Re: OT:Question on NVME disk direct access?

[ToddAndMargo]

On 04/05/2018 11:21 PM, Michael D. Setzer II wrote:

The raw mode does not do resizing, but with ntfsclone you can restore and
image to a larger partition. At that point, it will still be the same size as 
the
original partition, but then you run the ntfsclone resize option, and it will 
than
modify the partition and can make use of the additional space. It could also,
reduce the size, but have not done that myself.


I use gparted off the Xfce Live USB to resize.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Which VirtualBox repo to use?

[Eyal Lebedinsky]

On 07/04/18 11:34, Rick Stevens wrote:

On 04/06/2018 05:57 PM, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:

On 07/04/18 10:02, Ed Greshko wrote:

On 04/07/18 07:03, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:

On 04/04/18 13:21, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:

I have been using VirtualBox for a long while. Looking at what rpms
are available
I see:

$ dnf list '*VirtualBox*'
Last metadata expiration check: 19 days, 23:03:27 ago on Thu Mar 15
14:29:34 2018.
Installed Packages
VirtualBox-5.2.x86_64  5.2.8_121009_fedora26-1
@virtualbox
Available Packages


[trimmed]


Which repo [virtualbox (Oracle) or rpmfusion] should one use?
Is Oracle simply a more up-to-date repo? Does rpmfusion packages
actually fetch
the Oracle rpm, or is rpmfusion a separate, full build?

The size difference is significant:
   rpmfusion    VirtualBox-5.2.8-2.fc26.x86_64.rpm 8.1MB
   virtualbox
VirtualBox-5.2-5.2.8_121009_fedora26-1.x86_64.rpm    69  MB

If the two are different: if I change to use the rpmfusion repo,
will the VMs be
compatible?

TIA


Anyone? Should be an easy question for someone who knows?


See https://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Licensing_FAQ

Since RPMFusion is using the VirtualBox name they would be required to
follow the
license.  Specifically:

"The term “VirtualBox” has been registered by Oracle as a trademark in
various
countries. If you choose to ship custom binaries and/or source code
revisions of the
product, you may not use the VirtualBox name in those versions."

Therefore, RPMFusion has built their packages from Oracle's source and
have decided
to package things in multiple rpms as opposed to a single rpm like
Oracle has done.
They have also modified the way kernel modules are built when the
kernel packages get
updated.

And, since they are using the VirtualBox name they must not have made
any changes
such that a VM created on their release would be incompatible with the
Oracle release.

So, using either one is fine and pretty much just a personal choice.


Thanks. Looking at the huge difference in size between the two sources,
I wonder if
rpmfusion broke the single package from virtualbox into separate
packages. The size
still does not fully add up though.

Does anyone know what is different between the two sources? I mean, why
would rpmfusion
put the effort for no added value? Maybe the virtualbox repo includes
fluff that rpmfusion
removed?

$ sudo dnf install VirtualBox


  Package   Arch Version
Repository   Size


Installing:
  VirtualBox    x86_64   5.2.8-2.fc26
rpmfusion-free-updates  8.1 M
Installing dependencies:
  VirtualBox-kmodsrc    noarch   5.2.8-2.fc26
rpmfusion-free-updates  801 k
  VirtualBox-server x86_64   5.2.8-2.fc26
rpmfusion-free-updates   15 M
  akmod-VirtualBox  x86_64   5.2.8-3.fc26
rpmfusion-free-updates   31 k
  akmods    noarch   0.5.6-12.fc26
updates  24 k
  kmodtool  noarch   1-24.fc26
fedora   16 k

Transaction Summary


Install  6 Packages

Total download size: 24 M
Installed size: 66 M


The additive sizes of all the rpmfusion packages may not match what the
virtualbox repo offers because a) they are packaged differently; and b)
there MAY be things rpmfusion doesn't include because inclusion in
rpmfusion might violate a copyright or patent--and Fedora/Red Hat try
really hard to NOT violate copyrights and patents.


Is it then recommended to install from rpmfusion? This will allow me to disable 
the virtualbox
repo (always good to reduce the number of sources)?


--
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigitalri...@alldigital.com -
- AIM/Skype: therps2ICQ: 22643734Yahoo: origrps2 -


--
Eyal Lebedinsky (fed...@eyal.emu.id.au)
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Which VirtualBox repo to use?

[Rick Stevens]

On 04/06/2018 05:57 PM, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:
> On 07/04/18 10:02, Ed Greshko wrote:
>> On 04/07/18 07:03, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:
>>> On 04/04/18 13:21, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:
 I have been using VirtualBox for a long while. Looking at what rpms
 are available
 I see:

 $ dnf list '*VirtualBox*'
 Last metadata expiration check: 19 days, 23:03:27 ago on Thu Mar 15
 14:29:34 2018.
 Installed Packages
 VirtualBox-5.2.x86_64  5.2.8_121009_fedora26-1
 @virtualbox
 Available Packages
 VirtualBox.x86_64  5.2.6-2.fc26
 rpmfusion-free-updates
 VirtualBox-5.1.x86_64  5.1.34_121010_fedora26-1
 virtualbox
 VirtualBox-devel.i686  5.2.6-2.fc26
 rpmfusion-free-updates
 VirtualBox-devel.x86_64    5.2.6-2.fc26
 rpmfusion-free-updates
 VirtualBox-guest-additions.x86_64  5.2.6-2.fc26
 rpmfusion-free-updates
 VirtualBox-kmodsrc.x86_64  5.1.22-1.fc26
 rpmfusion-free
 VirtualBox-kmodsrc.noarch  5.2.6-2.fc26
 rpmfusion-free-updates
 VirtualBox-server.x86_64   5.2.6-2.fc26
 rpmfusion-free-updates
 VirtualBox-webservice.x86_64   5.2.6-2.fc26
 rpmfusion-free-updates
 akmod-VirtualBox.x86_64    5.2.6-2.fc26
 rpmfusion-free-updates
 kmod-VirtualBox.x86_64 5.2.6-2.fc26
 rpmfusion-free-updates
 python-VirtualBox.x86_64   5.2.6-2.fc26
 rpmfusion-free-updates

 Which repo [virtualbox (Oracle) or rpmfusion] should one use?
 Is Oracle simply a more up-to-date repo? Does rpmfusion packages
 actually fetch
 the Oracle rpm, or is rpmfusion a separate, full build?

 The size difference is significant:
   rpmfusion    VirtualBox-5.2.8-2.fc26.x86_64.rpm 8.1MB
   virtualbox   
 VirtualBox-5.2-5.2.8_121009_fedora26-1.x86_64.rpm    69  MB

 If the two are different: if I change to use the rpmfusion repo,
 will the VMs be
 compatible?

 TIA
>>>
>>> Anyone? Should be an easy question for someone who knows?
>>
>> See https://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Licensing_FAQ
>>
>> Since RPMFusion is using the VirtualBox name they would be required to
>> follow the
>> license.  Specifically:
>>
>> "The term “VirtualBox” has been registered by Oracle as a trademark in
>> various
>> countries. If you choose to ship custom binaries and/or source code
>> revisions of the
>> product, you may not use the VirtualBox name in those versions."
>>
>> Therefore, RPMFusion has built their packages from Oracle's source and
>> have decided
>> to package things in multiple rpms as opposed to a single rpm like
>> Oracle has done.
>> They have also modified the way kernel modules are built when the
>> kernel packages get
>> updated.
>>
>> And, since they are using the VirtualBox name they must not have made
>> any changes
>> such that a VM created on their release would be incompatible with the
>> Oracle release.
>>
>> So, using either one is fine and pretty much just a personal choice.
> 
> Thanks. Looking at the huge difference in size between the two sources,
> I wonder if
> rpmfusion broke the single package from virtualbox into separate
> packages. The size
> still does not fully add up though.
> 
> Does anyone know what is different between the two sources? I mean, why
> would rpmfusion
> put the effort for no added value? Maybe the virtualbox repo includes
> fluff that rpmfusion
> removed?
> 
> $ sudo dnf install VirtualBox
> 
> 
>  Package   Arch Version   
> Repository   Size
> 
> 
> Installing:
>  VirtualBox    x86_64   5.2.8-2.fc26  
> rpmfusion-free-updates  8.1 M
> Installing dependencies:
>  VirtualBox-kmodsrc    noarch   5.2.8-2.fc26  
> rpmfusion-free-updates  801 k
>  VirtualBox-server x86_64   5.2.8-2.fc26  
> rpmfusion-free-updates   15 M
>  akmod-VirtualBox  x86_64   5.2.8-3.fc26  
> rpmfusion-free-updates   31 k
>  akmods    noarch   0.5.6-12.fc26 
> updates  24 k
>  kmodtool  noarch   1-24.fc26 
> fedora   16 k
> 
> Transaction Summary
> 
> 
> Install  6 Packages
> 
> Total download size: 24 M
> Installed size: 66 M

The additive sizes of all the rpmfusion packages may not match what the
virtualbox repo offers because a) they are packaged differently; and b)
there MAY be things rpmfusion doesn't include because inclusion in
rpmfusion might violate a copyright or patent--and Fedora/Red Hat try
really hard to NOT 

Re: Which VirtualBox repo to use?

[Eyal Lebedinsky]

On 07/04/18 10:02, Ed Greshko wrote:

On 04/07/18 07:03, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:

On 04/04/18 13:21, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:

I have been using VirtualBox for a long while. Looking at what rpms are 
available
I see:

$ dnf list '*VirtualBox*'
Last metadata expiration check: 19 days, 23:03:27 ago on Thu Mar 15 14:29:34 
2018.
Installed Packages
VirtualBox-5.2.x86_64  5.2.8_121009_fedora26-1
@virtualbox
Available Packages
VirtualBox.x86_64  5.2.6-2.fc26
rpmfusion-free-updates
VirtualBox-5.1.x86_64  5.1.34_121010_fedora26-1
virtualbox
VirtualBox-devel.i686  5.2.6-2.fc26
rpmfusion-free-updates
VirtualBox-devel.x86_64    5.2.6-2.fc26
rpmfusion-free-updates
VirtualBox-guest-additions.x86_64  5.2.6-2.fc26
rpmfusion-free-updates
VirtualBox-kmodsrc.x86_64  5.1.22-1.fc26
rpmfusion-free
VirtualBox-kmodsrc.noarch  5.2.6-2.fc26
rpmfusion-free-updates
VirtualBox-server.x86_64   5.2.6-2.fc26
rpmfusion-free-updates
VirtualBox-webservice.x86_64   5.2.6-2.fc26
rpmfusion-free-updates
akmod-VirtualBox.x86_64    5.2.6-2.fc26
rpmfusion-free-updates
kmod-VirtualBox.x86_64 5.2.6-2.fc26
rpmfusion-free-updates
python-VirtualBox.x86_64   5.2.6-2.fc26
rpmfusion-free-updates

Which repo [virtualbox (Oracle) or rpmfusion] should one use?
Is Oracle simply a more up-to-date repo? Does rpmfusion packages actually fetch
the Oracle rpm, or is rpmfusion a separate, full build?

The size difference is significant:
  rpmfusion    VirtualBox-5.2.8-2.fc26.x86_64.rpm 8.1MB
  virtualbox    VirtualBox-5.2-5.2.8_121009_fedora26-1.x86_64.rpm    69  MB

If the two are different: if I change to use the rpmfusion repo, will the VMs be
compatible?

TIA


Anyone? Should be an easy question for someone who knows?


See https://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Licensing_FAQ

Since RPMFusion is using the VirtualBox name they would be required to follow 
the
license.  Specifically:

"The term “VirtualBox” has been registered by Oracle as a trademark in various
countries. If you choose to ship custom binaries and/or source code revisions 
of the
product, you may not use the VirtualBox name in those versions."

Therefore, RPMFusion has built their packages from Oracle's source and have 
decided
to package things in multiple rpms as opposed to a single rpm like Oracle has 
done.
They have also modified the way kernel modules are built when the kernel 
packages get
updated.

And, since they are using the VirtualBox name they must not have made any 
changes
such that a VM created on their release would be incompatible with the Oracle 
release.

So, using either one is fine and pretty much just a personal choice.


Thanks. Looking at the huge difference in size between the two sources, I 
wonder if
rpmfusion broke the single package from virtualbox into separate packages. The 
size
still does not fully add up though.

Does anyone know what is different between the two sources? I mean, why would 
rpmfusion
put the effort for no added value? Maybe the virtualbox repo includes fluff 
that rpmfusion
removed?

$ sudo dnf install VirtualBox

 Package   Arch VersionRepository   
Size

Installing:
 VirtualBoxx86_64   5.2.8-2.fc26   rpmfusion-free-updates  
8.1 M
Installing dependencies:
 VirtualBox-kmodsrcnoarch   5.2.8-2.fc26   rpmfusion-free-updates  
801 k
 VirtualBox-server x86_64   5.2.8-2.fc26   rpmfusion-free-updates   
15 M
 akmod-VirtualBox  x86_64   5.2.8-3.fc26   rpmfusion-free-updates   
31 k
 akmodsnoarch   0.5.6-12.fc26  updates  
24 k
 kmodtool  noarch   1-24.fc26  fedora   
16 k

Transaction Summary

Install  6 Packages

Total download size: 24 M
Installed size: 66 M

--
Eyal Lebedinsky (fed...@eyal.emu.id.au)
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Which VirtualBox repo to use?

[Ed Greshko]

On 04/07/18 07:03, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:
> On 04/04/18 13:21, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:
>> I have been using VirtualBox for a long while. Looking at what rpms are 
>> available
>> I see:
>>
>> $ dnf list '*VirtualBox*'
>> Last metadata expiration check: 19 days, 23:03:27 ago on Thu Mar 15 14:29:34 
>> 2018.
>> Installed Packages
>> VirtualBox-5.2.x86_64  5.2.8_121009_fedora26-1   
>> @virtualbox
>> Available Packages
>> VirtualBox.x86_64  5.2.6-2.fc26  
>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>> VirtualBox-5.1.x86_64  5.1.34_121010_fedora26-1  
>> virtualbox
>> VirtualBox-devel.i686  5.2.6-2.fc26  
>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>> VirtualBox-devel.x86_64    5.2.6-2.fc26  
>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>> VirtualBox-guest-additions.x86_64  5.2.6-2.fc26  
>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>> VirtualBox-kmodsrc.x86_64  5.1.22-1.fc26 
>> rpmfusion-free
>> VirtualBox-kmodsrc.noarch  5.2.6-2.fc26  
>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>> VirtualBox-server.x86_64   5.2.6-2.fc26  
>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>> VirtualBox-webservice.x86_64   5.2.6-2.fc26  
>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>> akmod-VirtualBox.x86_64    5.2.6-2.fc26  
>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>> kmod-VirtualBox.x86_64 5.2.6-2.fc26  
>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>> python-VirtualBox.x86_64   5.2.6-2.fc26  
>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>>
>> Which repo [virtualbox (Oracle) or rpmfusion] should one use?
>> Is Oracle simply a more up-to-date repo? Does rpmfusion packages actually 
>> fetch
>> the Oracle rpm, or is rpmfusion a separate, full build?
>>
>> The size difference is significant:
>>  rpmfusion    VirtualBox-5.2.8-2.fc26.x86_64.rpm 8.1MB
>>  virtualbox    VirtualBox-5.2-5.2.8_121009_fedora26-1.x86_64.rpm    69  
>> MB
>>
>> If the two are different: if I change to use the rpmfusion repo, will the 
>> VMs be
>> compatible?
>>
>> TIA
>
> Anyone? Should be an easy question for someone who knows?

See https://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Licensing_FAQ

Since RPMFusion is using the VirtualBox name they would be required to follow 
the
license.  Specifically:

"The term “VirtualBox” has been registered by Oracle as a trademark in various
countries. If you choose to ship custom binaries and/or source code revisions 
of the
product, you may not use the VirtualBox name in those versions."

Therefore, RPMFusion has built their packages from Oracle's source and have 
decided
to package things in multiple rpms as opposed to a single rpm like Oracle has 
done. 
They have also modified the way kernel modules are built when the kernel 
packages get
updated.

And, since they are using the VirtualBox name they must not have made any 
changes
such that a VM created on their release would be incompatible with the Oracle 
release.

So, using either one is fine and pretty much just a personal choice.


-- 
Conjecture is just a conclusion based on incomplete information. It isn't a 
fact.


signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Which VirtualBox repo to use?

[SternData]

On 04/06/2018 06:03 PM, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:
> On 04/04/18 13:21, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:
>> I have been using VirtualBox for a long while. Looking at what rpms
>> are available I see:
>>
>> $ dnf list '*VirtualBox*'
>> Last metadata expiration check: 19 days, 23:03:27 ago on Thu Mar 15
>> 14:29:34 2018.
>> Installed Packages
>> VirtualBox-5.2.x86_64 
>> 5.2.8_121009_fedora26-1    @virtualbox
>> Available Packages
>> VirtualBox.x86_64 
>> 5.2.6-2.fc26   rpmfusion-free-updates
>> VirtualBox-5.1.x86_64 
>> 5.1.34_121010_fedora26-1   virtualbox
>> VirtualBox-devel.i686 
>> 5.2.6-2.fc26   rpmfusion-free-updates
>> VirtualBox-devel.x86_64   
>> 5.2.6-2.fc26   rpmfusion-free-updates
>> VirtualBox-guest-additions.x86_64 
>> 5.2.6-2.fc26   rpmfusion-free-updates
>> VirtualBox-kmodsrc.x86_64 
>> 5.1.22-1.fc26  rpmfusion-free
>> VirtualBox-kmodsrc.noarch 
>> 5.2.6-2.fc26   rpmfusion-free-updates
>> VirtualBox-server.x86_64  
>> 5.2.6-2.fc26   rpmfusion-free-updates
>> VirtualBox-webservice.x86_64  
>> 5.2.6-2.fc26   rpmfusion-free-updates
>> akmod-VirtualBox.x86_64   
>> 5.2.6-2.fc26   rpmfusion-free-updates
>> kmod-VirtualBox.x86_64
>> 5.2.6-2.fc26   rpmfusion-free-updates
>> python-VirtualBox.x86_64  
>> 5.2.6-2.fc26   rpmfusion-free-updates
>>
>> Which repo [virtualbox (Oracle) or rpmfusion] should one use?
>> Is Oracle simply a more up-to-date repo? Does rpmfusion packages
>> actually fetch
>> the Oracle rpm, or is rpmfusion a separate, full build?
>>
>> The size difference is significant:
>>  rpmfusion    VirtualBox-5.2.8-2.fc26.x86_64.rpm 8.1MB
>>  virtualbox   
>> VirtualBox-5.2-5.2.8_121009_fedora26-1.x86_64.rpm    69  MB
>>
>> If the two are different: if I change to use the rpmfusion repo, will
>> the VMs be compatible?
>>
>> TIA
> 
> Anyone? Should be an easy question for someone who knows?

I use the one from VirtualBox rather than rpmfusion.  The VMs themselves
are transferrable.



-- 
-- Steve
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Which VirtualBox repo to use?

[Eyal Lebedinsky]

On 04/04/18 13:21, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:

I have been using VirtualBox for a long while. Looking at what rpms are 
available I see:

$ dnf list '*VirtualBox*'
Last metadata expiration check: 19 days, 23:03:27 ago on Thu Mar 15 14:29:34 
2018.
Installed Packages
VirtualBox-5.2.x86_64  5.2.8_121009_fedora26-1    
@virtualbox
Available Packages
VirtualBox.x86_64  5.2.6-2.fc26   
rpmfusion-free-updates
VirtualBox-5.1.x86_64  5.1.34_121010_fedora26-1   
virtualbox
VirtualBox-devel.i686  5.2.6-2.fc26   
rpmfusion-free-updates
VirtualBox-devel.x86_64    5.2.6-2.fc26   
rpmfusion-free-updates
VirtualBox-guest-additions.x86_64  5.2.6-2.fc26   
rpmfusion-free-updates
VirtualBox-kmodsrc.x86_64  5.1.22-1.fc26  
rpmfusion-free
VirtualBox-kmodsrc.noarch  5.2.6-2.fc26   
rpmfusion-free-updates
VirtualBox-server.x86_64   5.2.6-2.fc26   
rpmfusion-free-updates
VirtualBox-webservice.x86_64   5.2.6-2.fc26   
rpmfusion-free-updates
akmod-VirtualBox.x86_64    5.2.6-2.fc26   
rpmfusion-free-updates
kmod-VirtualBox.x86_64 5.2.6-2.fc26   
rpmfusion-free-updates
python-VirtualBox.x86_64   5.2.6-2.fc26   
rpmfusion-free-updates

Which repo [virtualbox (Oracle) or rpmfusion] should one use?
Is Oracle simply a more up-to-date repo? Does rpmfusion packages actually fetch
the Oracle rpm, or is rpmfusion a separate, full build?

The size difference is significant:
 rpmfusion    VirtualBox-5.2.8-2.fc26.x86_64.rpm 8.1MB
 virtualbox    VirtualBox-5.2-5.2.8_121009_fedora26-1.x86_64.rpm    69  MB

If the two are different: if I change to use the rpmfusion repo, will the VMs 
be compatible?

TIA


Anyone? Should be an easy question for someone who knows?

--
Eyal Lebedinsky (fed...@eyal.emu.id.au)
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: upgrade to 28 beta question?

[ToddAndMargo]

On 04/06/2018 01:42 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:

If you've done complicated things, you might also want `--best`. On the
other hand, if you_haven't_, you probably don't need `--allowerasing`
either.



Thank you!

I had to allow raising from some reason when I upgraded
from 26 to 27.  Forgot why.



--
~~
Computers are like air conditioners.
They malfunction when you open windows
~~
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: upgrade to 28 beta question?

[Matthew Miller]

On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 01:22:39PM -0700, ToddAndMargo wrote:
> This worked under 27.  Anything different under 28?

> FC 27 -->> FC 28:
> # rpm --rebuilddb
> # rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest

These steps shouldn't _generally_ be necessary.


> # dnf --enablerepo=* update --refresh

Depending on what repos you have installed, sure.


> # dnf install python3-dnf-plugin-system-upgrade

(Probably already there?)

> # dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=28 --allowerasing

If you've done complicated things, you might also want `--best`. On the
other hand, if you _haven't_, you probably don't need `--allowerasing`
either.

> # dnf clean packages <-- optional
> # dnf system-upgrade reboot

Yep. And you might want to clear /var/cache/dnf after.

-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

upgrade to 28 beta question?

[ToddAndMargo]

Hi All,

This worked under 27.  Anything different under 28?


Many thanks,
-T


FC 27 -->> FC 28:

# rpm --rebuilddb
# rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest
  if anything is too new, do a
# dnf downgrade offender(s)

# dnf --enablerepo=* update --refresh
# dnf install python3-dnf-plugin-system-upgrade
# dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=28 --allowerasing
# dnf clean packages <-- optional
# dnf system-upgrade reboot




--
~
When we ask for advice, we are usually looking for an accomplice.
   --  Charles Varlet de La Grange
~
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: empty messages from fedora users list.

[home user via users]

(replying to both Samuel and Tim)
ok.  I thank everyone who tried to help.

Once Thunderbird 52.7 (or later) is added to the Fedora repository, and I've 
verified the fix to a separate Thunderbird issue, I'll try to communicate with 
Thunderbird people about this issue.  If they suggest submitting a bug, I'll do 
so, and post something here with the bug number.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: GnuCash 3.0

[Rick Stevens]

On 04/06/2018 10:37 AM, D. Hugh Redelmeier wrote:
> | From: SternData 
> 
> | Version 3.0 was released the other day.  Are there plans to update the
> | version in the repos?  I don't see anything in updates-testing.
> 
> I'm looking forward to it because some gnucash bugs were caused by
> using an old version of webkit and 3.0 moves to a newer version.
> 
> I tried to build it myself, under Fedora 27.
> 
> It came with no .spec file.  That's fine: I'd like to keep the old
> version while playing with the new one, so creating and installing a
> .rpm is probably not the way for me to go.  Still, it would be nice to
> have a .spec.  On the other hand, each distro using a .spec would
> probably need a different one -- too bad.
> 
> A README talks about a .spec, but it is quite quite old and not even
> included in the distributed tarball.
> 
> 
> The documentation for building under Fedora is quite wrong.  It seems
> to assume that you've installed a source RPM (for build dependencies)
> and then doesn't use that .spec.  Of course the real build
> dependencies might well be different from those in the old .spec.
> 
> 
> Building under F27 fails because it needs "gwen3.gui-gtk3" but Fedora
> 27 doesn't have such a thing.  I presume that that was added to
> Gwenhyfar after the version in F27.  (A Welsh name for a package
> distributed from a German banking software site.)
> 

Download the source RPM and install it. There will be a .spec file in
the SPECS directory (~/rpmbuild/SPECS/.spec) that you
can borg (assimilate and modify) to build a new RPM.

The documentation you're referring to is old, but not "wrong". It shows
how the spec file and its macros work to build that example code. Having
said that, building RPMs is not a trivial task and understanding how the
.spec file interacts with rpmbuild(8), its defaults and the various
macros specific to Fedora and the architecture you're using can be
very confusing. Once learned, it's a useful skill. It took me a while
to learn how to build RPMs. I've been doing it for years now, but I'd be
lying if I said I'm a pro at it. I know enough to make me very, VERY
dangerous. However, should you decide to give it a whirl and are
successful, I'm sure other GnuCash users would love you!

> Next plan: try gnucash of F28 beta.

That may also work, but with the understanding that it might be
dependent on newer packages available only in F28 and you still may be
unable to use it.
--
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigitalri...@alldigital.com -
- AIM/Skype: therps2ICQ: 22643734Yahoo: origrps2 -
--
-Artificial Intelligence usually beats real stupidity.   -
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Lost touchpad vertical scrolling after upgrading this laptop from F25->F26

[Kevin Cummings]

On 04/06/18 13:02, Rick Stevens wrote:
> On 04/06/2018 09:37 AM, Ian Pilcher wrote:
>> On 04/05/2018 10:54 PM, Kevin Cummings wrote:
>>> I just recently upgraded the F25 on this laptop (Dell Inspiron
>>> 1520) to
>>> F26.  It mostly went well, except that I seem to have lost the ability
>>> to use the vertical scrolling part of my touchpad.  I'm running the MATE
>>> desktop, so the first thing I did was to check the mouse configuration
>>> in System->Preferences->Mouse.  In the touchpad tab, I see that Vertical
>>> Edge Scrolling is indeed checked, and un-checking it and re-checking it
>>> does not bring the functionality back.  I can use two-fingered vertical
>>> scrolling (it also is checked), but I am not an expert, and it seems to
>>> have the side effect of backing up if I move my second finger down into
>>> the horizontal scroll area of the touchpad when trying to do a large
>>> vertical scroll.
>>
>> Fedora switched from using the synaptics touchpad driver to libinput(?)
>> by default.  Unfortunately, the libinput driver doesn't appear to have
>> all the features that the synaptics driver does.
>>
>> At least in Fedora 27, you can uninstall the xorg-x11-drv-libinput
>> package and install xorg-x11-drv-synaptics-legacy.  I'm not sure how
>> long this will last.
> 
> I'm using libinput (/usr/lib64/xorg/modules/input/libinput_drv.so) on a
> Dell Inspiron N7110 laptop running F27 and vertical scroll works just
> peachy for me using two fingers on the touchpad. I see these entries in
> the /var/log/Xorg.0.log file:
> 
> [   109.192] (**) AlpsPS/2 ALPS GlidePoint: Applying InputClass
> "libinput touchpad catchall"
> [   109.192] (II) Using input driver 'libinput' for 'AlpsPS/2 ALPS
> GlidePoint'

Yes, it works for me too, but it is awkward to use.

I just replaced xorg-x11-drv-libinput with xorg-x11-drv-synaptics-legacy
on my F26 system, and all is well with the world again (at least until I
upgrade to F27 later this summer).

> YMMV (your mileage may vary)
> --
> - Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigitalri...@alldigital.com -
> - AIM/Skype: therps2ICQ: 22643734Yahoo: origrps2 -
> --
> -Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine.-
> --
> ___
> users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> 

-- 
Kevin J. Cummings
cummi...@kjchome.homeip.net
cummi...@kjc386.framingham.ma.us
kjch...@icloud.com
Registered Linux User #1232 (http://www.linuxcounter.net/)
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: GnuCash 3.0

[D. Hugh Redelmeier]

| From: SternData 

| Version 3.0 was released the other day.  Are there plans to update the
| version in the repos?  I don't see anything in updates-testing.

I'm looking forward to it because some gnucash bugs were caused by
using an old version of webkit and 3.0 moves to a newer version.

I tried to build it myself, under Fedora 27.

It came with no .spec file.  That's fine: I'd like to keep the old
version while playing with the new one, so creating and installing a
.rpm is probably not the way for me to go.  Still, it would be nice to
have a .spec.  On the other hand, each distro using a .spec would
probably need a different one -- too bad.

A README talks about a .spec, but it is quite quite old and not even
included in the distributed tarball.


The documentation for building under Fedora is quite wrong.  It seems
to assume that you've installed a source RPM (for build dependencies)
and then doesn't use that .spec.  Of course the real build
dependencies might well be different from those in the old .spec.


Building under F27 fails because it needs "gwen3.gui-gtk3" but Fedora
27 doesn't have such a thing.  I presume that that was added to
Gwenhyfar after the version in F27.  (A Welsh name for a package
distributed from a German banking software site.)


Next plan: try gnucash of F28 beta.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Lost touchpad vertical scrolling after upgrading this laptop from F25->F26

[Rick Stevens]

On 04/06/2018 09:37 AM, Ian Pilcher wrote:
> On 04/05/2018 10:54 PM, Kevin Cummings wrote:
>> I just recently upgraded the F25 on this laptop (Dell Inspiron
>> 1520) to
>> F26.  It mostly went well, except that I seem to have lost the ability
>> to use the vertical scrolling part of my touchpad.  I'm running the MATE
>> desktop, so the first thing I did was to check the mouse configuration
>> in System->Preferences->Mouse.  In the touchpad tab, I see that Vertical
>> Edge Scrolling is indeed checked, and un-checking it and re-checking it
>> does not bring the functionality back.  I can use two-fingered vertical
>> scrolling (it also is checked), but I am not an expert, and it seems to
>> have the side effect of backing up if I move my second finger down into
>> the horizontal scroll area of the touchpad when trying to do a large
>> vertical scroll.
> 
> Fedora switched from using the synaptics touchpad driver to libinput(?)
> by default.  Unfortunately, the libinput driver doesn't appear to have
> all the features that the synaptics driver does.
> 
> At least in Fedora 27, you can uninstall the xorg-x11-drv-libinput
> package and install xorg-x11-drv-synaptics-legacy.  I'm not sure how
> long this will last.

I'm using libinput (/usr/lib64/xorg/modules/input/libinput_drv.so) on a
Dell Inspiron N7110 laptop running F27 and vertical scroll works just
peachy for me using two fingers on the touchpad. I see these entries in
the /var/log/Xorg.0.log file:

[   109.192] (**) AlpsPS/2 ALPS GlidePoint: Applying InputClass
"libinput touchpad catchall"
[   109.192] (II) Using input driver 'libinput' for 'AlpsPS/2 ALPS
GlidePoint'

YMMV (your mileage may vary)
--
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigitalri...@alldigital.com -
- AIM/Skype: therps2ICQ: 22643734Yahoo: origrps2 -
--
-Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine.-
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Lost touchpad vertical scrolling after upgrading this laptop from F25->F26

[Ian Pilcher]

On 04/05/2018 10:54 PM, Kevin Cummings wrote:

I just recently upgraded the F25 on this laptop (Dell Inspiron 1520) to
F26.  It mostly went well, except that I seem to have lost the ability
to use the vertical scrolling part of my touchpad.  I'm running the MATE
desktop, so the first thing I did was to check the mouse configuration
in System->Preferences->Mouse.  In the touchpad tab, I see that Vertical
Edge Scrolling is indeed checked, and un-checking it and re-checking it
does not bring the functionality back.  I can use two-fingered vertical
scrolling (it also is checked), but I am not an expert, and it seems to
have the side effect of backing up if I move my second finger down into
the horizontal scroll area of the touchpad when trying to do a large
vertical scroll.


Fedora switched from using the synaptics touchpad driver to libinput(?)
by default.  Unfortunately, the libinput driver doesn't appear to have
all the features that the synaptics driver does.

At least in Fedora 27, you can uninstall the xorg-x11-drv-libinput
package and install xorg-x11-drv-synaptics-legacy.  I'm not sure how
long this will last.

--

Ian Pilcher arequip...@gmail.com
 "I grew up before Mark Zuckerberg invented friendship" 

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: what package would one bugzilla package group issues against?

[Rex Dieter]

Robert P. J. Day wrote:

> 
>   seems to me that some of the current dnf packages related to
> virtualization and containers could be adjusted and cleaned up, but
> i'm not sure against which component one would file a BZ issue
> against.

Not bugzilla, but...
https://pagure.io/fedora-comps

-- Rex

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: can i define my own dnf package groups?

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Fri, 6 Apr 2018, Ed Greshko wrote:

> On 04/06/18 17:55, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> >   related to my earlier query (and i'll have a couple more about
> > package groups and virtualization before i'm done), is there any way
> > to define my own package groups for personal use, other than manually
> > hacking the groups.xml file?
> >
> >   i've scanned the dnf man page, and i don't see any indication that
> > that's possible -- perhaps a dnf plugin somewhere i haven't found?
>
> I may be misunderstanding your terminology?  There is no concept of
> a "dnf" package group.

  sorry, just being redundant and superfluous there.

> package groups are defined within the repodata for each repo.  The file would 
> be
> named something like
> db434ff174a0a9afa983f7721dda9caaa1d9b6e35517e504e002f824faa87002-comps-Everything.x86_64.xml.gz
>
>
> I think the groups.xml file you're talking about hacking would be the one 
> found in,
> for example, /var/cache/dnf/fedora-cba4cf65782eccda/repodata/gen ?
>
> But that file will be regenerated when the metadata expires.

  correct, i was just trying to draw an analogy with what i was trying
to do.

> So, to achieve what I think you want (a new group with your chosen
> packages) I believe you probably would want to create a "local" repo
> with no packages but with your custom group definition.

  ah, quite so, i hadn't thought of that, that seems like the easiest
solution.

rday___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: can i define my own dnf package groups?

[Ed Greshko]

On 04/06/18 17:55, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>   related to my earlier query (and i'll have a couple more about
> package groups and virtualization before i'm done), is there any way
> to define my own package groups for personal use, other than manually
> hacking the groups.xml file?
>
>   i've scanned the dnf man page, and i don't see any indication that
> that's possible -- perhaps a dnf plugin somewhere i haven't found?


I may be misunderstanding your terminology?  There is no concept of a "dnf" 
package
group.

package groups are defined within the repodata for each repo.  The file would be
named something like
db434ff174a0a9afa983f7721dda9caaa1d9b6e35517e504e002f824faa87002-comps-Everything.x86_64.xml.gz


I think the groups.xml file you're talking about hacking would be the one found 
in,
for example, /var/cache/dnf/fedora-cba4cf65782eccda/repodata/gen ?

But that file will be regenerated when the metadata expires.

So, to achieve what I think you want (a new group with your chosen packages) I
believe you probably would want to create a "local" repo with no packages but 
with
your custom group definition.

-- 
Conjecture is just a conclusion based on incomplete information. It isn't a 
fact.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

using "dnf group remove" to *totally* remove all virtualization?

[Robert P. J. Day]

  a couple more dnf/virtualization questions and that should be it.
first, is there any option, when removing a package group with "dnf
group remove", to remove even those packages that were installed
manually? last time i looked (and i believe i just reconfirmed that),
dnf keeps track of which packages were installed manually so that,
when you remove a package group, it will *not* remove packages that
had been installed manually. i'm not aware of any way around that, but
perhaps i missed something in the man page. or maybe there's a dnf
plugin?

  finally, the reason i'm asking about this is that i'm writing a
tutorial on how to get started with virtualization on fedora, and i
wanted to start from the perspective of a system that had absolutely
no virtualization support on it whatever, and show what one could do
as one added one virtualization component at a time; hence, my attempt
at trying to remove the entire Virtualization package group (even
though i don't think that would come close to getting rid of all
virtualization).

  by the way, that last paragraph inspires the question -- does a
regular fedora system *require* even the smallest aspect of
virtualization to run properly? as in, if i had no need for
virtualization support, is it feasible to remove every single
virt-related package from the machine and not break something?

rday
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

can i define my own dnf package groups?

[Robert P. J. Day]

  related to my earlier query (and i'll have a couple more about
package groups and virtualization before i'm done), is there any way
to define my own package groups for personal use, other than manually
hacking the groups.xml file?

  i've scanned the dnf man page, and i don't see any indication that
that's possible -- perhaps a dnf plugin somewhere i haven't found?

rday
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

what package would one bugzilla package group issues against?

[Robert P. J. Day]

  seems to me that some of the current dnf packages related to
virtualization and containers could be adjusted and cleaned up, but
i'm not sure against which component one would file a BZ issue
against.

  first, the Virtualization group:

$ dnf group info virtualization
Last metadata expiration check: 0:18:41 ago on Fri 06 Apr 2018
05:18:28 AM EDT.

Group: Virtualization
 Description: These packages provide a graphical virtualization
environment.
 Mandatory Packages:
   virt-install
 Default Packages:
   libvirt-daemon-config-network
   libvirt-daemon-kvm
   qemu-kvm
   virt-manager
   virt-viewer
 Optional Packages:
   guestfs-browser
   libguestfs-tools
   libvirt-client
   python-libguestfs
   virt-top
$

i'm still perusing that group to convince myself that its contents
really reflects what is required for "virtualization" on fedora --
it's possible that there are newer packages that should be included,
but i'm still poring over it.

  next, the "container-management" package seems awfully
docker-centric:

$ dnf group info container-management
Last metadata expiration check: 0:21:50 ago on Fri 06 Apr 2018
05:18:28 AM EDT.

Group: Container Management
 Description: Tools for managing Linux containers
 Mandatory Packages:
   cockpit-docker
   docker
 Optional Packages:
   docker-registry
   fedora-dockerfiles
$

  more to the point, these days, it should incorporate the "docker-ce"
package, not "docker", yes? (and i vaguely recall from somewhere that
the fedora-dockerfiles package was not terribly up to date.) anyway,
given container technologies other than docker, it seems that that
group name is a bit misleading.

  and if one can have a package group devoted to docker, one imagines
it would be appropriate to have one dedicated to, say, kubernetes as
well, but there isn't one.

  anyway, it just seems like there could be a refactoring of a number
of package groups to make them more consistent and current. thoughts?

rday
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: OT:Question on NVME disk direct access?

[Michael D. Setzer II]

The raw mode does not do resizing, but with ntfsclone you can restore and 
image to a larger partition. At that point, it will still be the same size as 
the 
original partition, but then you run the ntfsclone resize option, and it will 
than 
modify the partition and can make use of the additional space. It could also, 
reduce the size, but have not done that myself.

fsarchiver also can do this, but it is not a program I wrote, but was asked to 
include long ago. It is a file level image, so partitions need to already exist.


On 5 Apr 2018 at 21:41, Todd Chester wrote:

Subject:Re: OT:Question on NVME disk direct access?
To: "Michael D. Setzer II" ,
Community support for Fedora users 

From:   Todd Chester 
Date sent:  Thu, 5 Apr 2018 21:41:23 -0700
Send reply to:  Community support for Fedora users 


> 
> 
> On 04/05/2018 01:15 PM, Michael D. Setzer II wrote:
> > G4L includes ntfsclone for windows paritions, and
> > fsarchiver for that and others, and it can backup data only, and is faster.
> > Also, has options to change size of partitions. Bit level restores exactly 
> > the
> > same size, but can be resized by other utilities afterwards.
> 
> Interesting.  I am going to have to try out G4L.  CloneZilla will
> not do resizing.
> ___
> users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


++
 Michael D. Setzer II - Computer Science Instructor (Retired) 
 mailto:mi...@guam.net
 mailto:msetze...@gmail.com
 Guam - Where America's Day Begins
 G4L Disk Imaging Project maintainer 
 http://sourceforge.net/projects/g4l/
++

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu (Original)
Number of Seti Units Returned:  19,471
Processing time:  32 years, 290 days, 12 hours, 58 minutes
(Total Hours: 287,489)

BOINC@HOME CREDITS

ROSETTA  65145396.630944 | ABC  16613838.513356
SETI109336776.035164 | EINSTEIN141006633.999240
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: OT:Question on NVME disk direct access?

[Michael D. Setzer II]

G4L does a few things. It has UDPcast, where it can transfer an image to 
multiple machines at one time.  Would create image files on one system, and 
the broadcast it to the 19 other machines at one time. Has other little things.

Had students work on documentation file, and the latest is at
https://sourceforge.net/projects/g4l/files/g4l%20documentation/g4l0.53-docu
mentation.pdf/download

That was built using Fedora 24 as a base. THe 0.54 version is now using 
Fedora 27 as the build system.


On 5 Apr 2018 at 21:38, Todd Chester wrote:

Subject:Re: OT:Question on NVME disk direct access?
To: "Michael D. Setzer II" ,
Community support for Fedora users 

From:   Todd Chester 
Date sent:  Thu, 5 Apr 2018 21:38:10 -0700
Send reply to:  Community support for Fedora users 


> 
> 
> On 04/05/2018 01:15 PM, Michael D. Setzer II wrote:
> > I like making image files, and include the date as back of the image name.
> > That way, I can have multiple backups of images, and in the event of
> > something going wrong, can restore older versions on other disk to recover
> > files that might have been deleted that should not have been.
> 
> CloneZilla will do a disk to image, including a network location
> ___
> users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


++
 Michael D. Setzer II - Computer Science Instructor (Retired) 
 mailto:mi...@guam.net
 mailto:msetze...@gmail.com
 Guam - Where America's Day Begins
 G4L Disk Imaging Project maintainer 
 http://sourceforge.net/projects/g4l/
++

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu (Original)
Number of Seti Units Returned:  19,471
Processing time:  32 years, 290 days, 12 hours, 58 minutes
(Total Hours: 287,489)

BOINC@HOME CREDITS

ROSETTA  65145396.630944 | ABC  16613838.513356
SETI109336776.035164 | EINSTEIN141006633.999240
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org