Huawei E1552 no longer connecting?
Hi, I have problems to get the Huawei E1552 UTMS modem working, it used to work with F14-16 (now I'm using F17) I suppose usb_modeswitch is working as it should (see logfile). But I'm not sure about these lines: line 152 - 154: NetworkManager[771]: /sys/devices/virtual/net/ppp0: couldn't determine device driver; ignoring... pppd[16863]: Modem hangup pppd[16863]: Connection terminated. entire loglines regarding the usb + network manager: http://paste.org/54372 (189 lines) What could the problem be? thanks in advance, Christoph -- 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 Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Fedora 14 -> 15 upgrade: libnih problems
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hi, I did an upgrade from F14 to F15 using yum: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upgrading_Fedora_using_yum#Fedora_14_-.3E_Fedora_15 I run it with --skip-broken due to the problems with libnih, and completed the upgrade process (except libnih). Now I'd like to fix the libnih problem before proceeding to upgrade from F15 to F16. I get the following error: yum update Loaded plugins: presto, refresh-packagekit Setting up Update Process Resolving Dependencies - --> Running transaction check - ---> Package libnih.x86_64 0:1.0.2-2.fc14 will be updated - ---> Package libnih.x86_64 0:1.0.2-4.fc15 will be an update - --> Processing Dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_PRIVATE)(64bit) for package: libnih-1.0.2-4.fc15.x86_64 - --> Finished Dependency Resolution Error: Package: libnih-1.0.2-4.fc15.x86_64 (fedora) Requires: libc.so.6(GLIBC_PRIVATE)(64bit) Available: glibc-2.13.90-9.x86_64 (fedora) libc.so.6(GLIBC_PRIVATE)(64bit) Available: glibc-2.14-5.x86_64 (updates) libc.so.6(GLIBC_PRIVATE)(64bit) Installed: glibc-2.14.1-4.i686 (@updates-testing) Not found You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem You could try running: rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest rpm -qa libnih libnih-1.0.2-2.fc14.x86_64 rpm -qa glibc glibc-2.14.1-4.x86_64 glibc-2.14.1-4.i686 How can I fix this problem with libnih? thanks, Christoph similar problem: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731815 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iEYEAREKAAYFAk73SZgACgkQrq+riTAIEg3LFgCgv+S8KXaR9YpB/AY1GbrkYzpK AkoAn2cqldMJB8DDlT+VpODoz96V75Yk =q88d -END 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 Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: flash-plugin not working within SELinux sandbox (f14)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 10/11/2011 11:11 PM, Daniel J Walsh wrote: > chcon -t textrel_shlib_t /usr/lib/flash-plugin/libflashplayer.so thank you, that fixed it! -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iEYEAREKAAYFAk6VvjQACgkQrq+riTAIEg2ERQCfRBY9Q4DM2BauE2M/37pxXRwW c4YAn3XfL4IEKtPDh8WvmU3ILQsRVA+D =MmQK -END 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
flash-plugin not working within SELinux sandbox (f14)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi,
since a recent flash-plugin it is no longer working within a sandbox.
rpm -qa flash-plugin
flash-plugin-11.0.1.152-release.i386
rpm -qa *selinux*
selinux-policy-targeted-3.9.7-44.fc14.noarch
libselinux-utils-2.0.96-6.fc14.1.x86_64
libselinux-2.0.96-6.fc14.1.i686
selinux-policy-3.9.7-44.fc14.noarch
libselinux-python-2.0.96-6.fc14.1.x86_64
libselinux-2.0.96-6.fc14.1.x86_64
I tried restorecon but it didn't fix the problem.
I turned off the dontaudit rules as described by Dan Walsh at a previous
similar thread:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/2010-August/380366.html
I see the following AVCs:
type=AVC msg=audit(1318366350.121:782): avc: denied { execmod } for
pid=11212 comm="npviewer.bin"
path="/usr/lib/flash-plugin/libflashplayer.so" dev=dm-1 ino=4980766
scontext=unconfined_u:unconfined_r:sandbox_web_client_t:s0:c140,c1007
tcontext=system_u:object_r:lib_t:s0 tclass=file
type=AVC msg=audit(1318366350.122:783): avc: denied { read } for
pid=11120 comm="firefox" name="nswrapper_64_64.libflashplayer.so"
dev=dm-1 ino=4720059
scontext=unconfined_u:unconfined_r:sandbox_web_client_t:s0:c140,c1007
tcontext=unconfined_u:object_r:nsplugin_rw_t:s0:c185,c254 tclass=file
type=AVC msg=audit(1318366350.122:784): avc: denied { read } for
pid=11120 comm="firefox" name="nswrapper_64_64.libflashplayer.so"
dev=dm-1 ino=4720059
scontext=unconfined_u:unconfined_r:sandbox_web_client_t:s0:c140,c1007
tcontext=unconfined_u:object_r:nsplugin_rw_t:s0:c185,c254 tclass=file
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
iEYEAREKAAYFAk6Ur0MACgkQrq+riTAIEg29rQCgn4JsW9ddTr/yFN2ROGnaLWyM
8rQAoIpeuntpo2RjesoN8Omnw1rxGTbx
=IWsP
-END 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: /var/cache/abrt-di
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 06/02/2011 11:23 PM, Ranjan Maitra wrote: > Hi, > > Looking at my files and diskspace, I note the following: > > $ sudo du -sm /var/cache/* > 1961 /var/cache/abrt-di > 1 /var/cache/cups > 1 /var/cache/fontconfig > 1 /var/cache/foomatic > 1 /var/cache/hald > 1 /var/cache/jwhois > 1 /var/cache/ldconfig > 3 /var/cache/man > 1 /var/cache/mash > 1 /var/cache/PackageKit > 217 /var/cache/yum > > Googling on how to reduce this abrt-di beast, I came up with the > solution that you should delete the reports in the abrt GUI tool. But > these are all deleted for me, and I think there must be a better way to > remove this cache? Any suggestions on how to do this cleanly? Hi Ranjan, did you eventually figure out how to solve your problem? My /var/cache/abrt-di uses about 4 GB and I would also like to reduce its size. thanks, Christoph -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iEYEAREKAAYFAk6PQ18ACgkQrq+riTAIEg1r/wCfUdcq2LtIvqhs2yd80nQxfRwB CdcAoIDsdHBeD0SbniEYsaIcLjQoFVYo =WcVm -END 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: Update error (Test Transaction): glibc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 09/23/2011 02:47 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote: > Oh no, you've messed up your installation further. ;) I almost thought so. Since it is a quite new VM I'll just setup a new one instead of trying to fix this. Thank you for your time! -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iEYEAREKAAYFAk58hiUACgkQrq+riTAIEg1BoQCfbTM0G/SIkMajP+xwzk0CDHN3 Mi8AnilGCCg0LuL1wO0WC5Zu5/wtwx0a =1QC3 -END 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: Update error (Test Transaction): glibc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 09/23/2011 11:51 AM, Christoph A. wrote: > On 09/22/2011 06:22 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote: >> How have you managed to install those duplicates? >> Perhaps you've interrupted an update? > > that might be the case but I can't confirm it for sure. > >> Is there a message about >> running yum-complete-transaction? > > It doesn't suggest to run y-c-t > >> Try to erase the -2 version of glibc.x86_64: >> rpm --justdb -e --noscripts glibc-2.13-2.x86_64 > > rpm --justdb -e --noscripts glibc-2.13-2.x86_64 > error: Failed dependencies: > glibc = 2.13-2 is needed by (installed) glibc-common-2.13-2.x86_64 > glibc = 2.13-2 is needed by (installed) glibc-headers-2.13-2.x86_64 > glibc = 2.13-2 is needed by (installed) glibc-devel-2.13-2.x86_64 > > rpm --justdb -e --noscripts glibc-2.13-1.x86_64 rpm -qa glibc glibc-2.13-1.i686 glibc-2.13-2.x86_64 yum update --skip-broken Loaded plugins: langpacks, presto, refresh-packagekit Adding en_US to language list Setting up Update Process Resolving Dependencies - --> Running transaction check - --> Processing Dependency: glibc = 2.13-1 for package: glibc-headers-2.13-1.x86_64 - --> Processing Dependency: glibc = 2.13-1 for package: glibc-common-2.13-1.x86_64 - --> Processing Dependency: glibc = 2.13-1 for package: glibc-devel-2.13-1.x86_64 - ---> Package glibc.i686 0:2.13-2 set to be updated - --> Finished Dependency Resolution Packages skipped because of dependency problems: glibc-2.13-2.i686 from updates -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iEYEAREKAAYFAk58WAoACgkQrq+riTAIEg1YIwCgzV9jJB+YBUIPMsmTfoXv8UaE JyIAoI3wZwMegFkAjMWstDjWcbPE8A7x =Vkmy -END 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: Update error (Test Transaction): glibc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 09/22/2011 06:22 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote: > How have you managed to install those duplicates? > Perhaps you've interrupted an update? that might be the case but I can't confirm it for sure. > Is there a message about > running yum-complete-transaction? It doesn't suggest to run y-c-t > Try to erase the -2 version of glibc.x86_64: > rpm --justdb -e --noscripts glibc-2.13-2.x86_64 rpm --justdb -e --noscripts glibc-2.13-2.x86_64 error: Failed dependencies: glibc = 2.13-2 is needed by (installed) glibc-common-2.13-2.x86_64 glibc = 2.13-2 is needed by (installed) glibc-headers-2.13-2.x86_64 glibc = 2.13-2 is needed by (installed) glibc-devel-2.13-2.x86_64 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iEYEAREKAAYFAk58VroACgkQrq+riTAIEg0eXgCgm72TzJwcOpR/2ZyqbmYQEIA+ JtUAmwf4G7yIA79CMvmpbiFkPVF45pzy =9GtJ -END 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: How to permanently delete root CAs from mozilla products?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 09/17/2011 08:23 PM, Christoph A. wrote: > I'll probably make a feature request to add three columns (websites, > user, software) to the certificate manager to indicate (and modify) the > trust flags for a given CA. FYI: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=688427 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iEYEAREKAAYFAk57MtEACgkQrq+riTAIEg3GhACgkv/T0LKf8df3hCAh5Z3KT/wT Ig0An35PjnRfnommfFcI0ngEC/jJ6LWI =5Wvt -END 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
Update error (Test Transaction): glibc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hi, when updating I get the following error message: Test Transaction Errors: file /usr/share/doc/glibc-2.13/NEWS from install of glibc-2.13-2.i686 conflicts with file from package glibc-2.13-1.x86_64 rpm -qa glibc glibc-2.13-1.i686 glibc-2.13-1.x86_64 glibc-2.13-2.x86_64 How can this be fixed? thanks, Christoph -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iEYEAREKAAYFAk57K5sACgkQrq+riTAIEg1gnQCfaLmQwALV948SZe0EGd23YOBm UzsAn3AWoCvAxAkhNUznbCIs04CEd59p =VHhg -END 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: How to permanently delete root CAs from mozilla products?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 09/19/2011 03:55 PM, Robert Marcano wrote: > On 09/17/2011 06:58 AM, Christoph A. wrote: >> >> ... > > >> By "non-persistent" I mean the following: >> - - I remove a root CA in the "Authorities" tab of mozilla's "certificate >> manager" by hitting the delete button >> - - I close the certificate manager >> - - I reopen the certificate manager >> - - The - previously removed - root ca is again there. >> > > When you remove a CA that is bundled with Firefox/Thunderbird, It > disappear from the list on the current session, after you restart the > application the CA still appear, if you press the "Edit Trust" button, > you will see the CA is not trusted for anything. So Firefox is not able > to remove the CA if it is bundled, but it remove all trust you have on > it, so it will not be valid for anything You didn't read my mail till the end, did you? -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iEYEAREKAAYFAk53tZ8ACgkQrq+riTAIEg1VIwCgiYu9wEkbreeiZGEC+m0fcKLt dekAoNgBWvgL21DE4KYmpUgmr8/79ypS =th8A -END 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: How to permanently delete root CAs from mozilla products?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 09/17/2011 06:42 PM, Craig White wrote: > that may have been the Macintosh that required 2 'deletes' to remove, I > forget. > > Again though, probably better to leave them in place and marked > 'untrusted' anyway just to ensure that they don't come back again with > the next FF/TB update. I agree. I'll probably make a feature request to add three columns (websites, user, software) to the certificate manager to indicate (and modify) the trust flags for a given CA. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iEYEAREKAAYFAk505YoACgkQrq+riTAIEg1WFACZARMznrTz/9Z/qEvBgBjzHJUm zqAAni2gEGzN6Bm3g/JXaKFGYGROUawA =bqcm -END 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: How to permanently delete root CAs from mozilla products?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 09/17/2011 01:36 PM, Craig White wrote: > I remember having to delete a certificate 2 times to actually physically > remove them - the first time sets it to untrusted and the second one > finally purges it but I think from a safe point of view, it is probably > better to only delete it 1 time to set it to non-trusted and leave it > there so there is no ambiguity - it is not to be trusted. I wasn't able to reproduce this. I removed them twice and they were still there. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iEYEAREKAAYFAk50tvgACgkQrq+riTAIEg3W5ACfYNJ77YmNnm53+jvlLaLwG9IH NFgAoOkpiiQRPvQ1I72IzRTZtgya/Kxn =6C6I -END 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
How to permanently delete root CAs from mozilla products?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 > I believe that as part of your login/usage of Firefox & Thunderbird, a > profile is created in ~/.mozilla (FF) and ~/.thunderbird (TB) and within > each of your profiles is a file cert8.db file which is a personalized > version of the certificate store relevant only to your profile. This is > what you are maintaining when you 'manage' certificates within FF/TB > Security settings. I thought so too till I noticed that my modifications in mozilla's "certificate manager" are non-persistent, but you are probably right. By "non-persistent" I mean the following: - - I remove a root CA in the "Authorities" tab of mozilla's "certificate manager" by hitting the delete button - - I close the certificate manager - - I reopen the certificate manager - - The - previously removed - root ca is again there. In general this procedure is described here: https://support.mozilla.com/en-US/kb/deleting-diginotar-ca-cert (but I'm doing it with other root CAs) Why are modifications to mozilla's root certificate list non-persistent? How do I permanently delete a root CA from the trusted list? Update: Now while writing this email and doing some tests I realized that the CA is still listed but the trust flag is removed (you can see it if you click "Edit..."). The problem with this is: I can't easily distinguish which CAs are trusted and which are not (I have to click "Edit..." on every CA to see the trust settings). It would be much easier to delete all but a few of them (according to my policy and needs). Is that possible? thanks, Christoph -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iEYEAREKAAYFAk50hFEACgkQrq+riTAIEg0lBgCdGlsjR/gyLRNcss3crvIpBVAC 7tEAnAl326PZ+DxJcNC9+Xdy10vZQt+u =kjl4 -END 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
Manually editing trusted root CA list in Thunderbird and Firefox
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hi, I'd like to remove certain root certificates from my trusted list in Firefox but any changes I make are not permanent. Is there a way to have per-user trusted root lists instead of a system wide list? I suppose manual changes are not effective because the list is managed via the package ca-certificates. I'd even like to go so far to have separate root ca lists for Firefox and Thunderbird because for Thunderbird I only need a handful of CAs. thanks, Christoph -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iEYEAREKAAYFAk50Q6YACgkQrq+riTAIEg3oMACgwFs0Z3Gw05hyrLuetbfCmfMt vxgAn3K5y4pw1pArDEnpo50SdU/jwGyK =qthX -END 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: Firefox 3.6.18 (CVE-2011-0083, CVE-2011-0085, CVE-2011-2363)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xulrunner-1.9.2.18-1.fc14,firefox-3.6.18-1.fc14,mozvoikko-1.0-22.fc14.1,perl-Gtk2-MozEmbed-0.08-6.fc14.27,gnome-web-photo-0.9-21.fc14.1,galeon-2.0.7-41.fc14.1,gnome-python2-extras-2.25.3-31.fc14.1,thunderbird-3.1.11-1.fc14 give the update some karma points if you are running it without problems -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iEYEAREKAAYFAk4Fx7gACgkQrq+riTAIEg3QIQCgloBxfW5sv+sqg1CVAJ5Uu5ww LN8AnjacjqRFpo6BEgEiHa0gfEBpU4dC =eYdm -END 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: Firefox 3.6.18 (CVE-2011-0083, CVE-2011-0085, CVE-2011-2363)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Christoph A. wrote: > f15 (firefox 4) is not affected. f15 is affected via Thunderbird. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=249666 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iEYEAREKAAYFAk4A5qgACgkQrq+riTAIEg16eACgmta8XcLWhCTFqzvJy+IaCs9L npsAoOVrf3T8hLJS6c7O2b0K8oC52H1p =d5rL -END 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
Firefox 3.6.18 (CVE-2011-0083, CVE-2011-0085, CVE-2011-2363)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 I hope to see Firefox 3.6.18 soon in f13/f14 f15 (firefox 4) is not affected. https://www.mozilla.org/security/announce/2011/mfsa2011-23.html https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=CVE-2011-0083 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/search/firefox http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=249629 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=249616 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iEYEAREKAAYFAk4A0YMACgkQrq+riTAIEg2HvwCgqjfGIYIuVnJDdY58c7m04SV7 +5YAn2ZTkN90XOTRSYtBbUMMh9l9WzCT =2Bov -END 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: outdated Tor version in Fedora (missing security fixes)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 06/10/2011 06:28 PM, Fennix wrote: > As to the SELinux policy questions...I am not sure. I have always compiled > and the TOR package has always worked without any SELinux complaints so for > this question I have never looked into this. the output of the following command would provide the answer to the tor_t question: ps auxZ|grep /tor (executed on the host running the self compiled Tor) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iEYEAREKAAYFAk3yt0MACgkQrq+riTAIEg0kHgCff5nikRgyKz9cTEydUODgJhpw 9jEAnA0FhTEzFE5bFhJozWVR+1ChAgOs =v1wr -END 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: outdated Tor version in Fedora (missing security fixes)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 06/07/2011 04:06 PM, Fennix wrote: > Umm, you could just download the source file and compile yourself... Yes, *I* could, but if Fedora ships a vulnerable package this affects a lot more people then just me. Compiling is always a possibility but the last one I would choose. F14 contains latest stable (0.2.1.30) now and in future I (and hopefully others) will give some karma to Enricos packages :) > I always compile the latest alpha/beta and the current is 0.2.2.27-beta > which is working perfectly well for me. Actually it is 0.2.2.28-beta https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/2011-June/020596.html You don't have to compile, you can use unofficial repos if you want Tor 0.2.2.x. http://deb.torproject.org/torproject.org/rpm/fc14-experimental/ (packages usually take some time after the a new Tor version was released) I don't use the unofficial packages because I don't know if they fit with the SELinux policy. Does your self compiled tor daemon run in tor_t? -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iEYEAREKAAYFAk3xDpYACgkQrq+riTAIEg1z8QCgr003z4iMy1wWhw9Nsy2br0Rq 3jgAoL51/5scy+ujPPGGwLRkorp32iaf =iZvi -END 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: outdated Tor version in Fedora (missing security fixes)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 06/07/2011 02:43 PM, Christoph A. wrote: > On 06/07/2011 06:53 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> I don't. Till the point it is EOL'ed, security updates are the only >> sort of the updates I would still want to definitely see pushed. > > You are right. > > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=234271 Vincent Danen 2011-05-30 12:45:16 EDT "No need to fix this in F13 at this point." https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=705193 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iEYEAREKAAYFAk3uLA4ACgkQrq+riTAIEg0m4QCdEzRPRSPNS62RSO3FnHFIW7Rz TfIAniqN09xNaIuLhEHH9Xb/UyIB8sNW =QIrt -END 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: outdated Tor version in Fedora (missing security fixes)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 06/07/2011 06:53 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > I don't. Till the point it is EOL'ed, security updates are the only > sort of the updates I would still want to definitely see pushed. You are right. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=234271 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iEYEAREKAAYFAk3uHQUACgkQrq+riTAIEg3UUQCfTiDqcHdgZjPOwnuMlUv8xdmf xRUAnjOMH22HKPqMWh/RwWp7eskoNW0A =+iBb -END 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: outdated Tor version in Fedora (missing security fixes)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 06/04/2011 11:20 AM, Enrico Scholz wrote: > for the other versions: there are simply no users who test the updates. > E.g. 0.2.1.29 was pushed to testing at 2011-01-22 and nobody tested it > for f13. According to bodhi you can push it to stable even if it didn't get enough karma points. F13: bodhi - 2011-01-29 03:52:41 This update has reached 7 days in testing and can be pushed to stable now if the maintainer wishes https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/tor-0.2.1.29-1300.fc13?_csrf_token=3865daac177ba3c8c416208224e40724bdf2fa6a -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iEYEAREKAAYFAk3uHP0ACgkQrq+riTAIEg3R2gCfYkDo03zNwe7QozfeA0OV49SC jyoAn0bgRsWk/MRWpowQ4HEo2/PR60nO =wPeq -END 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: outdated Tor version in Fedora (missing security fixes)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 06/05/2011 01:05 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Link to f13 update? I think it is ok if the package for f13 is not updated anymore because f13 will reach EOL soon. >> > Footnotes: >> > [1] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/tor-0.2.1.30-1400.fc14 > Tested and this is now pushed to stable repo. Status: pending Pushed: False seams to take a while... -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iEYEAREKAAYFAk3tSHgACgkQrq+riTAIEg0Y7QCfWAF7JlC5QVwPZeLCK+LsTcoF QBgAn2yo8AmDE98+94nzycwN6+qQZ75l =QdbX -END 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: outdated Tor version in Fedora (missing security fixes)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 06/04/2011 11:20 AM, Enrico Scholz wrote: > "Christoph A." writes: > >> I suppose you are the maintainer of the tor package in Fedora. >> I'm wondering why Fedora (13,14,15) currently doesn't contain the latest >> stable Tor version 0.2.1.30 > > f15 contains 0.2.1.30 > > for the other versions: there are simply no users who test the updates. > E.g. 0.2.1.29 was pushed to testing at 2011-01-22 and nobody tested it > for f13. Thanks for the clarification. > I just added an update[1] for fedora 14; it needs one positive karma to > get pushed to stable. > [1] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/tor-0.2.1.30-1400.fc14 Great, I'll test it as soon as I get it via the testing repo. thanks, Christoph -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iEYEAREKAAYFAk3qGdMACgkQrq+riTAIEg0+OQCcC9srfFkfVMFkgbqjz7rVhHTl fX0AoIEeIw7aDRN3OvGcxq4CQmgUKeTA =UccM -END 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
outdated Tor version in Fedora (missing security fixes)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hi Enrico, I suppose you are the maintainer of the tor package in Fedora. I'm wondering why Fedora (13,14,15) currently doesn't contain the latest stable Tor version 0.2.1.30 which was released on 2011-02-23 and contains various security fixes (since 0.2.1.28). [1] The build was already done months ago: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=234269 Fedora currently contains 0.2.1.28 (from 2010-12-17). Do you know the reason for this? thanks, Christoph [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=CVE-2011-0427 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=705192 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iEYEAREKAAYFAk3paeAACgkQrq+riTAIEg2SigCgnsf1wPc3iDLzT7IbNS5l7NLD xKsAnRou+X2oAWDh5axcDjt6TWjW0m2L =hxYq -END 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: assertion `G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed? - pygtk2 broken
On 04/19/2011 03:21 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote: > And if you upgrade again, the problem is reproducible again? Then it would > be a bug. Yes, if reinstalling pygtk2-2.17.0-8 the problems reappear. I tried that out - involuntary - broken packages got reinstalled because of my auto updater: Apr 19 13:50:13 yum[29344]: Updated: pygtk2-2.17.0-8.fc13.x86_64 Apr 19 13:50:14 yum[29344]: Updated: pygtk2-libglade-2.17.0-8.fc13.x86_64 I did a downgrade again. > Else the downgrade just replaced damaged RPM package contents, > which you could have detected with an integrity check of your RPM db. I did an rpm -V on these packages. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=697696 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital 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: assertion `G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed? - pygtk2 broken
On 04/19/2011 01:24 AM, Christoph A. wrote: > Any hints? FYI: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pygtk2-2.17.0-9.fc13?_csrf_token=67dbea4d02cade7e489bc62d18a0d94304553dd5 yum downgrade pygtk2 pygtk2-libglade fixed. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital 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
assertion `G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed?
Hi,
it seams that something got broken on my f13 system.
Several applications crash when trying to start:
$ system-config-services
/usr/bin/system-config-services:149: Warning: g_object_unref: assertion
`G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed
**{attrname: column})
/usr/bin/system-config-services:498: Warning: g_object_unref: assertion
`G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed
self.servicesTreeView = GUIServicesTreeView()
Segmentation fault (core dumped)
$ abrt-gui
/usr/share/abrt/CCMainWindow.py:454: Warning: g_object_get_qdata:
assertion `G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed
cc = MainWindow(daemon)
/usr/share/abrt/CCMainWindow.py:454: Warning: g_object_set_qdata_full:
assertion `G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed
cc = MainWindow(daemon)
/usr/share/abrt/CCMainWindow.py:454: Warning: g_object_unref: assertion
`G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed
cc = MainWindow(daemon)
Segmentation fault (core dumped)
...and probably others to.
I suspected that the filesystem might have some issues.. but a fsck
didn't report any problems.
Any hints?
thanks!
Christoph
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital 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
npviewer.bin segfault: libflashplayer.so
Hi, I'm seeing some of these entries in my /var/log/messages log file: kernel: npviewer.bin[2940]: segfault at f73e304c ip 01192ee7 sp ffb197e0 error 4 in libflashplayer.so[df3000+b2e000] abrt[3031]: saved core dump of pid 2940 (/usr/lib/nspluginwrapper/npviewer.bin) to /var/spool/abrt/ccpp-1292331679-2940.new/coredump (38649856 bytes) abrtd: Directory 'ccpp-1292331679-2940' creation detected abrtd: Blacklisted package 'nspluginwrapper' abrtd: Corrupted or bad crash /var/spool/abrt/ccpp-1292331679-2940 (res:2), deleting I'm running the latest flashplugin: flash-plugin-10.1.102.65-release.i386 Has someone seen similar behaviour? I'm wondering why abrtd is deleting the core dump file? (Why is it 'corrupted or bad'?) kind regards, Christoph signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital 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: Firefox at 3.6.7 that has known security bugs, all the while 3 newer versions where released in 54 days.
On 09/20/2010 02:36 PM, Bram_Gro wrote: >> you need to signup at bugzilla.redhat.com and submit a bug there. >> > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=635659 (priority should have > been urgent). Thank you for filing this bugreport. I was also asking for an update a week ago: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/2010-September/382706.html regarding the SSL problem you experienced: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/2010-September/382411.html kind regards, Christoph signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital 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: F13: no firefox 3.6.9 update?
On 09/13/2010 03:21 PM, Christoph A. wrote: > What blocks the update of firefox in fedora 13? > (nss problems seam to be resolved?) > > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=194231 > Has it something to do with this? http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9185398/Mozilla_halts_Firefox_security_updates https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=594699 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital 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
F13: no firefox 3.6.9 update?
What blocks the update of firefox in fedora 13? (nss problems seam to be resolved?) http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=194231 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital 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: [F13] update failure: nss*
On 09/09/2010 12:17 AM, Todd Zullinger wrote: > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nss-3.12.7-4.fc13,nss-util-3.12.7-2.fc13,nss-softokn-3.12.7-3.fc13,nspr-4.8.6-1.fc13?_csrf_token=3804d3987eb4e49cb08ac9af125e9b6bbcb41783 > > No idea why the nss packagers seem to cause this sort of problem so > regularly. Thankfully, it's not some core security package where such > a lack of attention to detail would be problematic. :/ Thank you, now I understand why there is no firefox 3.6.9 in fedora 13 yet. Christoph signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital 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
[F13] update failure: nss*
Since today the automatic update process fails with the following notice: could not do simulate: nss-softokn-3.12.7-3.fc13.x86_64 requires nss-util >= 3.12.7 nss-tools-3.12.7-3.fc13.x86_64 requires libnssutil3.so(NSSUTIL_3.12.7)(64bit) nss-softokn-3.12.7-3.fc13.i686 requires nss-util >= 3.12.7 nss-3.12.7-3.fc13.i686 requires nss-util >= 3.12.7 nss-3.12.7-3.fc13.x86_64 requires nss-util >= 3.12.7 : Success - empty transaction someone else experiencing similar problems? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital 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: libselinux 2.0.94-2 testing [solved]
On 09/07/2010 11:43 PM, JD wrote: > Why are you mixing 32 bit and 64 bit when you OS is 64 bit?? I'm using a 64bit system and downloaded the 64bit version, afterwords I saw that there was a i686 version installed... but now everything is fine as the packages was pushed to the updates-testing repo. kind regards, Christoph signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital 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: https://koji.fedoraproject.org -> invalid certificate
btw: it would be great if http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org could be reachable via https too signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital 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
libselinux 2.0.94-2 testing
I just wanted to try the fix for https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630592 and downloaded the rpm manually http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/packages/libselinux/2.0.94/2.fc13/x86_64/libselinux-2.0.94-2.fc13.x86_64.rpm installed via: yum --nogpgcheck install I guess this was the wrong and I would need: libselinux-2.0.94-2.fc13.i686.rpm but I'm unable to remove libselinux-2.0.94-2.fc13.x86_64.rpm yum remove libselinux-2.0.94-2.fc13 [..] [..] You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem ** Found 1 pre-existing rpmdb problem(s), 'yum check' output follows: libselinux-2.0.94-2.fc13.x86_64 is a duplicate with libselinux-2.0.90-5.fc13.i686 and according to rpm it is not even installed: rpm -e libselinux-2.0.94-2.fc13.x86_64.rpm error: package libselinux-2.0.94-2.fc13.x86_64.rpm is not installed I would like to test the fix, how should I proceed? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital 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
https://koji.fedoraproject.org -> invalid certificate
koji uses a certificate that is signed by 'Fedora Project CA' which is not installed by default. Fedora owns a wildcard certificate: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/ -> *.fedoraproject.org why is this not used on koji too? kind regards, Christoph signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital 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: yum repository synchronization time?
On 08/24/2010 07:49 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote: > When pushed into a repo, it will either be tagged with > "dist-*-updates-testing" or "dist-*-updates". Candidates are only > available in koji (and not even in the koji buildroot repos, depending > on what dist is built for). This http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=192358 is taged as dist-f13-updates-testing and not yet in a repo: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/kernel-2.6.34.6-47.fc13 status: pending pushed: false so I asume only 'dist-*-updates' are pushed to a repo? date && repoquery -i kernel Sat Aug 28 14:35:17 CEST 2010 Name: kernel Version : 2.6.33.8 Release : 149.fc13 Architecture: x86_64 Size: 108243345 Packager: Fedora Project Group : System Environment/Kernel URL : http://www.kernel.org/ Repository : updates Summary : The Linux kernel signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital 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
yum repository synchronization time?
Hi, sometimes I'm looking for new package versions within the yum repositories because they should fix security issues. Therefore I go to http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packages and search for e.g. 'kernel' then I see there is already a new kernel build 2.6.34.4: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=190874 But it is not yet available via yum: repoquery -i kernel Name: kernel Version : 2.6.33.8 Release : 149.fc13 Architecture: x86_64 Size: 108243345 Packager: Fedora Project Group : System Environment/Kernel URL : http://www.kernel.org/ Repository : updates-testing Summary : The Linux kernel Shouldn't this package (kernel-2.6.34.4-42.fc13.x86_64.rpm) be available already? It has the tag 'dist-f13-updates-candidate', is this equivalent to the updates-testing repository? (I also have the updates-testing repo enabled.) Sometimes I download the rpm files manually but on the long run that isn't very practical either (dependencies..). kind regards, Christoph signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital 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: flash-plugin-10.1.82.76 not working within SELinux sandbox
On 08/12/2010 06:01 PM, Daniel J Walsh wrote: > Not sure what is causing the problem, but I would try to run restorecon > on the directory > > restorecon -R -v /usr/lib64 /usr/lib restorecon -R -v /usr/lib64 /usr/lib restorecon reset /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins-wrapped/nswrapper_64_64.libflashplayer.so context unconfined_u:object_r:nsplugin_rw_t:s0:c501,c1021->system_u:object_r:nsplugin_rw_t:s0 It looks like, that was the fix.. thank you, Christoph signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital 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: flash-plugin-10.1.82.76 not working within SELinux sandbox
On 08/11/2010 03:36 PM, Daniel J Walsh wrote: > On 08/11/2010 08:41 AM, Christoph A. wrote: >> Hi, > >> since the flash-plugin update (v10.1.82.76) yesterday, it is not working >> anymore within a SELinux sandbox. >> If firefox is not running within a sandbox flash works fine. > >> Has anyone experienced the same issue and found the underlying problem? > >> kind regards, >> Christoph > > > What AVC are you seeing? Now I'm quite sure that SELinux has something todo with the issue. If I change to permissive mode (setenforce 0) flash within the sandbox works, but there are no new entries in the audit.log file..? Any hints to find the cause if the problem? kind regards, Christoph signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital 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: flash-plugin-10.1.82.76 not working within SELinux sandbox
On 08/12/2010 03:07 PM, n...@li.nux.ro wrote: > Christoph A. writes: > >> On 08/12/2010 02:43 AM, Wolfgang S. Rupprecht wrote: >>> >>> "Christoph A." writes: >>>> It seams that this didn't fix it entirely - in some cases it doesn't >>>> work again... >>>> I'll have to dig deeper.. >>> >>> Try just copying it. If the mozilla does a chroot the symlink may be >>> outside of what it can access. >> >> I copied it to >> /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins >> and >> /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins >> but it didn't resolve the problem. >> >> The interesting thing is, that it still works without the sandbox if I >> remove the plugin from both locations.. Sorry, I have to revise that, I didn't restart firefox after removing it. It didn't work after restarting firefox (= expected behavior). So the right location is /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins but somehow firefox running in a sandbox doesn't get that..? Kind regards, Christoph signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital 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: F13 - flash-plugin-10.1.82.76 not working AT ALL
On 08/12/2010 06:03 AM, Joe Klemmer wrote: > Upon upgrading to flash-plugin-10.1.82.76 flash movies no longer play. > I get either nothing or a black box. Regular flash components don't > work either. > > I know we're using flash at our own risk but, until everything moves to > whateverthenextlatestandgreatest will be, we're stuck with it. If I > remember right this happened before and I fixed it by going back to the > version 9 plugin. Now I have to go hunt the darn thing down again. > > This message is more about blowing off steam but if someone does know > how to get the 10.1 plugin to work it would be a nice bit of news. Hi Joe, you might want to have a look at my thread "flash-plugin-10.1.82.76 not working within SELinux sandbox" although you do not have problems relating SELinux. If you have a 64bit system, the following command may help: cp /usr/lib/flash-plugin/libflashplayer.so /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins let me know if that fixed the issue for you. kind regards, Christoph signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital 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: flash-plugin-10.1.82.76 not working within SELinux sandbox
On 08/12/2010 02:43 AM, Wolfgang S. Rupprecht wrote: > > "Christoph A." writes: >> It seams that this didn't fix it entirely - in some cases it doesn't >> work again... >> I'll have to dig deeper.. > > Try just copying it. If the mozilla does a chroot the symlink may be > outside of what it can access. I copied it to /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins and /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins but it didn't resolve the problem. The interesting thing is, that it still works without the sandbox if I remove the plugin from both locations.. kind regards, Christoph signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital 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: flash-plugin-10.1.82.76 not working within SELinux sandbox
On 08/11/2010 10:03 PM, Christoph A. wrote: > On 08/11/2010 09:56 PM, Wolfgang S. Rupprecht wrote: >> >> "Christoph A." writes: >>> If I open about:plugins in a sandboxed firefox flash does not even show up. >>> First I thought that flash is installed locally in ~/.mozilla/plugins >>> but that was not the case. That folder is empty. >>> Maybe there is just a missing link somewhere? >> ... >>> flash-plugin /usr/lib/flash-plugin/libflashplayer.so >> >> Are you sure that mozilla looks there? Here is where I install it on a >> 64-bit system. >> /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins/libflashplayer.so > > cd /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins > ln -s /usr/lib/flash-plugin/libflashplayer.so . > > fixed it. It seams that this didn't fix it entirely - in some cases it doesn't work again... I'll have to dig deeper.. Kind regards, Christoph signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital 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: flash-plugin-10.1.82.76 not working within SELinux sandbox
On 08/11/2010 09:56 PM, Wolfgang S. Rupprecht wrote: > > "Christoph A." writes: >> If I open about:plugins in a sandboxed firefox flash does not even show up. >> First I thought that flash is installed locally in ~/.mozilla/plugins >> but that was not the case. That folder is empty. >> Maybe there is just a missing link somewhere? > ... >> flash-plugin /usr/lib/flash-plugin/libflashplayer.so > > Are you sure that mozilla looks there? Here is where I install it on a > 64-bit system. > /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins/libflashplayer.so cd /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugins ln -s /usr/lib/flash-plugin/libflashplayer.so . fixed it. Thank you. The remaining question would be: Why was it working out of the sandbox without problems..? kind regards, Christoph signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital 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: flash-plugin-10.1.82.76 not working within SELinux sandbox
On 08/11/2010 03:36 PM, Daniel J Walsh wrote: > On 08/11/2010 08:41 AM, Christoph A. wrote: >> Hi, > >> since the flash-plugin update (v10.1.82.76) yesterday, it is not working >> anymore within a SELinux sandbox. >> If firefox is not running within a sandbox flash works fine. > >> Has anyone experienced the same issue and found the underlying problem? > >> kind regards, >> Christoph > > > What AVC are you seeing? There are no AVCs in /var/log/audit/audit.log while trying to access a flash site within a sandbox. Firefox just tells me that I need to install flash. If I open about:plugins in a sandboxed firefox flash does not even show up. First I thought that flash is installed locally in ~/.mozilla/plugins but that was not the case. That folder is empty. Maybe there is just a missing link somewhere? rpm -q --filesbypkg flash-plugin flash-plugin /usr/lib/flash-plugin flash-plugin /usr/lib/flash-plugin/LICENSE flash-plugin /usr/lib/flash-plugin/README flash-plugin /usr/lib/flash-plugin/homecleanup flash-plugin /usr/lib/flash-plugin/libflashplayer.so flash-plugin /usr/lib/flash-plugin/setup flash-plugin /usr/share/doc/flash-plugin-10.1.82.76 flash-plugin /usr/share/doc/flash-plugin-10.1.82.76/readme.txt Kind regards, Christoph signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital 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
flash-plugin-10.1.82.76 not working within SELinux sandbox
Hi, since the flash-plugin update (v10.1.82.76) yesterday, it is not working anymore within a SELinux sandbox. If firefox is not running within a sandbox flash works fine. Has anyone experienced the same issue and found the underlying problem? kind regards, Christoph signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital 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: Resizing virtual display on virtual machine
On 06/04/2010 07:43 PM, Dale J. Chatham wrote: > Using virtual machine manager > fedora core 13 vm > > > How do I change the display resolution in the virtual machine? 1024x768 > seems to be all I can get. > > I've scoured every way I can think of, Fedora docs, VMM docs, KVM, etc. > > TIA, > > Dale Hi, I was also looking for an answer to this question yesterday and got a hint: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/2010-June/374160.html 1) set the video model to vga 2) within the VM: 'yum install system-config-display' -> use it to set a new display with beter resolution I did that and got a higher resolution but unfortunately with a poor performance. Let me know if it worked for you. Christoph -- 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: F13: kvm guest screen resolution
On 06/03/2010 11:25 PM, Phil Meyer wrote: > You can also 'trick' it by using the system-administration-display and > setting the display type to generic LCD at whatever resolution is > smaller that your actual display. Thank you for the hint! I got higher resolution but with a performance that is not usable (I can watch how a new window gets drawn). I'll have to use something else for my needs.. kind regards, Christoph -- 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: F13: kvm guest screen resolution / kvm broken setup
On 06/03/2010 11:29 PM, Christoph A. wrote:
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> File "/usr/share/virt-manager/virtManager/engine.py", line 799, in
> run_domain
> vm.startup()
> File "/usr/share/virt-manager/virtManager/domain.py", line 1256, in startup
> self._backend.create()
> File "/usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/libvirt.py", line 317, in create
> if ret == -1: raise libvirtError ('virDomainCreate() failed', dom=self)
> libvirtError: internal error Process exited while reading console log
> output: char device redirected to /dev/pts/4
> Could not initialize SDL - exiting
This problem was introduced by enabling the vnc for that VM in the
virtual machine manager and is reproducable.
I'll file a bugreport.
kind regards,
Christoph
--
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: F13: kvm guest screen resolution / kvm broken setup
On 06/03/2010 10:50 PM, Gilboa Davara wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-06-03 at 18:51 +0200, Christoph A. wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm running a kvm guest (F13) on a F13 host but didn't managed to get a
>> reasonable screen resolution in the guest OS. I used cirrus and vga but
>> was not able to get a resolution higher then 800x600.
>> I tried also to manually add some resolutions to the xorg.conf but
>> without success.
>>
>> Would be great if I could get at least a resolution of 1280x960.
>> Is someone using kvm-qemu with decent resolutions?
>>
>> The majority of sites recommended vga for high resolutions but it didn't
>> work out so far.
>>
>> kind regards,
>> Christoph
>
> I'm not using libvirt (using qemu directly instead), but you could
> switching to vesa VGA by switching the graphics card to "std" instead of
> "cirrus logic".
>
> Be warned that -vga std is somewhat buggier (but far more flexible).
As I wrote I tried also the vga driver but without success,
...but today an upgrade broke my kvm setup, so I have to fix that before
trying again to set the resolution...
kind regards,
Christoph
OT:
In case someone is also having troubles after updating, error message
when starting VM:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/share/virt-manager/virtManager/engine.py", line 799, in
run_domain
vm.startup()
File "/usr/share/virt-manager/virtManager/domain.py", line 1256, in
startup
self._backend.create()
File "/usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/libvirt.py", line 317, in create
if ret == -1: raise libvirtError ('virDomainCreate() failed', dom=self)
libvirtError: internal error Process exited while reading console log
output: char device redirected to /dev/pts/4
Could not initialize SDL - exiting
--
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
F13: kvm guest screen resolution
Hi, I'm running a kvm guest (F13) on a F13 host but didn't managed to get a reasonable screen resolution in the guest OS. I used cirrus and vga but was not able to get a resolution higher then 800x600. I tried also to manually add some resolutions to the xorg.conf but without success. Would be great if I could get at least a resolution of 1280x960. Is someone using kvm-qemu with decent resolutions? The majority of sites recommended vga for high resolutions but it didn't work out so far. kind regards, Christoph -- 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
