Re: What is the deal with rpmfusion nvidia updates?
On Sat, 2014-11-08 at 19:01 -0500, Neal Becker wrote: I don't understand why yum doesn't want to install updates when a new kernel is available: sudo yum update ... --- Package kernel.x86_64 0:3.16.7-200.fc20 will be installed ... [nothing about kmod-nvidia-blah] ** yum wants to update kernel ** rpm -qa kmod-nvidia* kmod-nvidia-304xx-3.16.6-203.fc20.x86_64-304.123-1.fc20.16.x86_64 ** kmod-nvidia 3.16.6-203 is already installed ** yum info kmod-nvidia* ... Name: kmod-nvidia-304xx-3.16.7-200.fc20.x86_64 Arch: x86_64 Version : 304.123 Release : 1.fc20.17 ** OK, there it is! The kmod I need for the new kernel. So why doesn't yum want to install it? -- -- Those who don't understand recursion are doomed to repeat it Try to install the new kernel first, then after, see if the new kmod will update. Or just use akmod-nvidia and when you install an updated kernel and reboot, akmod will auto build the new kmod for you (you need to install kernel-devel along with kmod initially). -- Mike Chambers Madisonville, KY Best little town on Earth! -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: What is the deal with rpmfusion nvidia updates?
On Sun, 2014-11-09 at 03:40 -0600, Mike Chambers wrote: On Sat, 2014-11-08 at 19:01 -0500, Neal Becker wrote: I don't understand why yum doesn't want to install updates when a new kernel is available: sudo yum update ... --- Package kernel.x86_64 0:3.16.7-200.fc20 will be installed ... [nothing about kmod-nvidia-blah] ** yum wants to update kernel ** rpm -qa kmod-nvidia* kmod-nvidia-304xx-3.16.6-203.fc20.x86_64-304.123-1.fc20.16.x86_64 ** kmod-nvidia 3.16.6-203 is already installed ** yum info kmod-nvidia* ... Name: kmod-nvidia-304xx-3.16.7-200.fc20.x86_64 Arch: x86_64 Version : 304.123 Release : 1.fc20.17 ** OK, there it is! The kmod I need for the new kernel. So why doesn't yum want to install it? -- -- Those who don't understand recursion are doomed to repeat it Try to install the new kernel first, then after, see if the new kmod will update. Or just use akmod-nvidia and when you install an updated kernel and reboot, akmod will auto build the new kmod for you (you need to install kernel-devel along with kmod initially). (install kernel-devel along with akmod initially, I mean, not kmod haha) -- Mike Chambers Madisonville, KY Best little town on Earth! -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: What is the deal with rpmfusion nvidia updates?
On 11/09/2014 01:40 AM, Mike Chambers wrote: Try to install the new kernel first, then after, see if the new kmod will update. Speaking from experience, when you update the kernel, the new kmod (if available) is normally drawn in as a dependency. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Ralink RT3072?
On 11/09/2014 12:00 AM, poma wrote: On 09.11.2014 00:57, jd1008 wrote: On 07.11.2014 21:42, jd1008 wrote: Any hopes of a Fedora stable release with support for RL3072? What used to be Ralinktech.com is now MediaTek.Com They seem to only have Windows drivers :( http://mediatek.com/en/downloads/usb/ Ralink RT3072? $ lsusb ??? -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: fedup??
On Sat, 08 Nov 2014 14:23:49 -0800, Joe Zeff wrote: On 11/08/2014 02:08 PM, Beartooth wrote: yum install fedup actually does something, without complaining. But does Fedora still use fedup?? If not, what? I'd expected this list to be abuzz by now with posts about upgrading, but I don't see them. Are things in general really going so swimmingly that nobody questions anything?? I've never had a bit of trouble with it on my laptop and I've never had fedup work properly on my desktop. Go know. I'm going to have to upgrade the desktop before F19 expires, and I'm considering trying the unofficial fedora-upgrade tool and see if it works better. By unofficial fedora-upgrade tool I suppose you mean yum upgrade? I've seen posts about it, but never tried it myself. (I've always had fedup hang, leaving large numbers of duplicate packages and the system only working in CLI mode. Generally speaking, it takes several days worth of manual cleanup before package-cleanup --cleandupes will work in a reasonable time frame. Maybe yum-complete-transaction would be better.) And, to answer your question, fedup is still the official upgrade tool. I had somehow missed the information on full release as of 12/9; so I guess I'm jumping the gun a bit. I apologize for that. However, as I tried to say before, I'm left with my two main PCs running F21 Alpha and respectively F21 Beta. Beta is all right. I've often installed a Beta on an expendable machine -- not that I can help much, if at all, but just to get a foretaste. However, I've never touched an Alpha before, and I'm stunned at having no problems, so far touch wood!. I guess what I'm after is any clue on whether I'm better off putting my Beta install medium into the Alpha machine, or simply running fedup on it. Or, I suppose, keeping both as they are and hanging on for another month. Thoughts?? -- Beartooth Staffwright, Not Quite Clueless Power User Remember I know little (precious little!) of where up is. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: fedup??
On 11/10/14 02:31, Beartooth wrote: However, I've never touched an Alpha before, and I'm stunned at having no problems, so far touch wood!. I guess what I'm after is any clue on whether I'm better off putting my Beta install medium into the Alpha machine, or simply running fedup on it. Or, I suppose, keeping both as they are and hanging on for another month. Thoughts?? If you have a machine running a form of F21 then you'll not be running fedup since it isn't a tool to upgrade from a level to the same level. You'll probably want to run yum distro-sync at some point. -- If you can't laugh at yourself, others will gladly oblige. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Ralink RT3072?
On 09.11.2014 19:31, jd1008 wrote: On 11/09/2014 12:00 AM, poma wrote: On 09.11.2014 00:57, jd1008 wrote: On 07.11.2014 21:42, jd1008 wrote: Any hopes of a Fedora stable release with support for RL3072? What used to be Ralinktech.com is now MediaTek.Com They seem to only have Windows drivers :( http://mediatek.com/en/downloads/usb/ Ralink RT3072? $ lsusb ??? ¿¿¿ -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: fedup??
Hi On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Beartooth wrote: By unofficial fedora-upgrade tool I suppose you mean yum upgrade? I've seen posts about it, but never tried it myself. No $ sudo dnf info yum-upgrade Available Packages Name: fedora-upgrade Arch: noarch Epoch : 0 Version : 21.2 Release : 1.fc21 Size: 34 k Repo: updates-testing Summary : Upgrade Fedora to next version using yum upgrade (unofficial tool) URL : https://github.com/xsuchy/fedora-upgrade License : GPLv2 Description : Upgrade Fedora to next version using yum upgrade. : This is attempt to automatize steps as listed here: : https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upgrading_Fedora_using_yum : : This is an unofficial tool, for official Fedora-supported : upgrades please see the 'fedup' tool. Rahul -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: fedup??
On 09.11.2014 22:24, Rahul Sundaram wrote: Hi On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Beartooth wrote: By unofficial fedora-upgrade tool I suppose you mean yum upgrade? I've seen posts about it, but never tried it myself. No $ sudo dnf info yum-upgrade Available Packages Name: fedora-upgrade Arch: noarch Epoch : 0 Version : 21.2 Release : 1.fc21 Size: 34 k Repo: updates-testing Summary : Upgrade Fedora to next version using yum upgrade (unofficial tool) URL : https://github.com/xsuchy/fedora-upgrade License : GPLv2 Description : Upgrade Fedora to next version using yum upgrade. : This is attempt to automatize steps as listed here: : https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upgrading_Fedora_using_yum : : This is an unofficial tool, for official Fedora-supported : upgrades please see the 'fedup' tool. Interestingly, unofficial tool is more reliable than official one. :) unofficial == FedoraUpgrade https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/FedoraUpgrade official == FedUp https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FedUp -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Hibernate and lack of docs
Hi all, I was trying to get hibernation working on my F20 laptop with which I work. Going through the process, which I thought would be more transparent or that it would just be like hitting the hibernation and that's it, I found great deficiencies in Fedora (maybe just from the kernel) and especially in the docs (or the lack of documentation in this particular issue): 1) I had trouble getting the system to hibernate. There wasn't anything clear about the fact that you needed to have a swap bigger than the amount of memory you have. Also, it doesn't work if you have a file as swap (which was the easiest way to start testing) 2) You need (or at least with my laptop) to add the resume=swap FS, this I did find information in the docs, but I'm a bit surprised that Fedora doesn't give better information about all this during the installation process. 3) When adding the resume= option to the kernel line in grub you can't use UUID like FS. That is a bug IMHO. Well that's as much as I remember now. At least I now have hibernation working correctly on my laptop. Regards, -- Martín Marqués http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training Services -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Hibernate and lack of docs
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 11/09/2014 03:38 PM, Martín Marqués wrote: Hi all, I was trying to get hibernation working on my F20 laptop with which I work. Going through the process, which I thought would be more transparent or that it would just be like hitting the hibernation and that's it, I found great deficiencies in Fedora (maybe just from the kernel) and especially in the docs (or the lack of documentation in this particular issue): 1) I had trouble getting the system to hibernate. There wasn't anything clear about the fact that you needed to have a swap bigger than the amount of memory you have. Also, it doesn't work if you have a file as swap (which was the easiest way to start testing) 2) You need (or at least with my laptop) to add the resume=swap FS, this I did find information in the docs, but I'm a bit surprised that Fedora doesn't give better information about all this during the installation process. 3) When adding the resume= option to the kernel line in grub you can't use UUID like FS. That is a bug IMHO. Well that's as much as I remember now. At least I now have hibernation working correctly on my laptop. Regards, Please file a bug[1] against the documentation you're referencing, probably the Power Management Guide? That will help the guide coordinator ensure that the issue is appropriately addressed. Point 1) seems especially relevant, that much should be explicitly clear. fwiw, it seems like hibernation is generally falling out of favor these days. I know not everyone has newer systems, but those that do have machines that use shockingly little power on suspend, and cold boot faster than a resume from hibernate could ever achieve. On point 3, one would hope that resuming from hibernate didn't require you to manually edit the grub configs every time :) I'm not well versed in the area, but it smells like at least one bug/deficiency from here. [1] http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/20/html/Power_Management_Guide/pr01s02.html - -- - -- Pete Travis - Fedora Docs Project Leader - 'randomuser' on freenode - immanet...@fedoraproject.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUX/k7AAoJEL1wZM0+jj2Z8HEH/3v6F+RMnJ8vIs4BB8Qw0+Df BUq1ID6myD8ldmLEzWb72UnKmtWDcqpafB52TDXbea83ZNaQKwMKM6GtVEIOLTmX 5baA3l2M8C9N7LVyb9ZKPvoOcUefcbUXJge/oX3MI+qf3PoC9hkb/LSMuiNHwEUI ZDPz+iYZnObmo0zDxTlYPwRbVU1qZYvstrOliThA2jFG2La8ojIyCzWIxEeFsS5N PQ90Vax4HXVUvkhZaxVtBx+ufr0HN4gSPzTL/zUY9vkskgJ0JaGsHNyvLsEmNMoV IVnu6815OzBtQWHvJCROGFRODfBrQaKC97tsc5LaIouhbCqhn32YNkJUqSt2SMs= =zvbw -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Hibernate and lack of docs
On 11/10/14 06:38, Martín Marqués wrote: Hi all, I was trying to get hibernation working on my F20 laptop with which I work. I don't use hibernation myself but Going through the process, which I thought would be more transparent or that it would just be like hitting the hibernation and that's it, I found great deficiencies in Fedora (maybe just from the kernel) and especially in the docs (or the lack of documentation in this particular issue): 1) I had trouble getting the system to hibernate. There wasn't anything clear about the fact that you needed to have a swap bigger than the amount of memory you have. Also, it doesn't work if you have a file as swap (which was the easiest way to start testing) http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/18/html/Installation_Guide/s2-diskpartrecommend-x86.html Yes, it is true that you may have to look at earlier release documentation as it may not be carried forward if the information hasn't changed. 2) You need (or at least with my laptop) to add the resume=swap FS, this I did find information in the docs, but I'm a bit surprised that Fedora doesn't give better information about all this during the installation process. 3) When adding the resume= option to the kernel line in grub you can't use UUID like FS. That is a bug IMHO. Let us know the bugzilla # after you file it. Well that's as much as I remember now. At least I now have hibernation working correctly on my laptop. When it comes to documentation deficiencies you're invited to help improve the documentation as this is community driven. -- If you can't laugh at yourself, others will gladly oblige. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Hibernate and lack of docs
On Sun, 9 Nov 2014 16:31:07 -0700 Pete Travis li...@petetravis.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 11/09/2014 03:38 PM, Martín Marqués wrote: Hi all, I was trying to get hibernation working on my F20 laptop with which I work. Going through the process, which I thought would be more transparent or that it would just be like hitting the hibernation and that's it, I found great deficiencies in Fedora (maybe just from the kernel) and especially in the docs (or the lack of documentation in this particular issue): 1) I had trouble getting the system to hibernate. There wasn't anything clear about the fact that you needed to have a swap bigger than the amount of memory you have. Also, it doesn't work if you have a file as swap (which was the easiest way to start testing) 2) You need (or at least with my laptop) to add the resume=swap FS, this I did find information in the docs, but I'm a bit surprised that Fedora doesn't give better information about all this during the installation process. 3) When adding the resume= option to the kernel line in grub you can't use UUID like FS. That is a bug IMHO. Well that's as much as I remember now. At least I now have hibernation working correctly on my laptop. Regards, Please file a bug[1] against the documentation you're referencing, probably the Power Management Guide? That will help the guide coordinator ensure that the issue is appropriately addressed. Point 1) seems especially relevant, that much should be explicitly clear. fwiw, it seems like hibernation is generally falling out of favor these days. I know not everyone has newer systems, but those that do have machines that use shockingly little power on suspend, and cold boot faster than a resume from hibernate could ever achieve. On point 3, one would hope that resuming from hibernate didn't require you to manually edit the grub configs every time :) I'm not well versed in the area, but it smells like at least one bug/deficiency from here. [1] http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/20/html/Power_Management_Guide/pr01s02.html The following thread of December 2013 may be useful. https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/2013-December/443871.html I think it was a rank bad idea on the part of Fedora to blindly follow stupid Ubuntu and disable hibernation by default. As a result, it appears to me that this feature of the kernel is not being tested enough, as evidenced from my tribulations using a Dell Precision M3800. There is now no longer enough data on possible issues with this feature for developers to put fixes on. (Not everyone realizes that the feature can be turned on, and they give up on hibernation rather than try it and file bug reports). Hopefully, Fedora will consider bringing back this resume feature enabled by default in future releases. Ranjan - -- - -- Pete Travis - Fedora Docs Project Leader - 'randomuser' on freenode - immanet...@fedoraproject.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUX/k7AAoJEL1wZM0+jj2Z8HEH/3v6F+RMnJ8vIs4BB8Qw0+Df BUq1ID6myD8ldmLEzWb72UnKmtWDcqpafB52TDXbea83ZNaQKwMKM6GtVEIOLTmX 5baA3l2M8C9N7LVyb9ZKPvoOcUefcbUXJge/oX3MI+qf3PoC9hkb/LSMuiNHwEUI ZDPz+iYZnObmo0zDxTlYPwRbVU1qZYvstrOliThA2jFG2La8ojIyCzWIxEeFsS5N PQ90Vax4HXVUvkhZaxVtBx+ufr0HN4gSPzTL/zUY9vkskgJ0JaGsHNyvLsEmNMoV IVnu6815OzBtQWHvJCROGFRODfBrQaKC97tsc5LaIouhbCqhn32YNkJUqSt2SMs= =zvbw -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org -- Important Notice: This mailbox is ignored: e-mails are set to be deleted on receipt. Please respond to the mailing list if appropriate. For those needing to send personal or professional e-mail, please use appropriate addresses. FREE 3D EARTH SCREENSAVER - Watch the Earth right on your desktop! Check it out at http://www.inbox.com/earth -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Evolution 3.10.4 and Fedora 20
Everyone, I have about 6 desktop's running F20 with evolution 3.10.4 that have had problems related to the desktop gui 'freezing'. I can go to a terminal interface by hitting cntrlaltF2, and when I toggle back to the gui it is still not usable. The screen is filled with the last object displayed in this case it is always evolution that does not respond, and I am unable to switch to anything else on the gui. All panels are unaddressable. At first I thought the problem was gpaste so I removed it on a test desktop. The symptoms appeared less often but were still present. It seems to hang with evolution. Has anyone else had this problem? Can anyone help me debug this. Thank you for your help. Greg Ennis -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Yum whatprovides ??
F20/KDE Trying to determine what package provides /Settings/System Settings/Display and Monitor ? -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Yum whatprovides ??
On 11/10/14 09:05, Mickey wrote: F20/KDE Trying to determine what package provides /Settings/System Settings/Display and Monitor ? I don't understand the question. Are you asking about a selection within the systemsettings GUI of KDE? -- If you can't laugh at yourself, others will gladly oblige. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Number Lock
What do I have to do to convince the new (Awful) Gnome3 to let me have Number Lock on? Bill -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
