Re: is the name ok
On 04/06/2012 11:27 AM, John Dulaney wrote: This has nothing to do with QA. Seconded. George, just be happy they didn't go with the first choice: "Vivid animated penis." Happy Good Friday. :) -Scott p.s. extra points if you recognize the Usenet reference... -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Gnome 3
On 05/31/2011 12:18 PM, Pasha R wrote: > > So, lets tackle the screensaver issue again. As I understand from > your answer there are currently no plans to return screensavers other > than blank screen - it is not a temporary matter of lack of resources. > I would like to see this decision reversed. Hi Pasha, As a workaround, you can do what I did, and install xscreensaver. It continues to have the complete set of legacy, gl, etc. screensavers that we've seen developed over the last 20 years. (You'll also have to go into gnome-session-properties to take out gnome-screensaver and add xscreensaver.) _[/home/scott]_(scott@m5)_ $ rpm -qa | grep "^xscreensaver" xscreensaver-base-5.14-1.fc15.x86_64 xscreensaver-gl-base-5.14-1.fc15.x86_64 xscreensaver-5.14-1.fc15.x86_64 xscreensaver-gl-extras-5.14-1.fc15.x86_64 xscreensaver-extras-5.14-1.fc15.x86_64 xscreensaver-extras-base-5.14-1.fc15.x86_64 I would also like to point out that contradicting someone's ideas isn't necessarily hostile, but is necessary for expressing different points of view... -Scott -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: My Fedora 15 beta experiences so far
On 05/29/2011 11:24 PM, Pasha R wrote: > May be instead of rushing to release Gnome 3 before > it can provide not only nice-looking, but also functional DE, they > could stop, catch their breath and complete all these missing > features. It would be most helpful if someone could post a link, or address, to which we can send constructive criticism about Gnome 3. Thanks, -Scott -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: My Fedora 15 beta experiences so far
"Jason D. Clinton" wrote: >It's already been explained to you that it hasn't been replaced. The >old and new interfaces are co-deployed intentionally. Alas, this turns out not to be the case. My Gnome 2 panel has extensive customizations, none of which appear in Gnome 3...fallback mode or otherwise. Nor does alacarte seem to have any affect on the menus in fallback mode. If we were to regard this as intentional, it is difficult to seriously consider the decisions made for Gnome 3 as anything but encouragement for a diaspora to KDE ...or worse, another distro. But I don't think these problems are intentional. -Scott -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Multiple F15Beta bugs in under an hour
Adam Williamson wrote: >The alternative was not having the Shut Down option at all, so be >careful what you wish for...=) I know you're kidding, sir, because such examples of false dichotomies are clearly logical fallacies...and we know those never appear on Fedora mailing lists... ;-) Seriously, though: it doesn't do much good to exemplify "bold leadership" by proudly following Gnome off a cliff...because I strongly doubt the Fedora community will do likewise. >-- >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 -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: F14 Sendmail hard of hearing
On 04/08/2011 01:06 AM, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote: > After upgrading to a 3 terabyte hard drive, I reinstalled > Fedora 14 and can't get Sendmail to listen on the usual > network interfaces. The usual trick of commenting out > the 127. line no longer was sufficient. I had to > ecplicitly give a port command in sendmail.mc: > > DAEMON_OPTIONS(`Port=smtp,Addr=70.89.176.169, Name=MTA')dnl Not sure what's going on -- perhaps more security updates to Sendmail upstream? -- but you should be able to use "0.0.0.0" to listen on all addresses, if that is what you were after... -Scott -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: disable nouveau drivers
On 10/15/2010 01:22 PM, Lyvim Xaphir wrote: > > On the kernel line, "rdblacklist=nouveau". Also don't forget > /etc/modprobe.d/blacklist.conf also. I usually do both If you do only the latter, you also may need to run something like this: # dracut -f /boot/initramfs-$(uname -r).img $(uname -r) (This command is from a comment in a non-Fedora repository's file /etc/modprobe.d/blacklist-nouveau.conf , so ymmv.) -Scott -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Why was a kernel-2.6.34 pushed to updates that had un-addressed bugs.
On 09/02/2010 11:16 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > There's no guarantee the bug will get closed even if the problem is > fixed, unless someone else has the same hardware as you and is testing. > A fix may come down from upstream without being recognized specifically > as a fix for this particular Fedora bug report - a lot of stuff comes > down from upstream, and there's no guarantee the kernel team will match > up every upstream change to Fedora bug reports without assistance from > testers. How difficult would it be for BZ to implement some kind of "federations"? Though some projects don't use BZ for bug tracking, I'd hope there would be willingness on maintainers of all bug tracking software to agree on a protocol for updating each other. Simply put, imagine if Alice finds a bug at company X. She files a bug report on her company BZ server. Whoever is handling in-house development sees the bug, sees that it will need an upstream fix, and kicks it upstream. Alternately, she may fix the bug, and could kick _that_ upstream, too. If the fix is made upstream, that info would get passed down to the sub-federated servers that subscribe to that component. Finally -- and this could be postponed until "Version 2" ;) -- each component in each distro has it's own newsgroup in a private news hierarchy. This way, if Bob User wants to track the discussion & work on a component, he can go read the newsgroup and see all the discussion going on. That's a few rough ideas. But it seems like a win to use known, tried, and true telecommunications protocols to pass discussion traffic around -- expecially if Bob User could use an nnrp client to participate in said discussion! Anyway, I could say more -- but I've probably already shown how bananas my ideas can be. Happy Thursday! :) -Scott -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
