Re: Installing fedora on dell inspiron 15
Hi, > How about using rhel?? does't work well? If you have any problem with new hardware, any new driver or fix will be implemented first on Fedora, so it should be the preferred option. HTH, David > On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 6:37 PM, David García Granda > wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> > I need some suggestion on installing fedora 13 on my new dell >> > inspiron n5010. Through many forums i found there are some drivers >> > problems >> > with installing fedora 13 on dell. Can anyone suggest me if its a good >> > idea >> > to install fedora on dell ? >> >> Yes it is. >> >> > Is anyone successfully running fedora on their >> > laptops? >> >> Yes. I have been running Fedora on old Inspiron 15XY and Inspiron 13 >> with no major issues. I am surprised you find bad feedback although I >> don't know Inspiron n5010. >> >> > Is it a better option to go with RHEL5? >> >> I don't get the point why Fedora would have any problem on Dell >> laptops and is better to go for a commercial operating system. >> >> Good luck anyway ;-) >> >> Regards, >> >> David >> -- >> 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 > > > > -- > cheers > Sumatheja Dasararaju > > > > -- > 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 > > -- 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: Installing fedora on dell inspiron 15
Hi, > I need some suggestion on installing fedora 13 on my new dell > inspiron n5010. Through many forums i found there are some drivers problems > with installing fedora 13 on dell. Can anyone suggest me if its a good idea > to install fedora on dell ? Yes it is. > Is anyone successfully running fedora on their > laptops? Yes. I have been running Fedora on old Inspiron 15XY and Inspiron 13 with no major issues. I am surprised you find bad feedback although I don't know Inspiron n5010. > Is it a better option to go with RHEL5? I don't get the point why Fedora would have any problem on Dell laptops and is better to go for a commercial operating system. Good luck anyway ;-) Regards, David -- 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: DVD Installer on USB...?
Hi, >> documentation does not work. Actually it worked for me: http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/13/html/Installation_Guide/Making_USB_Media-UNIX_Linux.html I didn't success either with the dd command, but going to "3.2.2.1.2. Making Fedora USB Media with livecd-tools" section in link above did the trick. >> > I was convinced I'd actually done this, but my memory must be faulty. >> > >> >> I think it may be helpful to follow the advice of mcloaked earlier in >> the thread ... he explains how to make a bootable usb that works - and >> then put the dvd as a hard drive install on the mem stick - and then the >> gotcha's even .. > > I will probably try this next. > > ...But frankly, this means the amount of effort involved is high enough > that the time it takes to just burn a DVD to do the same thing makes > things awash at best and likely in favor of just burning the DVD. > > So, it will be good for making something work if you have to. > > Wonder if we can take the process and script it or just add it to the > existing tools as another option. Perhaps for F14...? In any case, the > current situation means we have an error in the documentation that > should probably be fixed. Maybe it's confusing, and it looks like link above mixes things up when talking about labels, but what it worked for me (pasted from my bash history): su -c 'yum -y install livecd-tools' su -c 'livecd-iso-to-disk --format --reset-mbr /home/david/Fedora-13-x86_64-DVD.iso /dev/sdc1' HTH, David -- 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: using sudo
Hi Terry, > I've looked through the systems > administation but cannot figure how > to put myself in the file where I can use say sudo yum something > without having to use su , passwd each time I need to be root You need to edit /etc/sudoers file. Check man sudoers for more information. HTH, David -- 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 not running : unable to load XPCOM > (was Re:)
Hi Don, 2010/4/5 Don Vogt : >> >>> Hopefully this will solve your problems. :) >> >> >> >> probably but to be honest, I haven't been tracking >> this problem but >> >> generally, you can just nuke the file, >> >> >> ~/.mozilla/firefox/YOUR_SALTED_PROFILE/pluginreg.dat and it >> will be >> >> rebuilt on the next Firefox startup. >> >> >> >> and more to the point, you can temporarily move >> your whole ~/.mozilla >> >> folder to another name and it will be created >> again which is a very >> >> quick way to test if something in your >> .mozilla/firefox directory is >> >> causing a problem. Don't nuke this folder unless >> you are prepared to >> >> lose your bookmarks, passwords, etc. >> >> >> > >> > Both of these were among the first things suggested to >> the OP. :) But >> > they didn't make any difference. I think this is one >> of the problems >> > with nspluginwrapper, since its installation is >> system-wide it is very >> > difficult to isolate when it malfunctions. All the >> usual troubleshooting >> > methodology starts failing. >> >> Actually everything looked fine on Don's system. >> >> > Thankfully Don was very observant and picked up on the >> error message in >> > the terminal. Otherwise even knowing that its >> installed would have been >> > difficult to guess over emails. Lets hope the problem >> is isolated now, >> > and can be resolved. >> >> I agree the best option is to get rid of nspluginwrapper: >> Don is not >> using it at all and it triggers an error (perfect match!). >> If it >> doesn't work, then I would focus in outputs from >> package-cleanup to >> inspect suspicious packages installed (there is some livna >> related >> packages and others (fc10/11) that can lead to confusion >> or >> misconfiguration) >> >> Regards, >> > I tried renaming ~/.mozilla and starting firefox, with no success. > I believe that, since firefox never starts, it will not rewrite the > ~/.mozilla directory. > When I enter firefox in a terminal, it comes back with "couldn't load XPCOM" > in about a second, so it isn't getting very far. Did you remove nspluginwrapper? > I tried to clean things up a bit using package-cleanup but didn't do much. I > did clean out old kernels and kernel-devel files. That didn't solve the > problem. What about removing packages from fc10 and fc11? goffice04-0.4.3-5.fc11.i586 libdhcp4client-4.0.0-37.fc10.i386 libdvdcss-1.2.10-1.i386 libvolume_id-141-7.fc11.i586 Livna is also out of the picture because it was merged with others and became rpmfusion, so you can remove livna-release-1-1.noarch > I am not sure I mentioned it before, but I installed another, newer, version > of firefox. It is a different version , from mozilla.org, that installs in my > home directory instead of on the system. So far that works fine in parallel > with the yum installed version (which still doesn't work). First notice. I don't think is a good idea to have applications installed both using official package and manually, but it's your system. > I have attached new versions of the output of package-cleanup --orphans and > --leaves, just in case I changed anything. > I believe I have tried everything that has been suggested, with no success. I > intend to putter with the package-cleanup files next. > I am putting this on the back burner now because: > 1. I have a working firefox. > 2 fc13 is coming soon and I need to do a complete re-install anyhow. I have > been using preupgrade with great success since fc9 but things are getting > messy. My system is a mess with 3 hard drives, grub boot record installed on > /dev/sda and the grub files on sda8, but I run fc12 from /dev/sdc7. I have > two versions of ubuntu, puppy, and another fc12 installed and keeping up to > date is just too complicated. > I will post if I find the answer and I would still appreciate any help. > Otherwise I consider this thread closed. Keep us posted! David -- 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 not running : unable to load XPCOM (was Re:)
2010/4/4 Suvayu Ali : > On Saturday 03 April 2010 10:28 PM, Craig White wrote: >> On Sat, 2010-04-03 at 22:20 -0700, Suvayu Ali wrote: >>> Hi Don, >>> >>> That actually helps a lot. :) >>> >>> On Saturday 03 April 2010 09:49 PM, Don Vogt wrote: > I would like to avoid removing and installing again firefox and > xulrunner, but maybe as last option it would work :-? > Regards, > David After removing and re-installing xulrunner (which removed and re-installed firefox again ), I ran firefox from a terminal and got back a little bit more info than before. firefox /usr/bin/mozilla-plugin-config: line 73: 3364 Segmentation fault $WRAPPER_LIB_DIR/nspluginwrapper/plugin-config -f> /dev/null 2>&1 Couldn't load XPCOM. the lines near line 73 are: # Set-up installed plugins if [ $# -eq 0 ]; then $WRAPPER_LIB_DIR/nspluginwrapper/plugin-config -f> /dev/null 2>&1 else $WRAPPER_LIB_DIR/nspluginwrapper/plugin-config $* fi >>> >>> 'nspluginwrapper' usually should be avoided unless you can't absolutely >>> do without it. Since you mentioned you don't have any add-ons other than >>> Adblock Plus installed and you are on a 32 bit system, I would presume >>> you don't need nspluginwrapper. >>> >>> As a confirmatory step could you check whether you have nspluginwrapper >>> installed using the following command? >>> >>> $ yum list installed nspluginwrapper >>> >>> If that lists it as installed, I would suggest removing it. To remove >>> try this, (as root) >>> >>> # yum remove nspluginwrapper >>> As usual, that doesn't help me at all. Any ideas? >>> >>> Hopefully this will solve your problems. :) >> >> probably but to be honest, I haven't been tracking this problem but >> generally, you can just nuke the file, >> ~/.mozilla/firefox/YOUR_SALTED_PROFILE/pluginreg.dat and it will be >> rebuilt on the next Firefox startup. >> >> and more to the point, you can temporarily move your whole ~/.mozilla >> folder to another name and it will be created again which is a very >> quick way to test if something in your .mozilla/firefox directory is >> causing a problem. Don't nuke this folder unless you are prepared to >> lose your bookmarks, passwords, etc. >> > > Both of these were among the first things suggested to the OP. :) But > they didn't make any difference. I think this is one of the problems > with nspluginwrapper, since its installation is system-wide it is very > difficult to isolate when it malfunctions. All the usual troubleshooting > methodology starts failing. Actually everything looked fine on Don's system. > Thankfully Don was very observant and picked up on the error message in > the terminal. Otherwise even knowing that its installed would have been > difficult to guess over emails. Lets hope the problem is isolated now, > and can be resolved. I agree the best option is to get rid of nspluginwrapper: Don is not using it at all and it triggers an error (perfect match!). If it doesn't work, then I would focus in outputs from package-cleanup to inspect suspicious packages installed (there is some livna related packages and others (fc10/11) that can lead to confusion or misconfiguration) Regards, David -- 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 not running : unable to load XPCOM (was Re:)
Hi Don, >> > I finally got straight on what you wanted for strace. >> > I have attached a gzipped copy, but I don't know if it >> will go through the list, and I lost track of who wanted it. >> If it doesen't go through let me know and I will send it >> direct. >> > It makes absolutely no sense to me at all. >> >> Thanks for the file. Actually I wasn't able to find direct >> root cause >> for your problem, so I would ask you to paste the output of >> following >> commands: >> >> $ stat /usr/lib/firefox-3.5.9/firefox >> $ ldd -r /usr/lib/firefox-3.5.9/firefox >> > > I removed VirtualBox but it didn't change anything. I wonder if having > Google-Chrome could have any effect? I don't think so. > I can't understand why I am the only one having this problem. I found some > other messages with the "couldn't load XPCOM " message on google, > but they > were last year and there was no solution I could see. I see nothing strange in those outputs. Which add-ons do you have installed?. Are all them compatible with current Firefox version?. All up to date? Maybe something got corrupted when you updated firefox and xulrunner?. What's the output of following commands?: $ package-cleanup --problems $ package-cleanup --orphans $ package-cleanup --leaves I would like to avoid removing and installing again firefox and xulrunner, but maybe as last option it would work :-? Regards, David -- 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 not running : unable to load XPCOM (was Re:)
Hi Don, > I finally got straight on what you wanted for strace. > I have attached a gzipped copy, but I don't know if it will go through the > list, and I lost track of who wanted it. If it doesen't go through let me > know and I will send it direct. > It makes absolutely no sense to me at all. Thanks for the file. Actually I wasn't able to find direct root cause for your problem, so I would ask you to paste the output of following commands: $ stat /usr/lib/firefox-3.5.9/firefox $ ldd -r /usr/lib/firefox-3.5.9/firefox Thanks, David -- 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 not running: unable to load XPCOM (was Re: )
Hi Don, >> > >>> or advice would be appreciated. >> >> Is it possible for you to check if XPCOM >> files related >> >>> from VirtualBox >> conflict with Firefox/xulrunner ones?. >> Maybe something >> >>> not compatible >> from VirtualBox is loaded instead of the >> right one. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> The OP should first try >> >>> 1. starting firefox in safe mode `firefox >> -safe-mode' and >> >>> see whether >> >>> any of the add-ons are to blame. >> >> >> >> Did that - no change >> >> >> >>> 2. If that doesn't work, try looking for >> unreleased lock >> >>> files for firefox. >> >>> >> >>> $ cd ~/.mozilla >> >>> $ find -type f -name '*lock' >> >>> >> >>> If any are found delete them and try again. >> >> >> >> found .parentlock files in each profile. Deleted >> them and got the same result ( unable to load XPCOM) >> >> 3. If none of the above works try creating a new >> user and >> >>> start firefox there. >> >> >> >> Created a new user and opened a terminal to run >> firefox again "unable to load XPCOM" >> >>> >> >>> And finally if none of the above work appeal >> to the >> >>> collective >> >>> knowledge of the list with the results from >> the above. >> >>> >> >>> >> >> >> >> OK I will attack VirtualBox to see if I can glean >> any info about dependencies and the look at removing it >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > I have VirtualBox installed and am having no problems >> with Firefox. >> >> Uhmmm... this may point us to some misconfiguration on >> Don's >> environment. Let's try with the following: >> >> 1.- Did you try strace (strace -o strace.log firefox)?. If >> not, please >> do it and post trace output file (strace.log in the example >> mentioned) >> for inspection. >> >> 2.- Which architecture are you running (i686, x86_64)?. Do >> you have >> mixed libraries? >> >> 3.- Can you paste the content of configuration files stored >> under /etc/gre.d/? > > output of strace -o strace.log firefox > Couldn't load XPCOM. I wanted to mean the strace.log file. Can you please compress it (gzip) and attach it? > the only file under /etc/gre.d is gre.conf > > sudo cat /etc/gre.d/gre.conf > [1.9.1.9] > GRE_PATH=/usr/lib/xulrunner-1.9.1 > xulrunner=true > abi=x86-gcc3[donv...@localhost ~]$ This looks good. > I am running kernel 2.6.32.10-90.fc12.i686 on a i686 athlon > I have no mixed libraries That's great. > I apologize for my screwed up messages. My excuses are > 1. I am an old man > 2. I just had some tooth roots extracted > 3. I am on codiene for the pain > 4. I use digests and find replying to several messages at the same time > confusing. > 5.No excuse sir. I will try to be more careful. (I have stopped the codiene.) > > I really appreciate the help. I am well above my depth here. No worries, take it easy! ;-) David -- 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 not running: unable to load XPCOM (was Re: )
Hi Don, Yesterday I updated to kernel 2.6.32.9.70 fc12 and to >>> firefox-3.5.9-1.fc12 and now firefox won't start. I get a >>> notice in the bottom bar for a few seconds and then it goes >>> blank. >>> >>> Strange, I have the same package versions and firefox runs >>> fine... >>> I tried starting firefox in a terminal and it returned >>> "can't load XPCOM" I tried 'locate XPCOM' and it returned some files in >>> /usr/lib/VirtualBox and >>> /usr/lib/xulrunner-1.9.1/modules/XPCOMUtils.jsm >>> >>> Uhmmm... I don't have virtualbox installed, so this can >>> make the difference. >>> I have VirtualBox installed, but I am not trying to >>> run firefox in virtualBox, but on the desktop. ?I just found that xulrunner-1.9.1.9-1.fc12 was >>> installed at the same time as the new firefox so I suspect >>> the problem is between firefox and xulrunner. >>> >>> I think the problem here is VirtualBox. >> >> >> OK, I will try to remove VirtualBox, if I can figure out how >> >> >> ?I don't know what to try next. I have been using fc12 >>> for a long time successfully for quite a while Any help or >>> advice would be appreciated. >>> >>> Is it possible for you to check if XPCOM files related from >>> VirtualBox >>> conflict with Firefox/xulrunner ones?. Maybe something not >>> compatible >>> from VirtualBox is loaded instead of the right one. >> >> I will see what I can figure out about the related files >> >>> >>> HTH, >>> >>> David >>> >>> >> >>> >>> Message: 13 >>> Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 14:20:42 -0700 >>> From: suvayu ali >>> Subject: Re: New Firefox Won't run >>> To: Community support for Fedora users >>> Message-ID: >>> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 >>> >>> On 1 April 2010 12:13, David Garc?a Granda >>> wrote: Hi Don, > Yesterday I updated to kernel 2.6.32.9.70 fc12 and >>> to firefox-3.5.9-1.fc12 and now firefox won't start. I get a >>> notice in the bottom bar for a few seconds and then it goes >>> blank. Strange, I have the same package versions and firefox >>> runs fine... > I tried starting firefox in a terminal and it >>> returned "can't load XPCOM" > I tried 'locate XPCOM' and it returned some files >>> in /usr/lib/VirtualBox and >>> /usr/lib/xulrunner-1.9.1/modules/XPCOMUtils.jsm Uhmmm... I don't have virtualbox installed, so this >>> can make the difference. > I have VirtualBox installed, but I am not trying >>> to run firefox in virtualBox, but on the desktop. > ?I just found that xulrunner-1.9.1.9-1.fc12 was >>> installed at the same time as the new firefox so I suspect >>> the problem is between firefox and xulrunner. I think the problem here is VirtualBox. >>> >>> It is improper methodology to start blaming other "most >>> unlikely" >>> packages before going through the proper troubleshooting >>> steps. I >>> don't have VBox installed and that file is there in my >>> system. >>> xulrunner is what firefox uses for all of its UI and >>> configuration. >>> (at least that is what I know) >>> >>> $ yum deplist firefox | grep xul >>> provider: xulrunner.x86_64 >>> 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11 >>> provider: xulrunner.x86_64 >>> 1.9.1.9-1.fc11 >>> dependency: libxul.so()(64bit) >>> provider: xulrunner.x86_64 >>> 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11 >>> provider: xulrunner.x86_64 >>> 1.9.1.9-1.fc11 >>> dependency: xulrunner >= 1.9.1.9 >>> provider: xulrunner.x86_64 >>> 1.9.1.9-1.fc11 >>> provider: xulrunner.i586 1.9.1.9-1.fc11 >>> provider: xulrunner.x86_64 >>> 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11 >>> provider: xulrunner.x86_64 >>> 1.9.1.9-1.fc11 >>> dependency: libxul.so()(64bit) >>> provider: xulrunner.x86_64 >>> 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11 >>> provider: xulrunner.x86_64 >>> 1.9.1.9-1.fc11 >>> provider: xulrunner.x86_64 >>> 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11 >>> provider: xulrunner.i586 >>> 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11 >>> > ?I don't know what to try next. I have been using >>> fc12 for a long time successfully for quite a while Any help >>> or advice would be appreciated. Is it possible for you to check if XPCOM files related >>> from VirtualBox conflict with Firefox/xulrunner ones?. Maybe something >>> not compatible from VirtualBox is loaded instead of the right one. >> >> >> >> >>> The OP should first try >>> 1. starting firefox in safe mode `firefox -safe-mode' and >>> see whether >>> any of the add-ons are to blame. >> >> Did that - no change >> >>> 2. If that doesn't work, try looking for unreleased lock >>> files for firefox. >>> >>> $ cd ~/.mozilla >>> $ find -type f -name '*lock' >>> >>> If any are found delete them and try again. >> >> found .parentlock files in each profile. Deleted them and got the same >> result ( unable to load XPCOM) >> 3. If none of the above works try creating a new user and >>> start firefox there. >> >> Created a new user and opened a terminal to run firefox again "unable to >> load XPCOM" >>> >>> And finally if none of the above work ap
Re: New Firefox Won't run
Hi again, >>> Yesterday I updated to kernel 2.6.32.9.70 fc12 and to firefox-3.5.9-1.fc12 >>> and now firefox won't start. I get a notice in the bottom bar for a few >>> seconds and then it goes blank. >> >> Strange, I have the same package versions and firefox runs fine... >> >>> I tried starting firefox in a terminal and it returned "can't load XPCOM" >>> I tried 'locate XPCOM' and it returned some files in /usr/lib/VirtualBox >>> and /usr/lib/xulrunner-1.9.1/modules/XPCOMUtils.jsm >> >> Uhmmm... I don't have virtualbox installed, so this can make the difference. >> >>> I have VirtualBox installed, but I am not trying to run firefox in >>> virtualBox, but on the desktop. >>> I just found that xulrunner-1.9.1.9-1.fc12 was installed at the same time >>> as the new firefox so I suspect the problem is between firefox and >>> xulrunner. >> >> I think the problem here is VirtualBox. >> > > It is improper methodology to start blaming other "most unlikely" > packages before going through the proper troubleshooting steps. Partially agree, but as long as firefox and xulrunner packages are already linked and we have another application in the environment, if there is no configuration issue, I would bet this "another application" is making some noise. I have seen also some python related errors in the past regarding XPCOM. >I don't have VBox installed and that file is there in my system. Believe it or not, mentioned file (XPCOMUtils.jsm) comes in xulrunner package. Check $ rpm -ql xulrunner | grep -i xpcom > xulrunner is what firefox uses for all of its UI and configuration. > (at least that is what I know) > > $ yum deplist firefox | grep xul > provider: xulrunner.x86_64 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11 > provider: xulrunner.x86_64 1.9.1.9-1.fc11 > dependency: libxul.so()(64bit) > provider: xulrunner.x86_64 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11 > provider: xulrunner.x86_64 1.9.1.9-1.fc11 > dependency: xulrunner >= 1.9.1.9 > provider: xulrunner.x86_64 1.9.1.9-1.fc11 > provider: xulrunner.i586 1.9.1.9-1.fc11 > provider: xulrunner.x86_64 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11 > provider: xulrunner.x86_64 1.9.1.9-1.fc11 > dependency: libxul.so()(64bit) > provider: xulrunner.x86_64 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11 > provider: xulrunner.x86_64 1.9.1.9-1.fc11 > provider: xulrunner.x86_64 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11 > provider: xulrunner.i586 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11 Yep, xulrunner is a firefox dependency. >>> I don't know what to try next. I have been using fc12 for a long time >>> successfully for quite a while Any help or advice would be appreciated. >> >> Is it possible for you to check if XPCOM files related from VirtualBox >> conflict with Firefox/xulrunner ones?. Maybe something not compatible >> from VirtualBox is loaded instead of the right one. >> > > The OP should first try > 1. starting firefox in safe mode `firefox -safe-mode' and see whether > any of the add-ons are to blame. > 2. If that doesn't work, try looking for unreleased lock files for firefox. > > $ cd ~/.mozilla > $ find -type f -name '*lock' > > If any are found delete them and try again. > 3. If none of the above works try creating a new user and start firefox there. I would add strace (strace -o strace.log firefox) > And finally if none of the above work appeal to the collective > knowledge of the list with the results from the above. Regards, David -- 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: New Firefox Won't run
Hi Don, > Yesterday I updated to kernel 2.6.32.9.70 fc12 and to firefox-3.5.9-1.fc12 > and now firefox won't start. I get a notice in the bottom bar for a few > seconds and then it goes blank. Strange, I have the same package versions and firefox runs fine... > I tried starting firefox in a terminal and it returned "can't load XPCOM" > I tried 'locate XPCOM' and it returned some files in /usr/lib/VirtualBox and > /usr/lib/xulrunner-1.9.1/modules/XPCOMUtils.jsm Uhmmm... I don't have virtualbox installed, so this can make the difference. > I have VirtualBox installed, but I am not trying to run firefox in > virtualBox, but on the desktop. > I just found that xulrunner-1.9.1.9-1.fc12 was installed at the same time as > the new firefox so I suspect the problem is between firefox and xulrunner. I think the problem here is VirtualBox. > I don't know what to try next. I have been using fc12 for a long time > successfully for quite a while Any help or advice would be appreciated. Is it possible for you to check if XPCOM files related from VirtualBox conflict with Firefox/xulrunner ones?. Maybe something not compatible from VirtualBox is loaded instead of the right one. HTH, David -- 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: rpm providing pdftopdf in fedora 12?
Hi there, >> > I seem to recall that there was a pdftopdf in Fedora 11 >> > (from what I >> > recall). Which package provides this in Fedora 12? >> > >> > I tried yum provides */pdftopdf and yum provides */*/pdf >> > and yum >> > provides */bin/pdf and yum provides *bin/pdf to no avail. >> > >> > Any suggestions? >> >> I'm confused. Do you really mean pdftopdf? If you already have a pdf file, >> why the need to convert it to pdf? >> > > Hi, > > Thanks very much! Good point. The trouble is that my pdf file is 12 MB > long. The website for a journal will only accept 6MB. There are all > these sites (Manuscript Central, EES, etc) which take a huge pdf file > (such as 25 MB) lets say and convert it to something very small (such > as 2 or 3 MB, lets say) so that it can go for peer review and they have > to be using some conversion program. I was thinking that it is > pdftopdf. But maybe not. > > Any suggestions? I think pdftk (http://www.pdfhacks.com/pdftk/) would help here. Regards, David -- 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: Best way to troubleshoot intermittant lockups on F12
Hi there, >> I have an F12 installation that experiences intermittent lockups, >> usually at times of heavy usage. I also have lockups, but just when running latest fedora's official Firefox package (plus ADP and flashblock) and not under heavy load. I am sure that is related to firefox because I have been using Chrome for some days and no lockup at all. >> The system just locks up solid, keyboard and mouse are non responsive. >> Graphical screen remains >> the same as it was when it locked up. Nothing is recorded in the >> system logs, and I also have >> logging to a remote machine and nothing is sent to there either. If >> you attempt to telnet in, you get >> the first telnet message with the kernel name but no login prompt and >> it times out. Only a hard reset >> and reboot gets it back. Yep. I see nothing in system logs. I will give Breakpad (http://kb.mozillazine.org/Breakpad) a try disabling extensions as well to see if I can figure out what the hell is going on there. Any progress will be posted to the list. >> I've extensively tested the hard disks and memory. Processor temp is >> well controlled by a big >> fan. >> >> This is on an ASUS M4A77D motherboard (AMD 770) with an AMD 9850 >> processor. I've tried pci=nomsi >> and it does not seem to change things. >> >> Twice, running yum caused the lockup, but any intensive progam can. It >> reencodes video early >> in the morning and has locked up three times then. >> >> Any suggestions would be appreciated. As said above, I experience this only when running Firefox therefore I think this issue is closely related to this web browser. Anyway, I run Fedora 12 on an Intel Inspiron 13z with up to date bios. > I had the same problem some years ago with one computer. After I changed > the power supply, everything was fine. Maybe this can help you... I don't think this is due to power supply, but thanks for the tip. Regards, David -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
