Re: [Off Topic] Good to know

[Sawrub]

 On 11/12/2010 09:06 AM, Paul Otheim wrote:



On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 1:33 PM, Sawrub > wrote:


Fealt good to know that Linus Torvalds is using Fedora 14. As he
is/was facing an issue with flash as i am
'https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=638477#c8'



Is that echo I hear the sound of laughter?

No Offencesjust feeling lucky among greats

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

-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Yum - Different OS version and Arch

[Sawrub]

  Running Fedora 14 x86_64, i was trying to search for a package using 
YUM. The search results lists multiple versions [Fc12, Fc13, Fc14] and 
different arch [i686 and x86_64], of which i just need it to list 
against Fc14 and x86_64. Why is this so, can we prevent this or is this 
a bad/undesirable feature in yum.

Stack trace :
-
[saw...@sawrub ~]$ yum list available pidgin*
Loaded plugins: langpacks, presto, refresh-packagekit
Adding en_US to language list
Available Packages
pidgin.x86_64   
2.7.5-1.fc14  updates
pidgin-birthday-reminder.x86_64 
1.5-2.fc14fedora
pidgin-devel.i686   
2.7.5-1.fc14  updates
pidgin-devel.x86_64 
2.7.5-1.fc14  updates
pidgin-docs.x86_64  
2.7.5-1.fc14  updates
pidgin-evolution.x86_64 
2.7.5-1.fc14  updates
pidgin-gfire.x86_64 
0.9.2-2.fc14  fedora
pidgin-guifications.x86_64  
2.16-4.fc12   fedora
pidgin-latex.x86_64 
1.4.2-1.fc14  updates
pidgin-libnotify.x86_64 
0.14-4.fc14   fedora
pidgin-musictracker.x86_64  
0.4.20-3.fc13 fedora
pidgin-otr.x86_64   
3.2.0-3.fc12  fedora
pidgin-perl.x86_64  
2.7.5-1.fc14  updates
pidgin-privacy-please.x86_64
0.6.3-2.fc14  fedora
pidgin-rhythmbox.x86_64 
2.0-5.fc12fedora
pidgin-sipe.x86_64  
1.10.1-1.fc14 fedora
[saw...@sawrub ~]$
- 


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

-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

NVIDIA-Linux-x86-96.43.18 problems fixed in NVIDIA-Linux-x86-96.43.19-pkg1.run

[Ben Mohilef]

For those with legacy Nvidia cards who prefer to use Nivida's
proprietary driver,  the current production
NVIDIA-Linux-x86-96.43.18-pkg1.run
will build but not load due to the recurrence of the miEmptyData missing
reference issue.

However, Nvidia has release candidate NVIDIA-Linux-x86-96.43.19-pkg1.run
available on their ftp servers at url:
   ftp://download.nvidia.com/XFree86/Linux-x86/96.43.19/
which does indeed build and load  properly.

I assume rpmfusion will incorporate this as a kmod/akmod soon after
Nvidia releases it as a production driver after they complete testing
(which probably will be soon).


-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: I need a new linux homepage. Ideas ?

[Tim]

On Sat, 2010-11-13 at 13:08 -0500, Bob Goodwin wrote:
> Very interesting. I created a blank "home page" in Firefox, copied
> it to file:///mnt/srvr1/index.html and made that the opening page.
> That worked on this F-13 box and was accessible on the F-14  too.
> Then I thought I'd try Opera on the F-14 computer but anything I did
> caused Opera to choke on that address, it kept inserting "localhost"
> and I had to keep killing it.

file:/// is the same thing as file://localhost/

It's construed of file:// as protocol and separating punctuation,
following be hostname and path e.g. localhost/ (which is root on this
machine).  Localhost can be omitted, and you'd see three slashes in a
row, and the software will presume it's presence where it ought to be.
Also, another hostname could be used, and so long as it was accessible,
it could be used, instead.

e.g. file://server/bookmarks.html

-- 
[...@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686

Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.  I
read messages from the public lists.



-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: I need a new linux homepage. Ideas ?

[Tim]

On Sat, 2010-11-13 at 10:54 -0600, Frank Cox wrote:
> The only disadvantage is that you have to manually type in any new
> bookmarks that you want to add.

Some browsers do let you export your bookmarks as a webpage, automating
the whole process for you.  This is useful if you use one browser as
your central point for creating your bookmarks.  But if you create
bookmarks from any location, you'd have to manually manage the file.

-- 
[...@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686

Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.  I
read messages from the public lists.



-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

More radeon woes

[Tom Horsley]

Just added this bug:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652993

My system locks up when I try to play the open GL
neverputt game. It worked fine in fedora 13.
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Greasemonkey extension for Epiphany

[Jordi Chulia]

First of all: I'm new in this mailing list, so: Hi to everybody :)


My problem is that I can not find the greasemonkey extension for
Epiphany. This extension is part of the epiphany-extensions package in
upstream, but seems that is not included in the fedora package, nor any
other package of the official repos nor in the rpmfusion repos.

So the question is: I'm missing something, or why is this extension out?


Thank you all.

-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: Convert ext4 lvm to normal ext4 partition

[Dean S. Messing]

Lamar Owen wrote:
>


Regarding your disk speed tests with hdparm,
you may want to look at the "--direct" switch.

Dean
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: missing packages

[JD]

On 11/13/2010 05:02 PM, Kevin J. Cummings wrote:
> On 11/13/2010 06:08 PM, JD wrote:
>> On 11/13/2010 12:56 PM, Kam Leo wrote:
>>> On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 12:11 PM, JD>> >  wrote:
>>>
>>>  On 11/13/2010 11:48 AM, fred smith wrote:
>>>  >  On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 10:56:31AM -0800, JD wrote:
>>>  >>  yum check
>>>  >>  reports missing packages.
>>>  >>  Is there a way to yum install missing packages
>>>  >>  without having to specify their names?
>>>  >  I suppose you could capture to a file, the list yum gives of missing
>>>  >  packages, then edit the file til it looks like a yum
>>>  commandline, then
>>>  >  run it.
>>>  >
>>>  Yeah   I know that.
>>>  I was hoping that there is an incantation of yum
>>>  or a package manager to go and fetch and install
>>>  missing packages.
>>>  Thanx for the suggestion.
>>>
>>>
>>> If the missing packages are dependencies and are available they will
>>> be automatically pulled in when you run yum.
>> I did yum update and yum says:
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> Setting up Update Process
>> No Packages marked for Update
> yum check
>
> lists the packages that you have installed that do not have all of their
> required dependencies installed.
>
> How can this be?  One possibility that pops to mind is that you have
> some "old" packages installed of which their dependencies have been
> upgraded, but your "old" packages list the dependencies as ='s installed
> of>='s.  This seems to be a rather common problem with certain
> packages, and make updating them problematic.
>
> It happens.  I have a couple of f12 packages on my (now) f14 laptop that
> require (for example) python-abi = 2.6.  But, Python on f14 is now 2.7.
>
> Your choices at this point are limited:
>
> 1)  remove the old packages with the dependency problems.  If you cannot
> find current packages, maybe you can rebuild them from source.
>
> 2)  assume that the old packages will work with the newer versions of
> its dependencies.  (Always a risk.)
>
> 3)  find/install the old dependencies.  (I do not recommend this option
> except as a last resort, as there is no guarantee that the old
> dependencies and the newer version of them can co-exist, and it may
> require you to "force" some installations leading to further database
> problems down the road).
>
You hit the nail on the head!
I think I will have to let go of some packages that
require
pkgXYZ-1.2.3
and other packages that require
libpkgXYZ-2.1.0

They come from different repos.
Each package is needed by something I would like to install,
but both XYZ packages provide the same libs, but of different
vintage and name.
Just disgusting :) :)
Perhaps over time, different distros will become SO different,
that any hope of building even a source from one distro
on another distro will be severely frustrated.

-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: End of life for FC12?

[Bill Davidsen]

Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 23:41:31 -0500
> Bill Davidsen  wrote:
>
>> It is a general Fedora problem, not hardware related. If you have a
>> laptop connected with WiFi and mount an NFS volume, on resume it
>> tries to use NFS before the network is up. Then the mount goes away.
>> I see it on every laptop and have for years.
>
> try:
>
> echo 'NETWORKWAIT=yes'>>  /etc/sysconfig/network
>
> The problem is that NetworkManager just brings up network as it can,
> and nothing waits for it by default. If you set the above it should
> wait until there is a Network that comes up before NetworkManager lets
> the next thing resume.
>
Since I have the laptops I shall try this at a time when it's not time 
critical, 
in case it doesn't work. The thing is that I have the feeling that the problem 
predates NetworkMangler. Still a helpful idea.

>>> You're of course welcome to use whatever distro you choose.
>>>
>> Worth trying Ubuntu, friend says it works. Costs nothing to try ;-)
>
If true, I wonder why they would default to "have a network before you use it" 
mode and Fedora doesn't. Was someone at Fedora overly concerned about coming 
back from suspend and fast boot times? NOTE: that's really a question, not a 
criticism, yet. It seems as though the network restart and all the things using 
the network would be in a thread and serialized, so other things don't get help 
up if they don't need the network.

I don't usually suspend servers, but it might be interesting to see if a 
hardwired NIC comes up fast enough to avoid a similar problem.

> Suit yourself. ;)
>
> kevin
>


-- 
Bill Davidsen 
   "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked."  - from Slashdot
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: Impossible Internet connection.Strange thing.

[Joe Zeff]

On 11/13/2010 03:13 PM, Luis Suzuki wrote:
> ping 18.7.22.69  and I have got : Network Unreachable.

DNS isn't an issue, then and changing the servers won't help.
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: Never Hacked or Infected--Yet (Was: Re: End of life for FC12?)

[Vaclav Mocek]

On 11/12/2010 05:41 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:
>
> I would never consider using Fedora on a system where security was paramount. 
>  That's why I only use it on my home desktop systems.
>
>
And what do you use instead? I have never had a security problem with 
Fedora.
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: missing packages

[Kevin J. Cummings]

On 11/13/2010 06:08 PM, JD wrote:
> On 11/13/2010 12:56 PM, Kam Leo wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 12:11 PM, JD > > wrote:
>>
>> On 11/13/2010 11:48 AM, fred smith wrote:
>> > On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 10:56:31AM -0800, JD wrote:
>> >> yum check
>> >> reports missing packages.
>> >> Is there a way to yum install missing packages
>> >> without having to specify their names?
>> > I suppose you could capture to a file, the list yum gives of missing
>> > packages, then edit the file til it looks like a yum
>> commandline, then
>> > run it.
>> >
>> Yeah   I know that.
>> I was hoping that there is an incantation of yum
>> or a package manager to go and fetch and install
>> missing packages.
>> Thanx for the suggestion.
>>
>>
>> If the missing packages are dependencies and are available they will 
>> be automatically pulled in when you run yum.
> I did yum update and yum says:
> .
> .
> .
> Setting up Update Process
> No Packages marked for Update

yum check

lists the packages that you have installed that do not have all of their
required dependencies installed.

How can this be?  One possibility that pops to mind is that you have
some "old" packages installed of which their dependencies have been
upgraded, but your "old" packages list the dependencies as ='s installed
of >='s.  This seems to be a rather common problem with certain
packages, and make updating them problematic.

It happens.  I have a couple of f12 packages on my (now) f14 laptop that
require (for example) python-abi = 2.6.  But, Python on f14 is now 2.7.

Your choices at this point are limited:

1)  remove the old packages with the dependency problems.  If you cannot
find current packages, maybe you can rebuild them from source.

2)  assume that the old packages will work with the newer versions of
its dependencies.  (Always a risk.)

3)  find/install the old dependencies.  (I do not recommend this option
except as a last resort, as there is no guarantee that the old
dependencies and the newer version of them can co-exist, and it may
require you to "force" some installations leading to further database
problems down the road).

-- 
Kevin J. Cummings
kjch...@rcn.com
cummi...@kjchome.homeip.net
cummi...@kjc386.framingham.ma.us
Registered Linux User #1232 (http://counter.li.org)
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: End of life for FC12?

[Patrick Bartek]

--- On Sat, 11/13/10, Kevin Fenzi  wrote:

> Patrick Bartek 
> wrote:
> 
> ...snip...
> 
> > Fedora's release cycles when it was Fedora Core used
> to be longer and
> > not on a strict schedule as it is now.  A new
> version was released
> > when it was ready.  Fedora now has become a rapid
> release test bed,
> > an eternal beta if you will, and we are the
> testers.  But that's
> > okay, since the "good" stuff eventually gets into RHEL
> and its clones
> > making them more stable and more secure with a longer
> life.
> 
> While it wasn't quite exactly 6months, it was pretty close.
> 
> See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hat_Linux#Version_history

I never used RH Linux.  The project was merged with Fedora about 2 years before 
I first installed Fedora Core 3.  Although, I was aware of FC1 & 2, they seemed 
to have too many problems to be considered.

As I remember releases from then were semi-regular from 5 months to 7 or 8.  I 
think when Fedora Core was renamed Fedora with version 7 that a 6 month release 
cycle was decided as being optimum.

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fedora_(operating_system)#Version_history

> ...snip...
> 
> > Also, upgrading Fedora every 6 months or so as most do
> on this list
> > just means additional headaches and work of a couple
> months of fixing
> > the problems with the "new" OS when the "old" one was
> running just
> > fine, but is fast approaching "unsupported." 
> This is my major
> > "problem" with Fedora, and mostly why I only upgrade
> every third
> > release--Why make more work for myself?--and why I'm
> considering
> > switching to a long term support version of Linux,
> whatever that may
> > be.
> 
> I almost never have issues on os upgrades anymore. The last
> 2 machines
> here I upgraded from 13->14 just worked. I didn't have
> to change
> anything at all. 

I avoided the upgrade process when I was installing every release, because at 
the time (FC3-6), it was at best problematical, and only did clean installs for 
that reason.  After 6, I started installing only every third release, so true 
upgrading was impossible.

It seems that Fedora with the preupgrade utility has made the process much more 
reliable.  However, it still doesn't work across more than one release number 
at a time, i.e. 12->13, 13->14 and not 12->14.

B
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Kernel-PAE no longer 32 bit default?

[Tom Horsley]

I was finally getting around to tweaking my 32 bit fedora 14
partition when I noticed that I was running kernel,
not kernel-PAE. PAE was previously the default. Did the
default change back to non-PAE, or did anaconda make
the wrong choice for my install? (I do have 8 gig
of memory, so I can use the PAE kernel). Just curious.
(And I just searched the "single page" version of the
release notes and the string "PAE" doesn't show up
anywhere :-).
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: End of life for FC12?

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 23:41:31 -0500
Bill Davidsen  wrote:

> It is a general Fedora problem, not hardware related. If you have a
> laptop connected with WiFi and mount an NFS volume, on resume it
> tries to use NFS before the network is up. Then the mount goes away.
> I see it on every laptop and have for years.

try: 

echo 'NETWORKWAIT=yes' >> /etc/sysconfig/network

The problem is that NetworkManager just brings up network as it can,
and nothing waits for it by default. If you set the above it should
wait until there is a Network that comes up before NetworkManager lets
the next thing resume. 

> > You're of course welcome to use whatever distro you choose.
> >
> Worth trying Ubuntu, friend says it works. Costs nothing to try ;-)

Suit yourself. ;) 

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: Fedora-14: Slow nVidia video

[Kevin J. Cummings]

On 11/13/2010 10:21 AM, Vaclav Mocek wrote:
> On 11/13/2010 07:27 AM, William Perkins wrote:
>>
>> Thank you for telling me about the Xorg log file.  I should have saved the
>> old log file that showed the problem, but it gets rewritten during the
>> boot process.
>>
> No, it is not. See:
> 
> ls /var/log/Xorg.*

Yeah, but it only saves one old copy.  After the second reboot, the
original log file gets "lost".  B^)

-- 
Kevin J. Cummings
kjch...@rcn.com
cummi...@kjchome.homeip.net
cummi...@kjc386.framingham.ma.us
Registered Linux User #1232 (http://counter.li.org)
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: End of life for FC12?

[Patrick Bartek]

--- On Fri, 11/12/10, Tom H  wrote:

> Patrick Bartek 
> wrote:
> 
> > I never said that nor was it my intention to imply
> that.  All I said was in the 10
> > years of using Linux none of my systems were ever
> hacked or infected.  I never
> > said I didn't check my system.  I do.  Daily.
>  Automatically.  Cron-jobs.  Plus,
> > manual checks--logs and what-nots--periodically.
>  Sometimes the first indicator
> > that something may (not is) wrong is the way the
> system runs and performs:
> > the little things that someone who doesn't use the
> system daily wouldn't notice.
> 
> No one can say that he/she's never been hacked. You can
> only say that
> you've never seen any sign of proof that you've been
> hacked...

Such a scenerio--leaving no trace of an intrusion--I think highly improbable.

> How would you know what being hacked might feel lie if
> you've never been hacked?

I've seen it on other computers as well as studied ways it's done.

B
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: End of life for FC12?

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 15:26:09 -0800 (PST)
Patrick Bartek  wrote:

...snip...

> Fedora's release cycles when it was Fedora Core used to be longer and
> not on a strict schedule as it is now.  A new version was released
> when it was ready.  Fedora now has become a rapid release test bed,
> an eternal beta if you will, and we are the testers.  But that's
> okay, since the "good" stuff eventually gets into RHEL and its clones
> making them more stable and more secure with a longer life.

While it wasn't quite exactly 6months, it was pretty close. 
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hat_Linux#Version_history

...snip...

> Also, upgrading Fedora every 6 months or so as most do on this list
> just means additional headaches and work of a couple months of fixing
> the problems with the "new" OS when the "old" one was running just
> fine, but is fast approaching "unsupported."  This is my major
> "problem" with Fedora, and mostly why I only upgrade every third
> release--Why make more work for myself?--and why I'm considering
> switching to a long term support version of Linux, whatever that may
> be.

I almost never have issues on os upgrades anymore. The last 2 machines
here I upgraded from 13->14 just worked. I didn't have to change
anything at all. 

..snip...

> I've never demeaned Fedora.  There are things I don't like to be
> sure, but that can be said of all things.  I've been using it since
> FC3 after trying a dozen or so other distros before settling on it as
> my primary desktop OS. So that says something.  And I'm VERY
> particular.  It's just that over the years Fedora's development model
> and my needs have diverged.  And it's time to move on.

Sorry to hear it, but I understand your reasoning. ;) 

I hope you will think fondly of Fedora and look and see how we are
doing from time to time. ;) 

Good luck. 

kevin



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: fedora 14 and evolution

[Mike Chambers]

On Sat, 2010-11-13 at 15:06 -0600, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 20:50:18 +,
>   "Amadeus W.M."  wrote:
> > 
> > Just one thing though. I kept my home and data directories upon install, 
> > hence all dot files, and I was expecting evolution to pick up my existing 
> > configuration, which has many folders and rules that sort the incoming 
> > mail by sender. No such luck though. I also restored evolution from a 
> > backup file and still my old folders in evolution do not show up. Just 
> > the standard Inbox, Drafts, Junk, etc. I would hate to have to re-create 
> > all the folders and rules. Is there any trick, some config files that I 
> > can restore manually somehow? 
> 
> My first thought would be that the name of the config file (or dir) changed.
> Look at the dot files and see if some new ones were created when you ran
> evolution after the update. If so, you might just be able to rename the
> old one.

Some of the config files are now in different directories,
besides .evolution.  Also try .config/evolution as well.  I don't
remember which files were moved to which.  You might try a test user and
create from scratch just to see where the files are created.  Then copy
your backup files to the appropriate dir.

Hope that helps (and yes I went through this with some testing and
didn't seem to restore evolution like it used to due to the dir change).

-- 
Mike Chambers
Madisonville, KY

"Best lil town on Earth!"

-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: End of life for FC12?

[Patrick Bartek]

--- On Fri, 11/12/10, Gordon Messmer  wrote:

> On 11/12/2010 08:31 AM, Patrick
> Bartek wrote:
> >
> > That's okay as long as the OS is "current" when it is
> installed and
> > will be supported for those 5 years or so.
> 
> I understand that, but you will never find that to be the
> case on a 
> sustained basis unless you schedule your hardware purchases
> to coincide 
> with OS releases.

By "current" OS, I don't mean one newly released the same day the system is 
built, but one that is from the "era" of the hardware's manufacture.  I don't 
(and never) use cutting edge hardware.  As far as Linux is concerned, that's 
asking for problems.  I make sure all my system hardware has been on the market 
for at least 6 months.  That way, the Linux community has had time to write 
drivers, "fix" code, etc.

>  You said that you were tiring of
> Fedora's release 
> cycle, but that release cycle is the only way to give users
> an OS that 
> is "current" given that those millions of users are going
> to continue 
> buying hardware in the periods between long-term
> releases.

Fedora's release cycles when it was Fedora Core used to be longer and not on a 
strict schedule as it is now.  A new version was released when it was ready.  
Fedora now has become a rapid release test bed, an eternal beta if you will, 
and we are the testers.  But that's okay, since the "good" stuff eventually 
gets into RHEL and its clones making them more stable and more secure with a 
longer life.

Anyway, in my case, once I build a system, it pretty much doesn't 
change--hardware-wise--during its life.  So, I have no need need for fast 
release cycles to keep up with cutting edge hardware.  Now I may upgrade a CPU 
or add a another hard drive or install a new graphics card because the orginal 
one died, but none of that requires upgrading to a newer OS version, or at 
least, it shouldn't.

Also, upgrading Fedora every 6 months or so as most do on this list just means 
additional headaches and work of a couple months of fixing the problems with 
the "new" OS when the "old" one was running just fine, but is fast approaching 
"unsupported."  This is my major "problem" with Fedora, and mostly why I only 
upgrade every third release--Why make more work for myself?--and why I'm 
considering switching to a long term support version of Linux, whatever that 
may be.

Now I'm not lobbying for Fedora to change its ways.  Although, there was some 
discussion months ago about "why not make Fedora a rolling release?".  I'm just 
saying that its "ways" no longer fulfill my needs.  And that's one of the 
reasons I use Linux:  a multitude of options.  (If I used Windows or OSX, there 
would be no option.)

>  It's 
> certainly legitimate to choose the long-term release 
> (RHEL/CentOS/Scientific Linux), but I'd hope that you'd
> recognize the 
> value that Fedora provides to its users and avoid demeaning
> it for its 
> strength.

I've never demeaned Fedora.  There are things I don't like to be sure, but that 
can be said of all things.  I've been using it since FC3 after trying a dozen 
or so other distros before settling on it as my primary desktop OS. So that 
says something.  And I'm VERY particular.  It's just that over the years 
Fedora's development model and my needs have diverged.  And it's time to move 
on.

B

-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Impossible Internet connection.Strange thing.

[Luis Suzuki]

I did: 
ping 18.7.22.69  and I have got : Network Unreachable.
The strange thing is: everything points that the Internet connection should be 
OK(the Gnome task bar widget when I point the cursor over it says Auto eth0 
active).My Thompson router through its management interface tells me that 
literally everything is OK : DSL Ethernet ATM etc. etc.Using the KDE version of 
Fedora14 happend the same thing.I did a pretty normal installation of both the 
KDE spin and Gnome spin,as I did with Fedora 12 and Fedora13.The difference is 
: with Fedora12 and Fedora13 not even a single problem with Fedora14 this.I 
doubt that I am the only one to have this problem,so this is probably a bug 
that came with Fedora 14.
  -- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: missing packages

[JD]

On 11/13/2010 12:56 PM, Kam Leo wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 12:11 PM, JD  > wrote:
>
> On 11/13/2010 11:48 AM, fred smith wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 10:56:31AM -0800, JD wrote:
> >> yum check
> >> reports missing packages.
> >> Is there a way to yum install missing packages
> >> without having to specify their names?
> > I suppose you could capture to a file, the list yum gives of missing
> > packages, then edit the file til it looks like a yum
> commandline, then
> > run it.
> >
> Yeah   I know that.
> I was hoping that there is an incantation of yum
> or a package manager to go and fetch and install
> missing packages.
> Thanx for the suggestion.
>
>
> If the missing packages are dependencies and are available they will 
> be automatically pulled in when you run yum.
I did yum update and yum says:
.
.
.
Setting up Update Process
No Packages marked for Update


-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: Distorted audio in Firefox -- another memcpy bug hiding somewhere?

[Piscium]

On 13 November 2010 18:53, Sam Varshavchik  wrote:
> After upgrading to F14 on x86_64 I'm getting distorted audio in some
> situations. Mostly playing /some/ flash audio. This was discussed in
> https://bugs.adobe.com/jira/browse/FP-5739 and our bug 638477, with the
> conclusion being a bug in the 64 bit Flash plugin.
>
> HOWEVER:
>
> I'm getting the same audio distortion from Google Pacman:
> http://www.google.com/pacman/ which uses HTML and Javascript, not Flash,
> AFAIK.
>
> If you're affected by the 64 bit Flash bug, can you try to see if you also
> get distorted audio from Pacman, which would suggest another memcpy bug
> hiding somewhere.

This has a workaround for the Flash issue (or similar) written by Linus:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=638477
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: fedora 14 and evolution

[Bruno Wolff III]

On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 20:50:18 +,
  "Amadeus W.M."  wrote:
> 
> Just one thing though. I kept my home and data directories upon install, 
> hence all dot files, and I was expecting evolution to pick up my existing 
> configuration, which has many folders and rules that sort the incoming 
> mail by sender. No such luck though. I also restored evolution from a 
> backup file and still my old folders in evolution do not show up. Just 
> the standard Inbox, Drafts, Junk, etc. I would hate to have to re-create 
> all the folders and rules. Is there any trick, some config files that I 
> can restore manually somehow? 

My first thought would be that the name of the config file (or dir) changed.
Look at the dot files and see if some new ones were created when you ran
evolution after the update. If so, you might just be able to rename the
old one.
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: Convert ext4 lvm to normal ext4 partition

[Michael Miles]

Lamar Owen wrote:
> On Saturday, November 13, 2010 01:08:12 pm Michael Miles wrote:
>
>> Lamar Owen wrote:
>>  
>>> [r...@migration ~]# ./seeker /dev/sdb3
>>> Seeker v2.0, 2007-01-15, 
>>> http://www.linuxinsight.com/how_fast_is_your_disk.html
>>> Benchmarking /dev/sdb3 [7012MB], wait 30 
>>> seconds..
>>> Results: 21459 seeks/second, 0.05 ms random access time
>>> [r...@migration ~]#
>>>
>
>> I have run all these tests and I have to say that Seeker is not a valid
>> test to show speeds of these disks
>> I ran hdparm and it shows the lvm to be a bit slower but not a lot.
>> With Seeker it shows a large difference because of the area on the disk
>> being tested
>> That's quite a difference on sdb3 by the way. It's amazing how much
>> speed a filesystem takes away from a disk
>>  
> The Seeker and hdparm -t results have nothing to do with the filesystem being 
> there or not; if I run seeker on /dev/sdb or /dev/sdb1 or /dev/sdb3 I'm 
> running it against the device; the presence or absence of a filesystem makes 
> no difference.  With LVM running it against the raw logical volume device (in 
> my examples, the volume group was benchtest, and the logical volume was 50g, 
> making the device node /dev/benchtest/50g) does the same thing, and doesn't 
> have anything to do with the filesystem.  The bonnie++ results do, however, 
> reflect the filesystem performance, since bonnie++ is writing and reading 
> files on the filesystem instead of raw device.
>
> What does make a difference is the size of the device being tested, in terms 
> of cylinders or blocks. If the partition is 1000 cylinders, a true random 
> seek will seek to cylinders between the start and the start+1000; if it's a 
> 100 cylinder partition, it will seek between the start and the start+100, 
> one-tenth of the distance, and thus it should produce an average seek that is 
> quite a bit smaller than the partition with 1000 cylinders.  Thanks to modern 
> ZBR (zone bit recording) drives, ten times the number of blocks does not 
> necessarily translate to ten times the number of cylinders (for more 
> information about ZBR and what that means for disks, see 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZBR for details.
>
> In any case, I've set up LVM on /dev/sdb3 (/dev/bench2/7g is the logical 
> volume's device node), and here's some more seeker and hdparm -t "results" 
> for your enjoyment:
> +++
> Seeker v2.0, 2007-01-15, 
> http://www.linuxinsight.com/how_fast_is_your_disk.html
> Benchmarking /dev/sdb3 [7012MB], wait 30 seconds.
> Results: 23546 seeks/second, 0.04 ms random access time
> [r...@migration ~]# ./seeker /dev/bench2/7g
> Seeker v2.0, 2007-01-15, 
> http://www.linuxinsight.com/how_fast_is_your_disk.html
> Benchmarking /dev/bench2/7g [7012MB], wait 30 
> seconds..
> Results: 37116 seeks/second, 0.03 ms random access time
> [r...@migration ~]# hdparm -t /dev/bench2/7g
>
> /dev/bench2/7g:
>   Timing buffered disk reads:  852 MB in  3.00 seconds = 283.65 MB/sec
> [r...@migration ~]# hdparm -t /dev/sdb3
>
> /dev/sdb3:
>   Timing buffered disk reads:  774 MB in  3.01 seconds = 257.53 MB/sec
> [r...@migration ~]#
> +++
>
> Of course, the fact that that entire partition can fit in the kernel's cache 
> makes a difference here in the Seeker results; the hdparm -t (just a big 
> sequential read, that's all) just shows that the array is very good at 
> caching and doing readahead.
>
> So I tend to trust bonnie++'s results more, since it takes pains to take the 
> cache out of the equation.
>



Very interesting stuff.
Thank you for clarifying this for me.

Michael
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: missing packages

[Kam Leo]

On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 12:11 PM, JD  wrote:

> On 11/13/2010 11:48 AM, fred smith wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 10:56:31AM -0800, JD wrote:
> >> yum check
> >> reports missing packages.
> >> Is there a way to yum install missing packages
> >> without having to specify their names?
> > I suppose you could capture to a file, the list yum gives of missing
> > packages, then edit the file til it looks like a yum commandline, then
> > run it.
> >
> Yeah   I know that.
> I was hoping that there is an incantation of yum
> or a package manager to go and fetch and install
> missing packages.
> Thanx for the suggestion.
>
>
If the missing packages are dependencies and are available they will be
automatically pulled in when you run yum.
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

fedora 14 and evolution

[Amadeus W.M.]

Just installed F14 and I have to say, this has been the smoothest 
installation and configuration in quite some time. Knock on wood.
Flash, java, multimedia, compilers, libraries, printing, networking, nfs, 
autofs, all seems well. Thumbs up and a big thank you to the developers!

Just one thing though. I kept my home and data directories upon install, 
hence all dot files, and I was expecting evolution to pick up my existing 
configuration, which has many folders and rules that sort the incoming 
mail by sender. No such luck though. I also restored evolution from a 
backup file and still my old folders in evolution do not show up. Just 
the standard Inbox, Drafts, Junk, etc. I would hate to have to re-create 
all the folders and rules. Is there any trick, some config files that I 
can restore manually somehow? 

Thanks!


-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: Convert ext4 lvm to normal ext4 partition

[Lamar Owen]

On Saturday, November 13, 2010 01:08:12 pm Michael Miles wrote:
> Lamar Owen wrote:
> > [r...@migration ~]# ./seeker /dev/sdb3
> > Seeker v2.0, 2007-01-15, 
> > http://www.linuxinsight.com/how_fast_is_your_disk.html
> > Benchmarking /dev/sdb3 [7012MB], wait 30 
> > seconds..
> > Results: 21459 seeks/second, 0.05 ms random access time
> > [r...@migration ~]#

> I have run all these tests and I have to say that Seeker is not a valid 
> test to show speeds of these disks
> I ran hdparm and it shows the lvm to be a bit slower but not a lot.
> With Seeker it shows a large difference because of the area on the disk 
> being tested
> That's quite a difference on sdb3 by the way. It's amazing how much 
> speed a filesystem takes away from a disk

The Seeker and hdparm -t results have nothing to do with the filesystem being 
there or not; if I run seeker on /dev/sdb or /dev/sdb1 or /dev/sdb3 I'm running 
it against the device; the presence or absence of a filesystem makes no 
difference.  With LVM running it against the raw logical volume device (in my 
examples, the volume group was benchtest, and the logical volume was 50g, 
making the device node /dev/benchtest/50g) does the same thing, and doesn't 
have anything to do with the filesystem.  The bonnie++ results do, however, 
reflect the filesystem performance, since bonnie++ is writing and reading files 
on the filesystem instead of raw device.

What does make a difference is the size of the device being tested, in terms of 
cylinders or blocks. If the partition is 1000 cylinders, a true random seek 
will seek to cylinders between the start and the start+1000; if it's a 100 
cylinder partition, it will seek between the start and the start+100, one-tenth 
of the distance, and thus it should produce an average seek that is quite a bit 
smaller than the partition with 1000 cylinders.  Thanks to modern ZBR (zone bit 
recording) drives, ten times the number of blocks does not necessarily 
translate to ten times the number of cylinders (for more information about ZBR 
and what that means for disks, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZBR for details.

In any case, I've set up LVM on /dev/sdb3 (/dev/bench2/7g is the logical 
volume's device node), and here's some more seeker and hdparm -t "results" for 
your enjoyment:
+++
Seeker v2.0, 2007-01-15, http://www.linuxinsight.com/how_fast_is_your_disk.html
Benchmarking /dev/sdb3 [7012MB], wait 30 seconds.
Results: 23546 seeks/second, 0.04 ms random access time
[r...@migration ~]# ./seeker /dev/bench2/7g
Seeker v2.0, 2007-01-15, http://www.linuxinsight.com/how_fast_is_your_disk.html
Benchmarking /dev/bench2/7g [7012MB], wait 30 
seconds..
Results: 37116 seeks/second, 0.03 ms random access time
[r...@migration ~]# hdparm -t /dev/bench2/7g

/dev/bench2/7g:
 Timing buffered disk reads:  852 MB in  3.00 seconds = 283.65 MB/sec
[r...@migration ~]# hdparm -t /dev/sdb3

/dev/sdb3:
 Timing buffered disk reads:  774 MB in  3.01 seconds = 257.53 MB/sec
[r...@migration ~]#
+++

Of course, the fact that that entire partition can fit in the kernel's cache 
makes a difference here in the Seeker results; the hdparm -t (just a big 
sequential read, that's all) just shows that the array is very good at caching 
and doing readahead.

So I tend to trust bonnie++'s results more, since it takes pains to take the 
cache out of the equation.
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: Fedora14 KDE.Unable to connect to the Internet.

[Rex Dieter]

Fennix wrote:

> Make sure that you have knetworkmanager installed.  For the past several
> clean installs (Fedora versions 12 and 13) I have found myself with no
> network under KDE until I installed knetworkmanager (logging in via gnome
> desktop).  Hope this can help...

knetworkmanager (the name anyway) is deprecated, now called kde-plasma-
networkmanagement , which it should get installed by default along with the 
kde spin (or yum groupinstall kde-desktop).

-- Rex


-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: Impossible to connect to the Internet.Fedora14.

[Joe Zeff]

On 11/13/2010 12:09 PM, Luis Suzuki wrote:
> I changed in resolv.conf the nameserver from the IP of my Thompson
> router(which works with other distros) to the IPs of my ISP (if I would
> do the same for Google Public DNS It would not probably change anything)
> and I am still not able to connect to the Internet.More,I installed
> Fedora14 Gnome and was the same as with Fedora14 KDE.So,it is a problem
> with DHCP implementation with this Fedora 14.I found that Fedora does
> not install any dhclient.conf which I find in Ubuntu etc.,could that be
> the problem?

Try this:

ping 18.7.22.69

If you get replies, you've got connectivity even if you can't resolve 
DNS.  Also, after changing the name server, did you save the changes, 
disable and re-enable the interface?  If not, your changes haven't taken 
effect.
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: Impossible to connect to the Internet.Fedora14.

[Robert Myers]

On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Luis Suzuki  wrote:
> I changed in resolv.conf the nameserver from the IP of my Thompson
> router(which works with other distros) to the IPs of my ISP (if I would do
> the same for Google Public DNS It would not probably change anything) and I
> am still not able to connect to the Internet.More,I installed Fedora14 Gnome
> and was the same as with Fedora14 KDE.So,it is a problem with DHCP
> implementation with this Fedora 14.I found that Fedora does not install any
> dhclient.conf which I find in Ubuntu etc.,could that be the problem?
> --

Too smart by half could describe >>50% Fedora users.  If you are
fiddling with things like, "dhclient.conf," stop and ask yourself: if
an ordinary user had to understand this, would Linux exist at all?

Robert.
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: Fedora-14-i386-dvd.iso, file corrupted

[William Stock]

When you burn the iso image, make sure the computer isn't trying to do
too many other things.  This is less of a problem now, but in the "good
old days" the computer could be so busy that it wouldn't get data to the
burner fast enough, and that would result in a bad copy (also known as a
"coaster," as in:  "3: a covering (plate or mat) that protects the
surface of a table (i.e., from the condensation on a cold glass or
bottle)").




On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 22:37 +, John Pilkington wrote:
> On 12/11/10 22:06, William Stock wrote:
> > in a terminal window, cd to the directory with the bittorrent files
> > (example: cd Download/Fedora-14-i386-DVD) and enter: sha256sum -c
> > *CHECKSUM
> >
> > (This is the lazy man's way to do it.  The system will try to find all
> > the CDs too, and fail them, but who cares?  Just so the DVD you're
> > interested in is OK.)
> >
> > apropos sha256  will give you a list of likely candidates, and
> > man sha256sum   will give you a quick&  dirty synopsis of the command.
> >
> > Good Luck.
> > (For years, before DVDs came along, the first CD (FTP) of the set would
> > test OK for me, and all the rest would test bad, but they all worked
> > fine.  I've had Brasero lie to me as well.)
> > Bill
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 16:20 -0500, Vincent wrote:
> >> Hello All'
> >> I downloaded fedora-14-i386-dvd.iso several time included bitorrent. The
> >> dvd disk were burned from two different computer, they all show error
> >> during the test. The installation were tested on 3 different computer.
> >> The bittorrent when downloaded made a directory "fedora-14-i386-dvd" in
> >> I found 2 files "fedora-14-i386-dvd.iso" and "fedora-14-i386-checksum"
> >> this is the first time I used bittorrent and do not know how to use the
> >> checksum to verify the iso file, this file however, when burned on dvd
> >> and tested during the installation shows error also. Am I doing some
> >> thing wrong?
> >> I appreciate some help.
> >>
> >
> >
> You did 'burn as an ISO image', didn't you?
> 
> John P
> 


-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: missing packages

[JD]

On 11/13/2010 11:48 AM, fred smith wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 10:56:31AM -0800, JD wrote:
>> yum check
>> reports missing packages.
>> Is there a way to yum install missing packages
>> without having to specify their names?
> I suppose you could capture to a file, the list yum gives of missing
> packages, then edit the file til it looks like a yum commandline, then
> run it.
>
Yeah   I know that.
I was hoping that there is an incantation of yum
or a package manager to go and fetch and install
missing packages.
Thanx for the suggestion.

-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Impossible to connect to the Internet.Fedora14.

[Luis Suzuki]

I changed in resolv.conf the nameserver from the IP of my Thompson router(which 
works with other distros) to the IPs of my ISP (if I would do the same for 
Google Public DNS It would not probably change anything) and I am still not 
able to connect to the Internet.More,I installed Fedora14 Gnome and was the 
same as with Fedora14 KDE.So,it is a problem with DHCP implementation with this 
Fedora 14.I found that Fedora does not install any dhclient.conf which I find 
in Ubuntu etc.,could that be the problem?   
 -- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: missing packages

[fred smith]

On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 10:56:31AM -0800, JD wrote:
> yum check
> reports missing packages.
> Is there a way to yum install missing packages
> without having to specify their names?

I suppose you could capture to a file, the list yum gives of missing
packages, then edit the file til it looks like a yum commandline, then
run it.

-- 
 Fred Smith -- fre...@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us -
"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of
 heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven."
-- Matthew 7:21 (niv) -
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: Fedora14 KDE.Unable to connect to the Internet.

[Fennix]

On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 8:37 AM, Manuel Escudero  wrote:

>
>
> 2010/11/12 Luis Suzuki 
>
>>  I am unable to connect to the Internet after fresh installation of
>> Fedora14 KDE Desktop.I tested my Thompson router and everything is OK,the
>> network connection widget on the kde task bar shows that Auto etho is
>> connected and everything is OK all tests show connection OK.When I use
>> KPackageKit for update,or Konqueror,or command line yum they say they cannot
>> connect,no network connection.Is this a bug that others are facing?It is the
>> first time Fedora does not connect to the Internet at first use.Is it a
>> problem with the DHCP implementation?Can I configure manually?(How?)
>>
>> --
>> users mailing list
>> users@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>> Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
>>
>>
>
> Use DHCP but change your DNS servers for google's ones:
>
> 8.8.8.8, 8.8.4.4
>
> Connect through a Ethernet cable and tell me what happened
> --
> <-Manuel Escudero->
> Linux User #509052
> @GWave: jmlev...@googlewave.com
> @Blogger: http://www.blogxenode.tk/ (Xenode Systems Blog)
> PGP/GnuPG: DAE3 82E9 D68E 7AE4 ED31  1F8F 4AF4 D00C 50E7 ABC6
>
>
> --
> users mailing list
> users@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
>
>

Make sure that you have knetworkmanager installed.  For the past several
clean installs (Fedora versions 12 and 13) I have found myself with no
network under KDE until I installed knetworkmanager (logging in via gnome
desktop).  Hope this can help...

/fennix
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

missing packages

[JD]

yum check
reports missing packages.
Is there a way to yum install missing packages
without having to specify their names?
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Distorted audio in Firefox -- another memcpy bug hiding somewhere?

[Sam Varshavchik]

After upgrading to F14 on x86_64 I'm getting distorted audio in some 
situations. Mostly playing /some/ flash audio. This was discussed in 
https://bugs.adobe.com/jira/browse/FP-5739 and our bug 638477, with the 
conclusion being a bug in the 64 bit Flash plugin.


HOWEVER:

I'm getting the same audio distortion from Google Pacman: 
http://www.google.com/pacman/ which uses HTML and Javascript, not Flash, 
AFAIK.


If you're affected by the 64 bit Flash bug, can you try to see if you also 
get distorted audio from Pacman, which would suggest another memcpy bug 
hiding somewhere.




pgpz9mwWhRgSF.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: Convert ext4 lvm to normal ext4 partition

[Michael Miles]

Lamar Owen wrote:
> On Friday, November 12, 2010 07:12:23 pm Peter Larsen wrote:
>
>> So create a partition, test it without lvm. Then add it as a pv, and do
>> the same test on the lvm on the same implementation.
>>  
> Ok, the first set of two results are in.  And I am surprised by one data 
> point in one of them.  Surprised enough that I ran the benchmarks three 
> times, and got substantially the same results all three times.  I also show 
> hdparm -t output below that confirms that hdparm -t is at best a 'best case' 
> figure, especially when used with a heavily cached controller.  And last, but 
> not least, is Seeker output that should really shed some light on random 
> access benchmarks on different sized partitions.
>
> System is running CentOS 5.5 x86_64, two 2.8GHz Opterons, 10GB RAM.  Disk 
> array connected by 4Gb/s fibre-channel, using a QLogic QLE2460 PCI-e 4x HBA.  
> Individual drives on the array are 500GB 7200RPM FCAL drives. LUN was (as far 
> as I can tell) properly stripe-aligned prior to test. RAID group containing 
> the LUN is 16 drives, in a RAID6 configuration; the other LUNs in the RAID 
> group had little to no traffic during the testing. Array controller has 
> substantial read and write caches (multiple GB) and powerful CPU's.  In other 
> words, not your typical home system.  But it's what I had on-hand and 
> available to test in a rapid manner.
>
> Using bonnie++ levels the playing field substantially, and wrings out what 
> the disk performance actually is; and I do know that the choice of 7200RPM 
> drives isn't the fastest; that's not the point here.  The point is comparing 
> the performance of two ext3 filesystems (may possibly be doing the ext4 tests 
> later today, but honestly it shouldn't matter), where one is on a raw 
> partition and the other is in an LVM logical volume.  Given the results, I 
> should probably swap the partitions, making sdb1 the LVM and sdb2 the raw 
> ext3 (currently it's the other way, with sdb1 the raw and sdb2 the LVM), and 
> rerun the tests to make sure I'm not running afoul of /dev/sdb1 not being 
> stripe-aligned but /dev/sdb2 being stripe-aligned.
>
> bonnie++ command line:
> bonnie++ -d /opt/${filesystem}/bonnie -u nobody:nobody
> No special options; nobody:nobody owns /opt/${filesystem}/bonnie.  
> ${filesystem} is 50g-straight for the raw partition, 50g-lvm for the logical 
> volume.
>
> The results:
>
> +++
> Raw Ext3:
> Size: 19496M
> SeqOutput:
> PerChr: 48445K/sec
> Block: 52836K/sec
> Rewrite: 19134K/sec
>
> SeqInput:
> PerChr: 51529K/sec
> Block: 26327K/sec (<--- this surprised me; one would think it would be 
> larger, but might be related to stripe size alignment, but I thought I had 
> compensated for that)
> RandomSeeks: 576.5 per sec.
>
> SeqCreate:
> Files: 16
> Creates/second: 10544
> RandomCreate:
> Creates/second: 11512
>
> Time output: real 50m16.811s, user 6m49.498s, sys 5m45.078s
> +++
> For the LVM filesystem:
>
> Size: 19496M
> SeqOutput:
> PerChr: 51841K/sec
> Block: 54266K/sec
> Rewrite: 26642K/sec
>
> SeqInput:
> PerChr: 54674K/sec
> Block: 69696K/sec (<--- this looks better and more normal)
> RandomSeeks: 757.9 per sec.
>
> SeqCreate:
> Files: 16
> Creates/second: 10540
> RandomCreate:
> Creates/second: 11127
>
> Time output: real 36m21.393s, user 6m47.328s, sys 6m17.813s
> +++
>
> Yeah, that means on this box with this array, LVM is somewhat faster than the 
> raw partition ext3, especially for sequential block reads.  That doesn't seem 
> to make sense; the Sequential and Random Create results are more in line with 
> what I expected, with a small performance degradation on LVM.
>
> Using the other common tools:
> First, hdparm -t.  Note that with this much RAM in the array controller, this 
> isn't a valid test, as the results below show very clearly (it also shows 
> just how fast the machine can pull data down 4G/s fibrechannel!).
>
> +++
> [r...@migration ~]# hdparm -t /dev/sdb1
>
> /dev/sdb1:
>   Timing buffered disk reads:  298 MB in  3.00 seconds =  99.32 MB/sec
> [r...@migration ~]# hdparm -t /dev/sdb2
>
> /dev/sdb2:
>   Timing buffered disk reads:  386 MB in  3.01 seconds = 128.07 MB/sec
> [r...@migration ~]# hdparm -t /dev/sdb1
>
> /dev/sdb1:
>   Timing buffered disk reads:  552 MB in  3.01 seconds = 183.67 MB/sec
> [r...@migration ~]# hdparm -t /dev/sdb2
>
> /dev/sdb2:
>   Timing buffered disk reads:  562 MB in  3.01 seconds = 186.86 MB/sec
> [r...@migration ~]# hdparm -t /dev/sdb1
>
> /dev/sdb1:
>   Timing buffered disk reads:  704 MB in  3.01 seconds = 233.85 MB/sec
> [r...@migration ~]# hdparm -t /dev/sdb2
>
> /dev/sdb2:
>   Timing buffered disk reads:  614 MB in  3.01 seconds = 204.16 MB/sec
> [r...@migration ~]#
> +++
>
> Now, the Seeker results (I test the raw disk first, then /dev/sdb1 and sdb2 
> in turn, th

Re: I need a new linux homepage. Ideas ?

[Bob Goodwin]

On 13/11/10 11:54, Frank Cox wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 09:50:29 -0500
> Bob Goodwin wrote:
>
>>  I assume this is the page that appears when the browser [Firefox]
>>  starts? How can I implement this using my NFS server?
> Create a html page named anything you like, on the server (or on your local
> computer) with your bookmarks as links.
>
> On Firefox:
> Edit-preferences-general
> When Firefox starts show my homepage
> homepage:  the webpage you just made
>
> Done.  Now you can use all of your bookmarks with any web browser.  If you
> put that page on a webserver you can access it from anywhere.
>
> The only disadvantage is that you have to manually type in any new bookmarks
> that you want to add.
>
> I deal with this by using a system where I have my permanent bookmarks on a
> webpage (named bookmarks.html, amazingly enough) and I store transient
> bookmarks for projects, current research and the like using the native Firefox
> bookmarking system.

Very interesting. I created a blank "home page" in Firefox, copied
it to file:///mnt/srvr1/index.html and made that the opening page.
That worked on this F-13 box and was accessible on the F-14  too.
Then I thought I'd try Opera on the F-14 computer but anything I did
caused Opera to choke on that address, it kept inserting "localhost"
and I had to keep killing it.

So I installed Dillo and did "dillo file:///mnt/srvr1/index.html"
and it pops right up and as you say I can access my Firefox
bookmarks from Dillo on the other computer.

Now I have to decide what I want to do with it ...

Thanks for pointing me in the right direction.

Bob

-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: Fedora-14: Slow nVidia video

[William Perkins]

On 2010.11.13 10:21, Vaclav Mocek wrote:
> On 11/13/2010 07:27 AM, William Perkins wrote:
> >
> > Thank you for telling me about the Xorg log file.  I should have
> > saved the old log file that showed the problem, but it gets rewritten 
> > during the boot process.
> >
> No, it is not. See:
>
> ls /var/log/Xorg.*

ls -l /var/log/Xorg.*
-rw-r--r--  1 root root 44476 Nov 13 01:43 /var/log/Xorg.0.log
-rw-r--r--  1 root root 44897 Nov 13 01:39 /var/log/Xorg.0.log.old
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 27254 Apr 15  2010 /var/log/Xorg.9.log

You are correct, but I still do not have any log output from the initial 
problem.  Both of the Xorg.0.log* files have basically the same output, 
except that the "old" file which shows more elapsed time due to the USB 
problem until the "nv" driver was started.  I had rebooted the system 
about five times since I installed Fedora-14 earlier yesterday.  Shouldn't 
I have one file for each time I completely booted the system, or do these 
files have to be rotated?

I believe that the "nv" driver was initializing correctly, but the slow 
video problem did not go away until I made the USB change in the bios. 
As to why the USB problem effected the video process, I have not a clue. 
The /var/log/messages and other log files contain quite a bit (too much!) 
information about the USB problem, and not much that is video related.

Bill


William M. Perkins, KJ4ASH UNIX/Linux Systems Administrator
The Greenwood   ARES / Skywarn / ARCA
Galax, Virginia
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: Fedora 14's new name?

[William Case]

On Sat, 2010-11-13 at 12:23 -0500, Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 16:59:08 + (UTC)
> Andre Robatino wrote:
> 
> > I always use just "F13", "F14", etc. It would be too confusing to remember 
> > the
> > names especially after a few years.
> 
> Or a few seconds :-).

That is why I use the name, Tom.  I forget to.  When I see a name on my
backup drive, I can say to myself "Oh that must be the ISO.  I wonder
where I put the burned version?"

-- 
Regards Bill
Fedora 13, Gnome 2.30.2
Evo.2.20.2, Emacs 23.2.1

-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: Fedora 14's new name?

[Tom Horsley]

On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 16:59:08 + (UTC)
Andre Robatino wrote:

> I always use just "F13", "F14", etc. It would be too confusing to remember the
> names especially after a few years.

Or a few seconds :-).
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: Convert ext4 lvm to normal ext4 partition

[Lamar Owen]

On Friday, November 12, 2010 07:12:23 pm Peter Larsen wrote:
> So create a partition, test it without lvm. Then add it as a pv, and do
> the same test on the lvm on the same implementation.

Ok, the first set of two results are in.  And I am surprised by one data point 
in one of them.  Surprised enough that I ran the benchmarks three times, and 
got substantially the same results all three times.  I also show hdparm -t 
output below that confirms that hdparm -t is at best a 'best case' figure, 
especially when used with a heavily cached controller.  And last, but not 
least, is Seeker output that should really shed some light on random access 
benchmarks on different sized partitions.

System is running CentOS 5.5 x86_64, two 2.8GHz Opterons, 10GB RAM.  Disk array 
connected by 4Gb/s fibre-channel, using a QLogic QLE2460 PCI-e 4x HBA.  
Individual drives on the array are 500GB 7200RPM FCAL drives. LUN was (as far 
as I can tell) properly stripe-aligned prior to test. RAID group containing the 
LUN is 16 drives, in a RAID6 configuration; the other LUNs in the RAID group 
had little to no traffic during the testing. Array controller has substantial 
read and write caches (multiple GB) and powerful CPU's.  In other words, not 
your typical home system.  But it's what I had on-hand and available to test in 
a rapid manner.

Using bonnie++ levels the playing field substantially, and wrings out what the 
disk performance actually is; and I do know that the choice of 7200RPM drives 
isn't the fastest; that's not the point here.  The point is comparing the 
performance of two ext3 filesystems (may possibly be doing the ext4 tests later 
today, but honestly it shouldn't matter), where one is on a raw partition and 
the other is in an LVM logical volume.  Given the results, I should probably 
swap the partitions, making sdb1 the LVM and sdb2 the raw ext3 (currently it's 
the other way, with sdb1 the raw and sdb2 the LVM), and rerun the tests to make 
sure I'm not running afoul of /dev/sdb1 not being stripe-aligned but /dev/sdb2 
being stripe-aligned.

bonnie++ command line:
bonnie++ -d /opt/${filesystem}/bonnie -u nobody:nobody
No special options; nobody:nobody owns /opt/${filesystem}/bonnie.  
${filesystem} is 50g-straight for the raw partition, 50g-lvm for the logical 
volume. 

The results:

+++
Raw Ext3:
Size: 19496M
SeqOutput:
PerChr: 48445K/sec
Block: 52836K/sec
Rewrite: 19134K/sec

SeqInput:
PerChr: 51529K/sec
Block: 26327K/sec (<--- this surprised me; one would think it would be larger, 
but might be related to stripe size alignment, but I thought I had compensated 
for that)
RandomSeeks: 576.5 per sec.

SeqCreate:
Files: 16
Creates/second: 10544
RandomCreate:
Creates/second: 11512

Time output: real 50m16.811s, user 6m49.498s, sys 5m45.078s
+++
For the LVM filesystem:

Size: 19496M
SeqOutput:
PerChr: 51841K/sec
Block: 54266K/sec
Rewrite: 26642K/sec

SeqInput:
PerChr: 54674K/sec
Block: 69696K/sec (<--- this looks better and more normal)
RandomSeeks: 757.9 per sec.

SeqCreate:
Files: 16
Creates/second: 10540
RandomCreate:
Creates/second: 11127

Time output: real 36m21.393s, user 6m47.328s, sys 6m17.813s
+++

Yeah, that means on this box with this array, LVM is somewhat faster than the 
raw partition ext3, especially for sequential block reads.  That doesn't seem 
to make sense; the Sequential and Random Create results are more in line with 
what I expected, with a small performance degradation on LVM.

Using the other common tools:
First, hdparm -t.  Note that with this much RAM in the array controller, this 
isn't a valid test, as the results below show very clearly (it also shows just 
how fast the machine can pull data down 4G/s fibrechannel!).

+++
[r...@migration ~]# hdparm -t /dev/sdb1

/dev/sdb1:
 Timing buffered disk reads:  298 MB in  3.00 seconds =  99.32 MB/sec
[r...@migration ~]# hdparm -t /dev/sdb2

/dev/sdb2:
 Timing buffered disk reads:  386 MB in  3.01 seconds = 128.07 MB/sec
[r...@migration ~]# hdparm -t /dev/sdb1

/dev/sdb1:
 Timing buffered disk reads:  552 MB in  3.01 seconds = 183.67 MB/sec
[r...@migration ~]# hdparm -t /dev/sdb2

/dev/sdb2:
 Timing buffered disk reads:  562 MB in  3.01 seconds = 186.86 MB/sec
[r...@migration ~]# hdparm -t /dev/sdb1

/dev/sdb1:
 Timing buffered disk reads:  704 MB in  3.01 seconds = 233.85 MB/sec
[r...@migration ~]# hdparm -t /dev/sdb2

/dev/sdb2:
 Timing buffered disk reads:  614 MB in  3.01 seconds = 204.16 MB/sec
[r...@migration ~]#
+++

Now, the Seeker results (I test the raw disk first, then /dev/sdb1 and sdb2 in 
turn, then twice on the LVM logical volume's device node, and then once on the 
much smaller /dev/sdb3):

+++

[r...@migration ~]# ./seeker /dev/sdb
Seeker v2.0, 2007-01-15, http://www.linuxinsight.com/how_fast_is_your_disk.html
Benchm

Re: Fedora 14's new name?

[Andre Robatino]

William Case  rogers.com> writes:

> 
> Hi;
> 
> Is Fedora using names anymore to distinguish versions?  F13 was Goddard.
> I have looked on the Wiki and on the Project page and several links.  I
> can't find the name anywhere.  What is particularly frustrating is that
> I am sure I saw it two or three weeks ago.

F14 = Laughlin
F15 = Lovelock

http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Fedora-15-to-be-named-Lovelock-1130513.html

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Name_suggestions_for_Fedora_14

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Name_suggestions_for_Fedora_15

> It is not deal killer, but I have gotten in the habit of storing the ISO
> for each version on my harddrive under a directory with the version name
> to distinguish it from the working copy.  If using a name has been
> dropped please let me know and I will use another designation.

I always use just "F13", "F14", etc. It would be too confusing to remember the
names especially after a few years.




-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: Fedora 14's new name?

[Frank Murphy]

On 13/11/10 16:45, William Case wrote:

cat /etc/fedora-release


-- 
Regards,

Frank Murphy
UTF_8 Encoded
Friend of Fedora
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: Fedora 14's new name?

[Digvijay Patankar]

On Saturday 13 Nov 2010 10:15:06 pm William Case wrote:
> Hi;
> 
> Is Fedora using names anymore to distinguish versions?  F13 was Goddard.
> I have looked on the Wiki and on the Project page and several links.  I
> can't find the name anywhere.  What is particularly frustrating is that
> I am sure I saw it two or three weeks ago.

Fedora 14 codenamed Laughlin

> It is not deal killer, but I have gotten in the habit of storing the ISO
> for each version on my harddrive under a directory with the version name
> to distinguish it from the working copy.  If using a name has been
> dropped please let me know and I will use another designation.

Recently codename voting declared 'Lovelock' as its codename for Fedora 15.

With regards,

-- 


Digvijay Patankar
Department of Civil Engineering,
Indian Institute of Science,
Bangalore - 560012 

PGP Key Fingerprint : 5904 2E52 6D64 1B43 DCBF EF01 17E7 E637 9814 F86A 
gpg --recv-keys --keyserver pgp.mit.edu 9814F86A



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: I need a new linux homepage. Ideas ?

[Frank Cox]

On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 09:50:29 -0500
Bob Goodwin wrote:

> I assume this is the page that appears when the browser [Firefox]
> starts? How can I implement this using my NFS server?

Create a html page named anything you like, on the server (or on your local
computer) with your bookmarks as links.

On Firefox:
Edit-preferences-general
When Firefox starts show my homepage
homepage:  the webpage you just made

Done.  Now you can use all of your bookmarks with any web browser.  If you
put that page on a webserver you can access it from anywhere.

The only disadvantage is that you have to manually type in any new bookmarks
that you want to add.

I deal with this by using a system where I have my permanent bookmarks on a
webpage (named bookmarks.html, amazingly enough) and I store transient
bookmarks for projects, current research and the like using the native Firefox
bookmarking system.
-- 
MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Melville Sask ~ http://www.melvilletheatre.com
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Fedora 14's new name?

[William Case]

Hi;

Is Fedora using names anymore to distinguish versions?  F13 was Goddard.
I have looked on the Wiki and on the Project page and several links.  I
can't find the name anywhere.  What is particularly frustrating is that
I am sure I saw it two or three weeks ago.

It is not deal killer, but I have gotten in the habit of storing the ISO
for each version on my harddrive under a directory with the version name
to distinguish it from the working copy.  If using a name has been
dropped please let me know and I will use another designation.

-- 
Regards Bill
Fedora 13, Gnome 2.30.2
Evo.2.20.2, Emacs 23.2.1

-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: Fedora-14: Slow nVidia video

[Vaclav Mocek]

On 11/13/2010 07:27 AM, William Perkins wrote:
>
> Thank you for telling me about the Xorg log file.  I should have saved the
> old log file that showed the problem, but it gets rewritten during the
> boot process.
>
No, it is not. See:

ls /var/log/Xorg.*
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: I need a new linux homepage. Ideas ?

[Bob Goodwin]

On 13/11/10 09:34, Tim wrote:
>
> I prefer a page on my LAN webserver.  Not only is it almost always
> available, and it has my usual bookmarks as regular links, so I can use
> them with any browser that I use.  And it saves going through menus to
> get to them.  ;-)
>

I assume this is the page that appears when the browser [Firefox]
starts? How can I implement this using my NFS server?

Bob


-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: I need a new linux homepage. Ideas ?

[Tim]

On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 11:17 -0800, Konstantin Svist wrote:
> I prefer about:blank since its owners seem to have a 100% uptime and 
> infinite bandwidth.

I prefer a page on my LAN webserver.  Not only is it almost always
available, and it has my usual bookmarks as regular links, so I can use
them with any browser that I use.  And it saves going through menus to
get to them.  ;-)

-- 
[...@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686

Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.  I
read messages from the public lists.



-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: fstab vs autofs

[Tim]

On Sat, 2010-11-13 at 00:33 +, Timothy Murphy wrote:
> What exactly is the outcome if the remote host cannot be mounted?

Booting can take ages, more so if you had several mounts.  Then logon
was painful, if any of those mounts was to be mounted within the
homespace.

> It seemed from what I read that there should just be a delay (timeout)
> of 60 seconds; but I recall a much longer delay in practice.

Likewise.

-- 
[...@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686

Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.  I
read messages from the public lists.



-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Fusion Fedora Remix is in top 10 on Distrowatch !

[valent.turko...@gmail.com]

Fusion Fedora Remix is in top 10 on Distrowatch - http://goo.gl/f3p1b

Feel free to drop in Fusion google group and leave your feedback -
http://groups.google.com/group/fusionlinux/

Cheers,
Valent.
-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines

Re: OT: vexing hw issue

[Les]

On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 13:24 -0800, Dave Stevens wrote:
> I want to make a new Fedora box so I used an existing case and put into it a 
> new ASUS motherboard and a dual core low power CPU (an AM2+) and 1 gig of RAM 
> (512x2) and a new 450 watt power supply. The only front panel connection is 
> for the power switch. Every time I power up (wall power is known good) the 
> unit goes through all the motions for about 5 seconds then stops dead. It 
> never gets to powering up the on-board video or doing the ram check or 
> displaying the BIOS config messages. Tried another PS with the same results. 
> Any ideas? I mean ANY ideas, I'm out of clues on this one. References welcome.
> 
> Dave

Did you check the documentation on the mother board?  It may tell you a
specific thing to check as this is a unusual symptom.  I assume that you
do have the little beeper connected, so the usual alarms that the MB
issues can be heard and none of those went off?

Regards,
Les H

-- 
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines