On 03/30/2016 07:27 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Well no-one else has replied for the last week, so that may be the best
> we're gonna get...Dennis, maybe we can just go ahead and turn the damn
> things off now?
+1
I can't think of any reason to continue to produce 32 bit images, especially at
On 02/21/2016 01:03 AM, Philip Rhoades wrote:
> I used fedup to do the initial stage of upgrading on a Fedora 20 x86_64 VM ->
> F21 on DO but when I reboot, the new fedup option in:
>
> /boot/grub2/grub.cfg
>
> is ignored - I even tried putting in a "set default=0" into the config but it
>
On 10/08/2014 12:26 AM, James Antill wrote:
I would also disagree strongly that RHEL will ever follow this model. I
would bet a huge amount of money that if customers are using the
official trees at all then enough of them will be willing to pay for
rhel8 after rhel9 goes live that it'll just
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/11/2013 08:13 AM, Sam Kottler wrote:
On 09/10/2013 11:36 PM, Sam Kottler wrote:
Given the deny-by-default nature of security groups I think
it makes sense to disable firewalld in the AMI's. I haven't
seen any other AMI's that have a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi everyone,
I'm Michael Hampton. I've been using Fedora for its entire existence, and Red
Hat Commercial Linux before that, starting around 3.0.3 or so. Until now,
though, I've never really had a good opportunity to contribute back, aside from
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/10/2013 11:36 PM, Sam Kottler wrote:
Given the deny-by-default nature of security groups I think it makes sense to
disable firewalld in the AMI's. I haven't seen any other AMI's that have a
firewall enabled by default and we probably
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/10/2013 11:52 PM, Sam Kottler wrote:
If people disable their firewall then that's their prerogative, but it's
confusing and non-standard to have a firewall running on the instance and one
running via the security group(s) that the host is
