oct 28 2010 Nicoleau Fabien  - 0.9.16-1
- Update to 0.9.16




 erlang-mustache-0.1.0-2.fc13 (FEDORA-2010-16931)
 Mustache template engine for Erlang

Update Information:

Initial commit

References:

  [ 1 ] Bug #639291 - Review Request: erlang-mustache - Mustache template 
engine for Erlang
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cg

Fedora 14 updates-testing report

[updates]

The following Fedora 14 Security updates need testing:

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mailman-2.1.13-6.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/moodle-1.9.10-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/cvs-1.11.23-11.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/monotone-0.48.1-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/apr-util-1.3.10-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/horde-3.3.9-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/tomcat6-6.0.26-14.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gnucash-2.3.15-2.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-libwww-perl-5.837-2.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/exim-4.72-2.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xpdf-3.02-16.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/seamonkey-2.0.9-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/bristol-0.40.7-7.fc14

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sunbird-1.0-0.31.b2pre.fc14,thunderbird-3.1.6-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/qt-4.7.0-8.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libguestfs-1.5.23-1
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/luci-0.22.4-2.0.b9faf868074git.fc14


The following Fedora 14 Critical Path updates have yet to be approved:

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xdg-utils-1.0.2-21.20101028.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/selinux-policy-3.9.7-7.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/chkconfig-1.3.48-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/tzdata-2010n-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/util-linux-ng-2.18-4.4.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mingetty-1.08-5.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/upstart-0.6.5-10.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gnome-keyring-2.32.1-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/cairo-1.10.0-2.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openssh-5.5p1-22.fc14.2

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/authconfig-6.1.11-1.fc14,sssd-1.4.0-2.fc14,ding-libs-0.1.2-3.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pungi-2.1.3-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/fedora-logos-14.0.0-3.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/util-linux-ng-2.18-4.2.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/anaconda-14.18-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xkeyboard-config-1.9-3.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xkeyboard-config-1.9-2.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/at-spi-1.32.0-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/glib2-2.26.0-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/selinux-policy-3.9.5-5.fc14

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xorg-x11-drv-nouveau-0.0.16-12.20100920gitf1ac413.fc14.1
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/anaconda-14.17.3-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/anaconda-14.17.2-1.fc14

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nss-3.12.7-3.fc14,nss-softokn-3.12.7-3.fc14,nss-util-3.12.7-2.fc14,nspr-4.8.6-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libuser-0.56.17-2.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gnome-settings-daemon-2.31.91-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gnome-settings-daemon-2.31.6-2.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libuser-0.56.17-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ntp-4.2.6p2-3.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/initscripts-9.17-1.fc14

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/evolution-2.31.90-1.fc14,evolution-data-server-2.31.90-1.fc14,gtkhtml3-3.31.90-1.fc14,evolution-mapi-0.31.90-1.fc14,evolution-exchange-2.31.90-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ntp-4.2.6p2-2.fc14

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/NetworkManager-0.8.1-4.git20100817.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/glib2-2.25.14-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/upower-0.9.5-5.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/linux-firmware-20100806-3.fc14

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libgpg-error-1.9-1.fc14,libksba-1.0.8-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/firstboot-1.112-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/polkit-0.97-3.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nss-3.12.6-11.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/system-config-date-1.9.60-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/syslinux-4.02-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/linux-firmware-20100806-2.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/util-linux-ng-2.18-3.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gobject-introspection-0.9.3-5.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-ethtool-0.4-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libsoup-2.31.6-1.fc14

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/glib2-2.25.13-1.fc14,gnome-panel-2.31.6-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/anaconda-14.14-1.fc14
https://

Re: ot : _download_ requirements?

[sawrub]

  On 10/28/2010 11:36 AM, cornel panceac wrote:
> here
> http://fedoraproject.org/
> i see a section called "Download requirements"
>
> shouldn't it be "Install requirements" instead?
>
> otoh, the new look is great!
> ( although it looks not so great on chromium :) )
>
> -- 
> When one door is closed, another is open.
> (Robert Nesta Marley)

That seems quite reasonable, added to be taken care of. The new UI is 
still to get more revamps. Thanks for the input.

-- 
Saurabh Sharma
Linux user number: 490644
http://sawrub-blog.blogspot.com/
Open your doors...It's time to look beyond Windows

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: ot : _download_ requirements?

[vagelis]

Quoting Dave Jones :

> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 08:41:50PM +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>  > 2010/10/29 Dave Jones :
>  > > On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 09:06:42AM +0300, cornel panceac wrote:
>  > >  > here
>  > >  > http://fedoraproject.org/
>  > >  > i see a section called "Download requirements"
>  > >  >
>  > >  > shouldn't it be "Install requirements" instead?
>  > >
>  > > Also the '400MHz pentium pro' part reads oddly, given the
>  > > fastest pentium pro was 200MHz.
>  >
>  > Maybe "Runs fine on Atom 230?" - in terms of speed it's like 2000/2001
>  > cpu. Sounds reasonable enough?
>
> I'd suggest just replacing with "a modern processor". It's ambiguous, but
> it doesn't encourage people to go dig out things from last century.
>
>   Dave
>
> --
> test mailing list
> test@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

you are absolutely right Dave

Vagelis
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: ot : _download_ requirements?

[Dave Jones]

On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 08:41:50PM +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
 > 2010/10/29 Dave Jones :
 > > On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 09:06:42AM +0300, cornel panceac wrote:
 > >  > here
 > >  > http://fedoraproject.org/
 > >  > i see a section called "Download requirements"
 > >  >
 > >  > shouldn't it be "Install requirements" instead?
 > >
 > > Also the '400MHz pentium pro' part reads oddly, given the
 > > fastest pentium pro was 200MHz.
 > 
 > Maybe "Runs fine on Atom 230?" - in terms of speed it's like 2000/2001
 > cpu. Sounds reasonable enough?
 
I'd suggest just replacing with "a modern processor". It's ambiguous, but
it doesn't encourage people to go dig out things from last century.

Dave

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: ot : _download_ requirements?

[Michał Piotrowski]

2010/10/29 Dave Jones :
> On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 09:06:42AM +0300, cornel panceac wrote:
>  > here
>  > http://fedoraproject.org/
>  > i see a section called "Download requirements"
>  >
>  > shouldn't it be "Install requirements" instead?
>
> Also the '400MHz pentium pro' part reads oddly, given the
> fastest pentium pro was 200MHz.

Maybe "Runs fine on Atom 230?" - in terms of speed it's like 2000/2001
cpu. Sounds reasonable enough?

>
> That whole section seems suspect. 384MB / 512MB recommended ?  seriously?
> I'd double both those estimates.

IMHO 1GB also sounds reasonable.

>
> I just upgraded my last 512MB box because I got tired of things
> either swapping forever, or regular visits from the oom killer.
> (and that wasn't even a desktop machine)
>
>        Dave
>
> --
> test mailing list
> test@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
>

Kind regards,
Michal
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: ot : _download_ requirements?

[Dave Jones]

On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 09:06:42AM +0300, cornel panceac wrote:
 > here
 > http://fedoraproject.org/
 > i see a section called "Download requirements"
 > 
 > shouldn't it be "Install requirements" instead?

Also the '400MHz pentium pro' part reads oddly, given the
fastest pentium pro was 200MHz.

That whole section seems suspect. 384MB / 512MB recommended ?  seriously?
I'd double both those estimates.

I just upgraded my last 512MB box because I got tired of things
either swapping forever, or regular visits from the oom killer.
(and that wasn't even a desktop machine)

Dave

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: TC1 torrent?

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On 10/29/10 1:35 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 13:26:53 -0430,
>Patrick O'Callaghan  wrote:
>> On 10/29/10 12:06 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
>>> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 09:14:19 -0430,
>>>Patrick O'Callaghan   wrote:
 Trying to download TC1 right now but it's snail-slow. Has anyone put up
 a torrent yet or do I have to bide my time till the official release? I
 was hoping to do the update this weekend.
>>> I think you would do better to just grab the netinstall/boot iso from
>>> the development repositories and then do a network install. There should
>>> be several good mirrors and you only need to grab what you need, not the
>>> whole install image.
>> That's all very well but it means having to wait for the new stuff
>> to download instead of dl'ing in the background while continuing to
>> work. And before anyone asks, yes I would like to use preupgrade but
>> I need to grow my /boot partition and the existence of LVM in the
>> rest of the disk makes this harder than it needs to be. One of the
>> things I intend to do is dump LVM and use direct partitioning, so I
>> prefer to have the full distro available just in case I have to do a
>> reinstall.
> The location of the RCs (RC1 is the same as final) was announced indirectly
> on the test lists. You could grab that. But it may be slow.
>
> I have copies of Live Desktop ISO for i386 and Live Games ISO for both arches.
> It doesn't sound like you want those if you are doing an update.
>
> If you have some place to host it, you could get a local mirror of the
> release from say mirrors.kernel.org and then point to that when doing the
> update. You'll need to download a lot more data (about 23 GB for one arch),
> but it can run in the background.
Thanks for the suggestions Bruno, but the point has become moot as my 
network connection just decided to speed up. No idea why (it wasn't 
overloaded or anything). Anyway, I'm just dl'ing the ISO as we speak.

poc
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: TC1 torrent?

[Bruno Wolff III]

On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 13:26:53 -0430,
  Patrick O'Callaghan  wrote:
> On 10/29/10 12:06 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> >On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 09:14:19 -0430,
> >   Patrick O'Callaghan  wrote:
> >>Trying to download TC1 right now but it's snail-slow. Has anyone put up
> >>a torrent yet or do I have to bide my time till the official release? I
> >>was hoping to do the update this weekend.
> >I think you would do better to just grab the netinstall/boot iso from
> >the development repositories and then do a network install. There should
> >be several good mirrors and you only need to grab what you need, not the
> >whole install image.
> That's all very well but it means having to wait for the new stuff
> to download instead of dl'ing in the background while continuing to
> work. And before anyone asks, yes I would like to use preupgrade but
> I need to grow my /boot partition and the existence of LVM in the
> rest of the disk makes this harder than it needs to be. One of the
> things I intend to do is dump LVM and use direct partitioning, so I
> prefer to have the full distro available just in case I have to do a
> reinstall.

The location of the RCs (RC1 is the same as final) was announced indirectly
on the test lists. You could grab that. But it may be slow.

I have copies of Live Desktop ISO for i386 and Live Games ISO for both arches.
It doesn't sound like you want those if you are doing an update.

If you have some place to host it, you could get a local mirror of the
release from say mirrors.kernel.org and then point to that when doing the
update. You'll need to download a lot more data (about 23 GB for one arch),
but it can run in the background.
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: TC1 torrent?

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On 10/29/10 12:06 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 09:14:19 -0430,
>Patrick O'Callaghan  wrote:
>> Trying to download TC1 right now but it's snail-slow. Has anyone put up
>> a torrent yet or do I have to bide my time till the official release? I
>> was hoping to do the update this weekend.
> I think you would do better to just grab the netinstall/boot iso from
> the development repositories and then do a network install. There should
> be several good mirrors and you only need to grab what you need, not the
> whole install image.
That's all very well but it means having to wait for the new stuff to 
download instead of dl'ing in the background while continuing to work. 
And before anyone asks, yes I would like to use preupgrade but I need to 
grow my /boot partition and the existence of LVM in the rest of the disk 
makes this harder than it needs to be. One of the things I intend to do 
is dump LVM and use direct partitioning, so I prefer to have the full 
distro available just in case I have to do a reinstall.

poc
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: Request for Fedora QA Group

[Saurabh Sharma]

On Thu, 2010-10-28 at 22:46 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 09:26 +0530, Sawrub wrote:
> > On 10/29/2010 01:11 AM, James Laska wrote: 
> > > On Thu, 2010-10-28 at 16:35 -0300, iarly selbir wrote:
> > > > AFAIK, this group isn't used by the real QA members, instead we have
> > > > both triagers, fedorabugs and proventesters for testers purposes.
> > > That's correct.   Iarly lists the actively managed Fedora QA FAS groups.
> > > Any other groups are ignored / not used.
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > James
> > > 
> > Ok thats too is fine, so how can i join/ be a member of proven
> > testers. Filing a ticket as mentioned http://tinyurl.com/2czpxok does
> > not seem to work [please change if not applicable ]. 
> > Besides all please approve my request for the proven testers group.
> 
> The group you have to apply to is 'proventesters' rather than 'qa', but
> you should also file a ticket, yes. When you say it 'doesn't work' do
> you mean you couldn't manage to file a ticket, or you filed a ticket and
> no-one responded? Thanks!
> -- 
> Adam Williamson
> Fedora QA Community Monkey
> IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
> http://www.happyassassin.net
> 

i was not logged in when i saw the page and was not able to figure out
how to use it for filing ticket.
Now i got an idea, but probably there should be more text to guide first
time visitors like me.

-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

ot : _download_ requirements?

[cornel panceac]

here
http://fedoraproject.org/
i see a section called "Download requirements"

shouldn't it be "Install requirements" instead?

otoh, the new look is great!
( although it looks not so great on chromium :) )

-- 
When one door is closed, another is open.
(Robert Nesta Marley)
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: Fedora 13/14 and new Macbook Air - anyone tried?

[Jesse Keating]

On 10/28/10 8:27 PM, Steven Haigh wrote:
> On 29/10/10 14:23, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> On Thu, 2010-10-28 at 22:11 +0200, Fabian A. Scherschel wrote:
>>> LOL. Booting Fedora in an Apple Store? I wanna see that! :D
>>
>> Macs aren't only sold in Apple stores.
> 
> Still, whats the point of only being *slightly* annoying...
> 
> Burn a handful of F14 live CDs, insert into display macs, reboot them to 
> the live CD, walk away.
> 
> NOTE: I do not recommend using super glue in the drives. This many annoy 
> the store employees a tad more than is socially acceptable.
> 

A tad hard since the macbook air doesn't have an optical drive...

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating





signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: Fedora 13/14 and new Macbook Air - anyone tried?

[Jesse Keating]

On 10/28/10 6:33 AM, Jan Wildeboer wrote:
> All,
> 
> the new Macbook Air and Fedora - has anyone tried it already? From the 
> specs I see the usual problems:
> 
> - Nvidia GeForce 320M

Chip should work, the concern is how it works either in EFI mode
(booting native EFI) or through "bootcamp" (a misnomer but common way to
describe booting emulated bios mode)

> - Airport Extreme WLAN

I think this might work with the recently dumped OSS code for these chips.

> - DisplayPort

Shouldn't be an issue.

> I would like to hear if s/o as Fedora up and running on it ...
> 
> Any pointers appreciated
> 
> Jan
> 

I'm interested as well!

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating





signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: TC1 torrent?

[Bruno Wolff III]

On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 09:14:19 -0430,
  Patrick O'Callaghan  wrote:
> Trying to download TC1 right now but it's snail-slow. Has anyone put up 
> a torrent yet or do I have to bide my time till the official release? I 
> was hoping to do the update this weekend.

I think you would do better to just grab the netinstall/boot iso from
the development repositories and then do a network install. There should
be several good mirrors and you only need to grab what you need, not the
whole install image.
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

[Test-Announce] Announcing 389 Directory Server 1.2.7 Alpha 3 for testing

[Rich Megginson]

The 389 team is pleased to announce the availability for testing of
Alpha 3 of version 1.2.7.  This release contains some new features as
well as many bug fixes.  On those platforms which have OpenLDAP built
with Mozilla NSS crypto support (Fedora 14 and later), the packages are
built with OpenLDAP instead of the Mozilla LDAP C SDK.

WARNING: If you are upgrading from a previous 1.2.6 release candidate,
you will need to run fixfiles to fix some SELinux AVCs, or directory
server will not start. See bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=622882

To fix, run this:
  fixfiles -R 389-ds-base restore

If you are upgrading from 1.2.5 or earlier, or a stable 1.2.6, there is 
no problem.

WARNING: If you are upgrading from a 1.2.6 alpha or release candidate,
you will need to manually fix your entryrdn index files. See
http://port389.org/wiki/Subtree_Rename#warning:_upgrade_from_389_v1.2.6_.28a.3F.2C_rc1_.7E_rc6.29_to_v1.2.6_rc6_or_newer
 

for more information.  If you are upgrading from 1.2.5 or earlier, or a
1.2.6 stable release, there is no problem.

The new packages and versions are:
* 389-ds-base 1.2.7.a3
* 389-admin 1.1.12.a2
* 389-adminutil 1.1.13
* 389-dsgw 1.1.6
* perl-Mozilla-LDAP 1.5.3 (Fedora 14 and later)

***We need your help!  Please help us test this software.***  It is an
Alpha release, so it may have a few glitches, but it has been tested for
regressions and for new feature bugs.  The Fedora system
requires that packages go into Testing until verified and pushed
to Stable.

The more testing we get, the faster we can release these packages to
Stable.  See the Release Notes for information about how to provide
testing feedback (or just send an email to
389-us...@lists.fedoraproject.org).

=== Installation ===
  yum install --enablerepo=[updates-testing|epel-testing] 389-ds
  setup-ds-admin.pl

=== Upgrade ===
  yum upgrade --enablerepo=[updates-testing|epel-testing] 389-ds-base
389-admin 389-adminutil 389-dsgw perl-Mozilla-LDAP
  setup-ds-admin.pl -u

=== New features ===
* On Fedora 14 and later, the 389 packages are built with OpenLDAP
instead of Mozilla LDAP
* Account Policy - keep track of last login, automatically disable
unused accounts
* The replication changelog has been moved into the main server database
environment
* Member Of supports multiple membership attributes

=== Bugs Fixed ===
This release contains many bug fixes.  The complete list of bugs
fixed is found at the link below.  Note that bugs marked as MODIFIED
have been fixed but are still in testing.
* Bug List for 389 1.2.7
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/showdependencytree.cgi?id=576869&hide_resolved=1 



* Release Notes - http://port389.org/wiki/Release_Notes
* Install_Guide - http://port389.org/wiki/Install_Guide
* Download - http://port389.org/wiki/Download


___
test-announce mailing list
test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test-announce
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: selinux and file system check

[Bruno Wolff III]

On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 17:35:54 +0300,
  cornel panceac  wrote:
> > not yet, if possible i'll create a bug tomorrow. the behaviour is like
> this: i boot rescue environment, maybe yum update the system to be rescued,
> then reboot on the then reboot. ""Superblock etc" then immediately "file
> system relabel is required". this happened several times today on a system
> which was dvd upgraded from f13 to f14 rc1. the relabel doesn't show up when
> i just rebooted the system.

There might be two problems. The superblock timestamp may have to do with
timezone settings and how you have your bios clock set. If the rescue
image and the normal image have different ideas about what the time of
the bios clock means (say one assumes it is UTC and the other assumes it
is localtime) I think you could see a symptom like this.

For the update / selinux relabel issue, if you write to file systems
with selinux disabled that is going to trigger needing a relabel. I think
it is normal for updating stuff while using rescue mode to trigger a relabel,
as if the policy of the rescue image weren't to match that of the installed
system, when you did an update files could get incorrectly labelled.
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

F-14 Branched report: 20101029 changes

[Branched Report]

Compose started at Fri Oct 29 13:15:04 UTC 2010

Broken deps for x86_64
--
qtgpsc-0.2.3-6.fc12.x86_64 requires libgps.so.18()(64bit)



Broken deps for i386
--
qtgpsc-0.2.3-6.fc12.i686 requires libgps.so.18




Summary:
Added Packages: 0
Removed Packages: 0
Modified Packages: 0
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: [Fedora QA] #148: Alexjan Carraturo: Reqeust to join

[Fedora QA]

#148: Alexjan Carraturo: Reqeust to join
--+-
  Reporter:  axjslack |   Owner:  jlaska
  Type:  proventester request |  Status:  closed
  Priority:  major|   Milestone:
 Component:  Proventester Mentor Request  | Version:
Resolution:  fixed|Keywords:
--+-
Changes (by jlaska):

  * status:  assigned => closed
  * resolution:  => fixed

Comment:

 Replying to [comment:3 axjslack]:
 > 1) Yes, I read and understood guide on
 http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Proven_tester
 > 2) Yes I know how send feedback via bodhi and how to use fedora-easy-
 karma
 >
 > I have not a particular area.
 >
 > Before I would like to see how others do this work.

 Welcome to the team, I have sponsored your FAS 'proventester' join
 request.

 I'm sure you've read it already, but I'd like to direct your attention to
 the documented feedback procedures on the wiki
 (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Proven_tester#Feedback_procedures).  As
 proventesters, our job isn't to block a proposed update by exhaustively
 finding all bugs related to the package.  Instead, our mission is to
 assert a basic level of stability before an update is moved into the
 'updates' repository.

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Fedora QA 
Fedora Quality Assurance
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: [Fedora QA] #148: Alexjan Carraturo: Reqeust to join

[Fedora QA]

#148: Alexjan Carraturo: Reqeust to join
--+-
  Reporter:  axjslack |   Owner:  jlaska  
  Type:  proventester request |  Status:  assigned
  Priority:  major|   Milestone:  
 Component:  Proventester Mentor Request  | Version:  
Resolution:   |Keywords:  
--+-
Comment (by axjslack):

 1) Yes, I read and understood guide on
 http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Proven_tester
 2) Yes I know how send feedback via bodhi and how to use fedora-easy-karma

 I have not a particular area.

 Before I would like to see how others do this work.

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Fedora QA 
Fedora Quality Assurance
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: [Fedora QA] #148: Alexjan Carraturo: Reqeust to join

[Fedora QA]

#148: Alexjan Carraturo: Reqeust to join
--+-
  Reporter:  axjslack |   Owner:  jlaska  
  Type:  proventester request |  Status:  assigned
  Priority:  major|   Milestone:  
 Component:  Proventester Mentor Request  | Version:  
Resolution:   |Keywords:  
--+-
Comment (by jlaska):

 Greetings Alexjan,

 I'll be happy to process your request to join proventesters.  As we
 discussed on IRC, I suspect you're familiar with the process already.
 However, please confirm by replying to this ticket that you have ...
  1. read and understood the proventester guide at
 http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Proven_tester,
  2. you know how to send feedback via the bodhi interface and how to use
 fedora-easy-karma.

 Once you have confirmed these I will be happy to sponsor you into the
 proventester group.

 Also, are there any particular packages or areas you're interested in
 helping to test?

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Fedora QA 
Fedora Quality Assurance
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: [Fedora QA] #148: Alexjan Carraturo: Reqeust to join

[Fedora QA]

#148: Alexjan Carraturo: Reqeust to join
--+-
  Reporter:  axjslack |   Owner:  jlaska  
  Type:  proventester request |  Status:  assigned
  Priority:  major|   Milestone:  
 Component:  Proventester Mentor Request  | Version:  
Resolution:   |Keywords:  
--+-
Changes (by jlaska):

  * owner:  => jlaska
  * status:  new => assigned

Comment:

 {{{
 10:40:50   axjslack: I would like to
 10:41:03   axjslack: enter in QA and test group
 10:41:18   axjslack: and give, if is possible, my help
 10:41:53   jlaska: axjslack: excellent, we're always in need of more
 hands+help :)
 10:42:24   jlaska: axjslack: a good place to start would be
 http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Join
 10:42:39   axjslack: Yes, I was ther
 10:42:47   axjslack: I know how Fedoraproject work
 10:42:47   jlaska: axjslack: more specifically, you might find becoming a
 'proventester' a good fit --
 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Proven_tester#Joining_the_proven_testers
 10:43:06   axjslack: I'm already an ambassador
 10:43:11   axjslack: I do the procedure
 10:44:24   jlaska: axjslack: very good, it sounds like you might be a
 natural then :)
 10:44:55   axjslack: now I'm subscribed to mailing list
 10:45:03   axjslack: and make "apply" on Fas
 10:45:32   jlaska: axjslack: note, when applying to 'proventesters',
 please also follow the steps provided at the link I posted earlier
 10:47:18   axjslack: yes I see the procedure
 10:47:19   axjslack: but
 10:48:10   axjslack: I don't know I have to
 10:48:21   axjslack: do the ticket that answer me procedure
 10:48:34   axjslack: so, I'm follow the adivce of the site
 10:48:39   axjslack: and I come here
 10:50:11   jlaska: axjslack: please do submit a ticket, including the
 information you posted here ... and I (or mcloaked or another mentor) will
 jump on it shortly
 10:50:39   axjslack: ok... I have to insert some personal information on
 ticket?
 10:51:45   jlaska: axjslack: no personal information is required
 10:52:01   axjslack: ok
 10:52:09   axjslack: now I'm doing it
 10:52:47   axjslack: I have done
 }}}

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Fedora QA 
Fedora Quality Assurance
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

[Fedora QA] #148: Alexjan Carraturo: Reqeust to join

[Fedora QA]

#148: Alexjan Carraturo: Reqeust to join
-+--
 Reporter:  axjslack |   Owner: 
 Type:  proventester request |  Status:  new
 Priority:  major|   Milestone: 
Component:  Proventester Mentor Request  | Version: 
 Keywords:   |  
-+--
 = phenomenon =

 = reason =

 = recommendation =

-- 
Ticket URL: 
Fedora QA 
Fedora Quality Assurance
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: selinux and file system check

[cornel panceac]

2010/10/29 Daniel J Walsh 

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 10/29/2010 02:48 AM, cornel panceac wrote:
> > why is the selinux relabel required when the "Superblock last mount/write
> is
> > in the future" error is fixed?
> >
> >
> No clue.  Who says it is?  Do you have a bugzilla reference?
>
> not yet, if possible i'll create a bug tomorrow. the behaviour is like
this: i boot rescue environment, maybe yum update the system to be rescued,
then reboot on the then reboot. ""Superblock etc" then immediately "file
system relabel is required". this happened several times today on a system
which was dvd upgraded from f13 to f14 rc1. the relabel doesn't show up when
i just rebooted the system.
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: F-14 Branched report: 20101028 changes

[Bill Nottingham]

Michael Schwendt (mschwe...@gmail.com) said: 
> What's going on? What repo are "stable" updates going to currently?
> They are piling up broken dependencies, because they disappear
> from updates-testing, don't appear in development/14, and don't
> enter updates either. Not limited to "nss" but e.g.
> 
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nss-3.12.8-2.fc14,nss-softokn-3.12.8-1.fc14,nss-util-3.12.8-1.fc14
> 
> Where can it be found?

Fixing.

Bill
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

TC1 torrent?

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

Trying to download TC1 right now but it's snail-slow. Has anyone put up 
a torrent yet or do I have to bide my time till the official release? I 
was hoping to do the update this weekend.

poc
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: selinux and file system check

[Daniel J Walsh]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 10/29/2010 02:48 AM, cornel panceac wrote:
> why is the selinux relabel required when the "Superblock last mount/write is
> in the future" error is fixed?
> 
> 
No clue.  Who says it is?  Do you have a bugzilla reference?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkzKu1kACgkQrlYvE4MpobPPSACfeoLc9dNrSXZbVTpzZCS2LlHI
9dwAnjN26mN1xsqePz26ygwzxsNcXdsn
=qGq+
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: question regarding TC1

[Claude Jones]

On Thursday, October 28, 2010, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-10-28 at 22:49 -0400, Claude Jones wrote:
> > I've had TC1 up and running for a couple of weeks , now; will
> > I be good to just leave things as they are and have it morph
> > into F14 when the official release occurs?
> 
> Yes. (If you're updating regularly, you essentially have F14
> final already.)

terrific - thanks for the quick response

-- 
Claude Jones
Brunswick, MD, USA
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: Fedora 14 updates-testing report

[José Matos]

On Thursday 28 October 2010 23:24:12 upda...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
> ===
> = hdf5-1.8.5.patch1-4.fc14 (FEDORA-2010-16889)
>  A general purpose library and file format for storing scientific data
> ---
> - Update Information:
> 
> Build parallel hdf5 packages for mpich2 and openmpi.
> ---
> - ChangeLog:
> 
> * Wed Oct 27 2010 Orion Poplawski  1.8.5.patch1-4
> - Really fixup all permissions
> * Wed Oct 27 2010 Orion Poplawski  1.8.5.patch1-3
> - Add docs to the mpi packages
> - Fixup example source file permissions
> * Tue Oct 26 2010 Orion Poplawski  1.8.5.patch1-2
> - Build parallel hdf5 packages for mpich2 and openmpi
> - Rework multiarch support and drop multiarch patch
> * Tue Sep  7 2010 Orion Poplawski  1.8.5.patch1-1
> - Update to 1.8.5-patch1
> * Wed Jun 23 2010 Orion Poplawski  1.8.5-4
> - Re-add rebased tstlite patch - not fixed yet
> * Wed Jun 23 2010 Orion Poplawski  1.8.5-3
> - Update longdouble patch for 1.8.5
> * Wed Jun 23 2010 Orion Poplawski  1.8.5-2
> - Re-add longdouble patch on ppc64 for EPEL builds
> ---
> - References:
> 
>   [ 1 ] Bug #646043 - Parallel Support for HDF5
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=646043

This update breaks R-hdf5 that requires hdf5==1.8.5

yum tries to satisfy this dependency loading the corresponding i686 library.

Resolving Dependencies
--> Running transaction check
--> Processing Dependency: hdf5 = 1.8.5 for package: R-
hdf5-1.6.9-8.fc14.x86_64
---> Package hdf5.x86_64 0:1.8.5.patch1-4.fc14 set to be updated
---> Package hdf5-devel.x86_64 0:1.8.5.patch1-4.fc14 set to be updated
--> Running transaction check
---> Package hdf5.i686 0:1.8.5-1.fc14 set to be installed
--> Processing Dependency: libgfortran.so.3 for package: 
hdf5-1.8.5-1.fc14.i686
--> Processing Dependency: libgfortran.so.3(GFORTRAN_1.0) for package: 
hdf5-1.8.5-1.fc14.i686
--> Running transaction check
---> Package libgfortran.i686 0:4.5.1-4.fc14 set to be installed
--> Finished Dependency Resolution

Dependencies Resolved

=
 Package Arch   

VersionRepository   

Size
=
Updating:
 hdf5x86_64 

1.8.5.patch1-4.fc14updates-testing  
   
1.4 M
 hdf5-devel  x86_64 

1.8.5.patch1-4.fc14updates-testing  
   
569 k
Installing for dependencies:
 hdf5i686   

1.8.5-1.fc14   fedora   
   
1.2 M
 libgfortran i686   

4.5.1-4.fc14   fedora   
   
199 k

Transaction Summary
=
Install   2 Package(s)
Upgrade   2 Package(s)

Total download size: 3.3 M
Is this ok [y/N]: n

-- 
José Abílio
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: no modue named yum

[cornel panceac]

2010/10/29 cornel panceac 

>
>
> 2010/10/29 cornel panceac 
>
>
>>
>> 2010/10/29 Stephen John Smoogen 
>>
>>>  On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 01:20, cornel panceac 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Doubtful. What is the version of yum on the system and what is it on the
>>> DVD
>>>
>>> rpm -qa | grep yum
>>>
>>>
>>> yum-3.2.28-3.fc14
>>
> on the dvd, and i'll try to discover what _was_ on the system since it's
> been replaced by rpm --oldpackage .
>
>
>>
>>
>> yes, that was it:

yum-3.2.28-4.fc13

however, yum could have figured that putting a fc14 package over a fc13 one
is  happening for one and only one reason 
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: no modue named yum

[cornel panceac]

2010/10/29 cornel panceac 

>
>
> 2010/10/29 Stephen John Smoogen 
>
>> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 01:20, cornel panceac  wrote:
>>
>>
>> Doubtful. What is the version of yum on the system and what is it on the
>> DVD
>>
>> rpm -qa | grep yum
>>
>>
>> yum-3.2.28-3.fc14
>
on the dvd, and i'll try to discover what _was_ on the system since it's
been replaced by rpm --oldpackage .


>
> --
> When one door is closed, another is open.
> (Robert Nesta Marley)
>



-- 
When one door is closed, another is open.
(Robert Nesta Marley)
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: no modue named yum

[cornel panceac]

2010/10/29 Stephen John Smoogen 

> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 01:20, cornel panceac  wrote:
>
>
> Doubtful. What is the version of yum on the system and what is it on the
> DVD
>
> rpm -qa | grep yum
>
>
> yum-3.2.28-3.fc14

-- 
When one door is closed, another is open.
(Robert Nesta Marley)
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: no modue named yum

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 01:20, cornel panceac  wrote:
> after upgrading with x86 dvd (f14 rc1) from f13 to f14, i had several issues
> but the worst is that yum is no longer working. the error is:
>
> "no module named yum"
>
> after reading the yum.baseurl.org/wiki/Faq page, i've checked the rpms and
> found that yum itself was not upgraded to f14 version. is this the intended
> behaviour?
>

Doubtful. What is the version of yum on the system and what is it on the DVD

rpm -qa | grep yum


> --
> When one door is closed, another is open.
> (Robert Nesta Marley)
>
> --
> test mailing list
> test@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
>



-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.
"The core skill of innovators is error recovery, not failure avoidance."
Randy Nelson, President of Pixar University.
"Let us be kind, one to another, for most of us are fighting a hard
battle." -- Ian MacLaren
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: Request for Fedora QA Group

[mike cloaked]

On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 8:41 AM, mike cloaked  wrote:

> conditions for joining the group. If you confirm, via the same ticket
> and via this list, that you have satisfied the requirements, then the
> mentor will sponsor your request once an application to join the

That was a type and I left a word out!  That should have said: "If you
confirm, via the same ticket and NOT via this list, that you have
satisfied the requirements, then the mentor will sponsor your request

-- 
mike c
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: Request for Fedora QA Group

[mike cloaked]

On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 4:56 AM, Sawrub  wrote:

> Ok thats too is fine, so how can i join/ be a member of proven testers.
> Filing a ticket as mentioned http://tinyurl.com/2czpxok does not seem to
> work [please change if not applicable ].
> Besides all please approve my request for the proven testers group.

You will see from the link that you provided that you need to file a
ticket at https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ and request to join the
proventester group. One of the mentor members of the group will reply
to that ticket, and ask that you confirm that you satisfy a set of
conditions for joining the group. If you confirm, via the same ticket
and via this list, that you have satisfied the requirements, then the
mentor will sponsor your request once an application to join the
proventester group in the Fedora Account system has been entered by
you in FAS. So there are several steps to the process and this is
detailed in the link you sent under the section "Joining the proven
testers"

That is the process, and there are still a number of people who made
the initial request via a ticket at
https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-qa/ but then never followed up by
replying to the mentor who responded - which is why the request
stalled at that point.

If the procedure is followed then it does work, and the number of
people who are members of the proventester group has been growing
steadily - but it is necessary to follow the correct procedure to do
so.

-- 
mike c
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

no modue named yum

[cornel panceac]

after upgrading with x86 dvd (f14 rc1) from f13 to f14, i had several issues
but the worst is that yum is no longer working. the error is:

"no module named yum"

after reading the yum.baseurl.org/wiki/Faq page, i've checked the rpms and
found that yum itself was not upgraded to f14 version. is this the intended
behaviour?


-- 
When one door is closed, another is open.
(Robert Nesta Marley)
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test

Re: F14 : Samba Installation Issue

[Saurabh Sharma]

On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 12:09 PM, Saurabh Sharma wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 12:24 AM, Sawrub  wrote:
>
>>  On 10/28/2010 11:31 PM, "Jóhann B. Gušmundsson" wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/28/2010 05:23 PM, Sawrub wrote:
>>>
 The installation was done using Fedora 14 Beta, will check the yum
 logs tomorrow for sure and revert back.
 BTW i missed to mention that the 'yum install samba -y' output was
 attached in my first mail but missed to mention it. So attaching it
 again and it clearly shows

>>> Looks like at some point you have installed the x86_64 version of the
>>> samba package and if this is a i686 only system you can remove it along
>>> with every other x86_64 package you might have accidentally install by
>>> running "yum remove *.x86_64"
>>>
>>> JBG
>>>
>> Nope, the system is x86_64 installed from F14 x86_64 Live ISO. Also its
>> note worth that the yum lists
>> "---> Package samba.x86_64 0:3.5.5-68.fc14.1 set to be installed" while
>> all other i686 are for dependencies that are not getting resolved properly
>> probably.
>> Let me see tomorrow may be its some mirror issue, as now on my second
>> machine i got samba and samba-common both of x86_64 arch.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Saurabh Sharma
>> Linux user number: 490644
>> http://sawrub-blog.blogspot.com/
>> Open your doors...It's time to look beyond Windows
>>
>> Here are the grepped out logs of the first 'yum update' that i fired after
> the fresh installation, and it shows clearly that 'whatsoever that called
> in' samba-common installed on the day was x86_64, while now its i686. So as
> of from my side its some mirror issue.
>
> [saw...@sawrub ~]$ sudo grep -w 'samba\|nss' /var/log/yum.log
> Oct 27 21:29:02 Installed: samba-common-3.5.6-69.fc14.x86_64
> Oct 27 21:29:34 Installed: samba-client-3.5.6-69.fc14.x86_64
> Oct 27 21:58:57 Updated: nss-softokn-freebl-3.12.8-1.fc14.x86_64
> Oct 27 21:59:36 Updated: nss-util-3.12.8-1.fc14.x86_64
> Oct 27 22:03:39 Updated: nss-softokn-3.12.8-1.fc14.x86_64
> Oct 27 22:03:40 Updated: nss-3.12.8-2.fc14.x86_64
> Oct 27 22:03:41 Updated: nss-sysinit-3.12.8-2.fc14.x86_64
> Oct 27 22:03:51 Updated: samba-winbind-clients-3.5.6-69.fc14.x86_64
> [saw...@sawrub ~]$
>
> Today its like this :
> package samba-common-0:3.5.6-69.fc14.x86_64 (which is newer than
> samba-common-0:3.5.5-68.fc14.1.i686) is already installed
>
>
> Erased the 'samba-common' and installed samba, everything worked. Probably
it was a QA package that was pushed for testing and then called back.
-- 
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe: 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test