On 03/18/2012 02:39 PM, Mike Chambers wrote:
Are you by chance using a proxy?
If so there is a bug in google-chrome/chromium which happened when KDE
proxy changed output to have white space separated port number - if so
make just edit the file ~/.kde4/share/config/kioslaverc
and make it
On 02/27/2012 11:44 AM, Sandro Mani wrote:
>
will leave your system in a state where manual cleanup is likely
>> required.
> One scenario which I often hit is forgetting to change the proxy
> settings in yum.conf and then trying to update. Yum will clearly fail to
> download repodata, but it will
On 02/15/2012 10:38 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> We're already building at least one package (hfsplus-tools) with llvm
> because it relies on non-standard C extensions that gcc doesn't support,
> and I believe the current software rasteriser in mesa depends on it. In
> terms of it being the gen
On 02/15/2012 09:45 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> Experienced admins dont use service iptables blah anyway ( they use
> iptables commands directly ) so it hardly matters to them documentation
> should however be updated for those that actually use service iptables
> blah to point this out s
On 02/13/2012 03:47 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> Fedora DE vs KDE spin download ratio compared to past release ratios would be
> more suggestive of a trend, if it exists.
Not necessarily - I always used the standard DVD to install and use
KDE and frankly never used the KDE spin - not once.
gen
On 02/12/2012 06:19 AM, mike cloaked wrote:
> http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/2011-linuxquestions-org-members-choice-awards-95/desktop-environment-of-the-year-919888/
>
> Shows an interesting result in terms of DE popularity - though given
> the many discussions not only on Fedora lists bu
On 02/10/2012 07:07 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> That is the definition of a product. Fedora has never been a product.
> Fedora is a community driven distribution and as such has no central
> or overriding authority to tell people that volunteer their time to go do
> some specific thing they don't fee
On 02/08/2012 12:37 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
>> Note that this has not actually been implemented in anaconda yet, so if
>> you do an anaconda upgrade at this time, it will explode horribly. The
>> bug requesting this support be added to anaconda is
>> http://bugzilla.redhat.
Let it go kevin ...
I know there are a bunch of gnome happy users (and of course the devs),
but there are probably less now than earlier ...
A limited sample but everyone I know - all of whom were gnome users - no
longer use gnome - they have all switched to either kde or xfce (each
with its own
On 02/01/2012 09:41 AM, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Emanuel Rietveld said:
>> On 02/01/2012 01:32 PM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
>>> To-be-installed files obviously have no on-disk fingerprints, so it
>>> wont work for initial installation. So yes, those "fake" compatibility
>>> provides
What would be the pros/cons of a bind mount instead of a soft link for
/bin et al?
gene
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 01/30/2012 05:17 PM, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
>
> The argument against rolling upgrades is that it's a wonderful idea
> early on, but then you run into a morass as time goes on, because of:
>
> - difficulty of handling wanted vs. unwanted updates, which in turn
> creates combinatorially growi
On 01/28/2012 12:23 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 11:15:11 -0600
> Andrew Wyatt wrote:
>
> ...snip...
>
...
>
> I think the way forward is the one I outlined in:
> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-January/161632.html
>
> Until those interested can organize
On 01/27/2012 12:09 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
>
> why in the world is a currently useless "feature" much more forced
> than the change of the init-system?
>
perhaps this change is wanted/needed by the new init system for some
reason that may not be apparent at the moment ...
resource us
On 01/25/2012 10:01 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 9:17 PM, Bryan Quigley wrote:
>
> It's pretty simple, really. Basically, if we don't keep the kernel on at
> least a somewhat recent release the amount of work required to support
> that release grows beyond what we can realisti
On 01/25/2012 03:48 AM, drago01 wrote:
>
> Exactly releases have the advantage of being a well tested set of
> updates where you have a window to decide whether you want to update
> yet or not.
> So I don't see what a rolling release gains really. If you always want
> to run the latest and greate
On 01/24/2012 02:59 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> But a fully rolling release just cannot work (and this is also why all those
> "just use Rawhide if you want the latest", "usable Rawhide" etc. suggestions
> are fundamentally flawed). Yes, there are distros doing this, but they all
> have one th
On 01/24/2012 09:08 AM, Michal Schmidt wrote:
> On 01/24/2012 02:13 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
>>Fedora suffers an additional problem it seems - not only are there
>> large changes as part of many releases, but lately some of them
>> immediately stop being supported until
On 01/24/2012 07:13 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>
> How is rawhide not a rolling release? Or perhaps better asked, what
> about rawhide makes it
> unsuitable for use as a rolling Fedora release?
Actually it is totally unsuitable for a stable rolling release.
A rolling release, as most mean it th
On 01/24/2012 07:24 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 11:23:14AM +, mike cloaked wrote:
>> Fedora would appear to be out of line in not taking on board the
>> potential user base for a rolling release version. For servers there
>> would be huge advantages in management of
On 01/11/2012 10:11 AM, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 10:03:39AM -0500, Genes MailLists wrote:
>> Odd as it is, IP6 reduces privacy - it was not designed with privacy
>> in mind.
>
> http://ipv6int.net/systems/linux-ipv6.html#privacy
>
Good point
On 01/11/2012 09:21 AM, Emanuel Rietveld wrote:
> On 01/11/2012 12:43 PM, Richard wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 10:53:52PM +0100, nodata wrote:
>>
>>> Fonts are a bigger threat to privacy, see here:
>>> http://panopticlick.eff.org/
>
> Maybe I am missing something, but isn't this only releva
On 01/09/2012 09:38 AM, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 01/09/2012 07:24 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> a concern over the debug opt
>
> Alternatively - just build it without debugging - download the source
> rpm(s).
>
...
Of course (should go without saying ... but) the obvious
On 01/09/2012 07:24 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> a concern over the debug opt
Alternatively - just build it without debugging - download the source
rpm(s).
After installing/setting up the rpm tools, unpack (rpm -iv) the source
rpm in ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS dir - then go to ~/rpmbuild/SPEC and do:
rpmbuil
On 01/03/2012 09:16 AM, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> # cat /proc/meminfo >/tmp/1; killall tracker-store; sleep 1; cat
> /proc/meminfo >/tmp/2; cat /tmp/1 /tmp/2 | grep MemFree
> MemFree: 1940372 kB
> MemFree: 1963860 kB
>
> As you see, killing it on my machine freed over 23 megs worth
On 12/14/2011 07:25 AM, Andrew Price wrote:
> Hi,
>
> From the systemd.mount(5) man page:
>
> "Mount units may either be configured via unit files, or via /etc/fstab"
>
> This makes me wonder - to what extent will systemd replace fstab in
> future Fedoras? Will fstab disappear in favour of syste
On 11/22/2011 12:13 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 06:00:43PM +0100, 80 wrote:
>
>> The failure is due to Fedora *non-upstream* versionning scheme,
>> VirtualBox has *already* fixes the API/ABI issue upstream relying on
>> the kernel version (since 3.2 RC). It has nothing to
On 11/16/2011 06:21 AM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> On 11/16/11 11:31, Mathieu Bridon wrote:
>> On Wed, 2011-11-16 at 10:33 +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>>> On 11/15/11 19:03, Genes MailLists wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Its easy enough to build an iso
Its easy enough to build an iso using mock/pungi which will take
advantage of all your local packages ... I really don't know that jigdo
added anything to that - in fact using pungi you always get a fully
updated build without waiting for a jigdo list.
gene
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.
Also, FYI, you you can disable it (as alternative to deleting):
unset -f command_not_found_handle
in your .bashrc ...
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 10/08/2011 04:44 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> if there would be much more care by introducing new features/replacements
> my understanding for the fear of update thmen after that would be much higher
>
> as long fedora is shooting out new features without any care if they are
> really ready fdora
On 09/16/2011 05:05 AM, Nils Philippsen wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 14:32 -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
>>--
>> (i) Server.
>>--
>>
>> These run all the time - reboots are most often in maintenance
>> window (
On 09/16/2011 05:01 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 05:17:43PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> True. As far as GNOME goes, though, whenever you suggest 'bulletproof
>> session management', they say 'that's what suspend is for'...
>
> I'd like to see proper session management. Ho
On 09/15/2011 02:14 PM, Bernd Stramm wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Sep 2011 18:27:29 +0100
>
> Many computers are booted very rarely, once a day or so, and then
> sit idle for very long periods of time. This is very wasteful. The
> reason people do this is because booting takes a long time compared to
> st
On 09/14/2011 01:42 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
>> Honestly, if systemd updates has 5% of users failing on an update to
>> the software - we should dump the thing immediately and go back to
>> upstart. That is insanely high bug rate for core code which is (or
>> should be) pretty simple.
>
> R
On 09/13/2011 09:48 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 09/14/2011 06:47 AM, Genes MailLists wrote:
>> Good points - up to a point - but lets go slow and think for a few
>> minutes - unlike the kernel which is very hardware dependent and
>> therefore may run on many machines but n
On 09/13/2011 08:34 PM, Jef Spaleta wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 4:13 PM, Genes MailLists <mailto:li...@sapience.com>> wrote:
>
> The kernel has undergone more updates than systemd ... all for very
> good reasons - making it better and solv
On 09/13/2011 05:58 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 09/14/2011 02:59 AM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
>> So Fedora guys what you are waiting for ? update systemd please , should
>> I open a report in bugzilla ?
>
> I can explain each of your examples but since systemd upstream developer
> is also the Fedor
On 09/07/2011 01:50 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> Rich Megginson on 09/07/2011 12:44 PM wrote:
>> git log --oneline TAG-OF-PREVIOUS-RELEASE.. | cat
>>
>> the | cat (or | more) is needed because git log will truncate lines
>
> This is not what I meant.
>
> Upstream may have had 20-30 commits in
On 09/07/2011 12:42 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>
>
> Unless of course you meant "have fedpkg automatically stick a
> git-shortlog into the %changelog section of the spec file on commit"
> or something. Then.. maybe.
Yah I meant this one .. :-)
>
> And yes, this assumes in all cases that develo
On 09/07/2011 09:57 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>
> %changelog isn't for developers. It's for users to see what the
> developers changed in the package.
>
Would a git-shortlog suffice for %changelog ? Assuming appropriate
comments are required for fedora's git repo.
--
devel mailing list
devel@l
On 08/25/2011 01:18 PM, Nils Philippsen wrote:
>
> Side-by-side means into the same prefix. You can only have one gimp
> version installed into the /usr prefix, you're free to install a
> different one into /opt/gimp-x.y or somewhere into your home if you're
> an ordinary user.
>
> Nils
Ah tha
On 08/25/2011 12:00 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 5:58 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
>> On 08/25/2011 10:28 AM, Nils Philippsen wrote:
>>
>>> As well, installing both stable versions side-by-side isn't an option as
>>> you can't insta
On 08/25/2011 10:28 AM, Nils Philippsen wrote:
> As well, installing both stable versions side-by-side isn't an option as
> you can't install them into the same prefix: the libraries have the same
> SONAME, the new ones are expected to be ABI compatible. Therefore I
> don't see a real alternative
It could be built to be installed in parallel with 2.6 - which would
allow those who want to test/play with it.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Are there any plans to bring gimp 2.7.x -> 2.8 into F16 ?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 08/22/2011 07:07 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-08-21 at 17:09 -0400, Steve Clark wrote:
>
>>> -Steve
>> Obviously a lot on this list value boot up speed over security!
>
> You're making a false assumption, which is that socket activation is
> only about speed. It's also about resou
On 08/21/2011 05:09 PM, Steve Clark wrote:
>>> http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/systemd.html
>>>
>>> Read the part about "Parallelizing Socket Services". It explains why
>>> socket actviation is interesting,
>> I find a secure OS interesting. Bootup speed does not matter much to me.
>>
>> -Steve
>
On 08/11/2011 11:58 PM, Manuel Escudero wrote:
> Hi, I was Wondering if there was a tool for Linux in general
> that let me undo the system changes at reboot or something
> like that, For example:
>
> I want to set a standard configuration in a machine and then
> let that machine to be used by ma
On 08/08/2011 08:55 AM, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Matej Cepl wrote:
>> On 8.8.2011 14:44, Josef Bacik wrote:
>>> I appreciate those who will continue to use it and report bugs, we are
>>> working very hard on trying to get everything more stable and it is a
>>> slow goin
On 08/02/2011 02:41 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-07-31 at 15:37 -0300, Sergio Belkin wrote:
>> I've read
>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Bugs/Common#Laptop_screen_dims_when_switching_to_battery_power_or_idle_mode_but_never_brightens_again
>>
>> My system suffers the same symptoms but
On 07/31/2011 12:35 AM, Chuck Anderson wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 11:30:30PM -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
>> On 07/30/2011 06:49 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
>>> ...
>>> So we could presumptuously configure the interface
>>> with the previous address from
On 07/30/2011 06:49 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
>
> NM already keeps DHCP information around based on the network you're
> connecting to, so we don't need to ARP a bunch of servers just to
> determine whether the DHCP server we wanted is still there. dhclient is
Cool - so is NM already pretty opt
On 07/30/2011 12:52 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> Am 30.07.2011 04:29, schrieb Genes MailLists:
>> wasn't there some kind of issue in vm's ?
>> Maybe I'm not remembering correctly
>
> no - performance sucks if the VM is stored on a BTRFS formatted disk
>
On 07/30/2011 10:37 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Sat, 30.07.11 10:31, Genes MailLists (li...@sapience.com) wrote:
>
>>>> http://cafbit.com/entry/rapid_dhcp_or_how_do
>>>
>
> IIRC connman (i.e. NM's competition) can do the ARP magic, too.
>
> L
On 07/30/2011 04:48 AM, Ryan Rix wrote:
...
> Reading the hackernews comments on it makes me wonder if this is a very good
> idea. It may work for people in certain usecases, but in the case of Fedora
> probably not so much
>
> http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2756952
> http://news.ycombina
On 07/29/2011 10:41 PM, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 10:29:58PM -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
>
> > wasn't there some kind of issue in vm's ? Maybe I'm not remembering
> > correctly.
>
> too vague to comment. there are always 'issu
On 07/29/2011 10:16 PM, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 01:16:43AM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> > i have running 2.6.40-4.fc15.x86_64 #1 SMP in my testing-virtual-machine
> since
> > some minutes, boot looked fine, after a minute a got a btrfs-stack-trace
> >
> > hope this hel
On 07/28/2011 12:36 PM, David Sommerseth wrote:
>>
>
>> I don't follow your thought here - if you have a bin64/ and a bin/
>> etc and you have your shell initscripts decide (e.g. using uname -m)
>> which of those to include in your PATH I think it does work ... provided
>> you have (obviously) b
On 07/28/2011 10:35 AM, Braden McDaniel wrote:
> Really, sharing of $HOME can (and does) happen among much *more*
> disparate architectures than x86 and x86_64. We don't have to think
> about this as much these days now that MIPS and SPARC have waned in
> popularity; but the idea that we might st
On 07/28/2011 09:09 AM, Bryn M. Reeves wrote:
> On 07/28/2011 01:41 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
>> On 07/28/2011 07:53 AM, Bryn M. Reeves wrote:
>>> On 07/28/2011 12:46 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
>>
>>>> This is a good point. Especially when you start on a 6
On 07/28/2011 08:41 AM, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 07/28/2011 07:53 AM, Bryn M. Reeves wrote:
>> On 07/28/2011 12:46 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
>
>>> This is a good point. Especially when you start on a 64 bit box and
>>> login to a 32 bit (or other arch) - bin n
On 07/28/2011 07:53 AM, Bryn M. Reeves wrote:
> On 07/28/2011 12:46 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
>> This is a good point. Especially when you start on a 64 bit box and
>> login to a 32 bit (or other arch) - bin now makes now sense at all. You
>> need arch specific
On 07/28/2011 06:17 AM, David Sommerseth wrote:
>
> However, I find ~/.local an odd name. To whom or what is it 'local'? If
> you have home directories mounted via NFS and log into two different remote
> hosts via SSH - the only base is "local" to, is the user. But if you start
> a program whi
On 07/27/2011 05:00 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On 7/27/11 1:09 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> Depends on the PATH-Order
>>
>> if something is intended to be first in PATH and any attacker is able
>> to write there his "ls" would win against "/bin/ls"
>
> So, the attacker can write a compromised ls in
On 07/27/2011 12:19 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 27.07.11 17:40, Roman Rakus (rra...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi all,
>> from the discussion here, I'm tempted to revert the change. Any objections?
>
> Yes. I am for keeping it in, and have prepped a patch for XDG basedir to
> make it
On 07/27/2011 01:23 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>
>> What specifically does systemd do that autofs does not do without it?
>
> I don't know if there is anything, but it's neat to get something like
> this 'free' with systemd, without having to add any other package.
Be a little wary.
This i
On 07/26/2011 03:34 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>
> I don't think it makes a lot of sense to have a visible directory for
> binaries. People will see that, and be annoyed.
Perhaps, but hiding things annoys many people more ... not a huge deal
as .config is not too hidden anyway ...
>
> Not
On 07/26/2011 09:34 AM, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
> * Genes MailLists [26/07/2011 15:32] :
>>
>> Mmm ok ... Can I assume root is excepted from this?
>
> You can. That is the case.
>
> Emmanuel
>
:-)
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://a
On 07/26/2011 09:15 AM, Robert Marcano wrote:
> In /etc/skel/.bash_profile they are added to the end and I think that is ok
>
> PATH=$PATH:$HOME/.local/bin:$HOME/bin
>
> Never knew about ~/.local/bin my .bash_profile is really old from the
> time where the default was only ~/bin
Mmm ok ... Ca
On 07/26/2011 08:03 AM, Misha Shnurapet wrote:
> 26.07.2011, 18:34, "Andrew Haley" :
>> On 26/07/11 10:22, Misha Shnurapet wrote:
>>
>>> Since F15 ~/bin has been added to PATH, and commands that are
>>> supposed to run user scripts will work without changing into that
>>> directory. Meanwhile, ~
On 07/21/2011 07:09 AM, Steve Clark wrote:
> Well what benefit(s) does the new 'df' provide, is it worth all the pain
> it brings?
>
I concur - the current df behavior is well .. goofy :-) - however this
may be tricky to fix in the new world - but should be fixed.
If this behavior is someho
On 07/14/2011 11:12 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> Something tells me if btrfs had been called "ext5" people would
> just nod their heads and move on. ;)
Heh ... like this ... Its not too late is it :-)
How about ext5-btrfs - and high level user space tools can shorten it
to ext5 :-)
--
devel ma
On 07/14/2011 10:59 AM, Josef Bacik wrote:
>>
>> Another (Q) - once the format changes, will there be tools to change
>> the online format of existing filesystems - or will we need to delete
>> and start fresh ?
>>
>
> All format changes happen automatically (usually with a mount option
> so as
On 07/14/2011 10:17 AM, Ric Wheeler wrote:
> On 07/14/2011 02:54 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Genes MailLists wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> I think RAID-5 support would be reasonably important to have too ... I
>>> dont think w
I think RAID-5 support would be reasonably important to have too ... I
dont think we want to have raid on top of btrfs ... right?
Ric - what is the current status of RAID-5 ?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 07/10/2011 09:39 PM, Steve Dickson wrote:
>
>
Completely and having administrators add and to set these values
manually in /etc/sysctl.conf as I mentioned in comment 30.
>>>I don't agree with this approach actually. Doing it this way means
>>> that we now have dependen
On 07/10/2011 07:31 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>
> Let's just aggree on disagreeing about this approach anyway the last
> unit file I submitted does what Steve and you and perhaps many others
> want's it to do afaik...
>
To be clear - I have as yet no views on systemd unit files et
On 07/10/2011 07:08 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
ell variables has always had a
>> default value of the empty string.)
>
> It achieves afaict the behavior the maintainer wanted if it was up to me
> I would have done this ( whole nfs ) completly differently
>
> Dropped
>
> ExecStartPr
On 07/08/2011 10:06 AM, JB wrote:
>
> This entry is passed to systemd for execution, as is !
> It is the responsibility of systemd to parse it, determine what entry it is
> (you could put in there any garbage, perhaps a virus, rootkit, etc), then if
> a valid executable entry then it should valid
On 07/08/2011 04:47 AM, Paul F. Johnson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Something strange has happened on my system. At the start of last
> week, / was reporting that I had about 8Gb free. It now reports that /
> is completely full.
>
..
>
> Any ideas?
>
Probably should be users list not dev (unless you're
On 06/30/2011 10:44 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-06-30 at 22:04 -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
>> On 06/30/2011 08:26 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Well, updates-testing is 'you get to keep both halves' territory.
>>
>&
On 06/30/2011 08:26 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> Well, updates-testing is 'you get to keep both halves' territory.
wasn't it stable that broke things (sealert stopped working for example
after a stable update) - and then something from updates testing was
supposed to fix it? But it never made
On 06/30/2011 12:16 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 3:51 AM, Jiri Moskovcak wrote:
>> - I was afraid, that it would be against some Fedora policy ;) Then just
>> the rawhide..
>
>
> Okay if this isn't coming to F15, can you provide the sufficient
> instructions on how to revert
On 06/30/2011 12:16 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 3:51 AM, Jiri Moskovcak wrote:
>> - I was afraid, that it would be against some Fedora policy ;) Then just
>> the rawhide..
>
>
> Okay if this isn't coming to F15, can you provide the sufficient
> instructions on how to revert
On 06/29/2011 01:48 PM, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 01:40:06PM -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
>
> > I thought so - glad its benign ... I assume the messages will
> > sometimes be useful to the kernel team ...
> >
> > so should I keep mention
On 06/29/2011 01:22 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-06-29 at 12:58 -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
>>
>> I am getting a lot of these in kernel 3.0-0.rc5.git0.1.fc16.x86_64
>> testing on F15 - i915 - happens on wake from sleep I think. Is this
>> advisory/beni
I'm still seeing these kinds of rcu_dereference_check() messages from
kernel 3.0-0.rc5.git0.1.fc16.x86_64
Same problem on rc3 git5.
Seems to happen when laptop is woken from sleep - I think.
gene/
-
Jun 28 08:49:59 lap3 kernel: [ 39.5
I am getting a lot of these in kernel 3.0-0.rc5.git0.1.fc16.x86_64
testing on F15 - i915 - happens on wake from sleep I think. Is this
advisory/benign or a problem ?
thanks
gene/.
-- /var/log/messages --
Jun 29 08:37:25 lap3 kernel: [72538.407
On 06/24/2011 04:07 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 06/24/2011 12:55 PM, JB wrote:
>> JB gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_computing
>>
>> TC is controversial because it is technically possible not just to secure the
>> hardware for its owner, but also to secure against
On 06/20/2011 01:22 PM, Paul Wouters wrote:
...
>
> gnome3 was not driven by user feedbak. It was driven by getting vendors
> to install it on factory shipped netbooks.
Perhaps, tho I suspect Android won that market already ... but perhaps
its worth a shot, things can change.
>
> Again, I'
On 06/17/2011 11:36 PM, Evandro Giovanini wrote:
those who are want to rewrite/modify GNOME3.
>
> No, I'm not. There are several working extensions *today*, I'm simply
> suggesting that people not 100% satisfied with the default GNOME 3
> experience go out there and experiment with them.
>
> It'
On 06/14/2011 02:32 PM, Nathanael D. Noblet wrote:
> On 06/14/2011 11:24 AM, Genes MailLists wrote:
>
> Its worked super well for me (though less well with GNOME3's effects
> etc)... Can you point me to what you mean by the usual info into
> xorg.conf? to be clear, I d
On 06/14/2011 12:27 PM, Nathanael D. Noblet wrote:
> On 06/14/2011 07:31 AM, seth vidal wrote:
>> On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 11:25 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>>> I've installed XFCE. It was easy to install, and it works sanely
>>> (unlike GNOME 3 / Unity).
>>
>>
>> And you can add some interestin
On 06/13/2011 08:54 PM, Scott Schmit wrote:
> Not addressing specifically the issue with the kernel updates, but at
> least in part, the answer is simple:
> * Within a release, updates should try very hard to avoid breaking
> things.
> * Between releases, upgrades can change a lot. These changes
On 06/13/2011 08:14 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Henrik Wejdmark wrote:
>> I have been with this distro since RH4 and have had a great time doing so.
>> Almost every upgrade has been really smooth with only a few minor setbacks
>> like an odd broken dependency that was easily fixed, but F15 is the end
On 06/13/2011 11:39 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
. At this point I am
> going to ask for someone from the Community Working Group to step in
> and see how we can better get along here. If you have a problem with
> that, I think it would be better if you took some time off and did
> something els
On 06/13/2011 03:13 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
...
>
> systemd surpasses Upstart in every way. It's not in an "early
> state". Upstart is much more limited and hence in a much earlier state
> feature-wise.
>
...
>
> Lennart
>
Superior design - yes I like it - but in practice there are stil
On 06/12/2011 08:40 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> Am 13.06.2011 02:29, schrieb Genes MailLists:
>> Perhaps this is not the way for you if you find it confusing ... my
>> suggestion then is deal with systemd and its bugs/quirks or perhaps
>> install F15 and replace systemd with
On 06/12/2011 07:59 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
>>>
>> I have done this and its working - I've used rawhide with 2.6.39
>> kernel and also F15. See my comments below. I'll describe what you need
>> to do using subset of F15.
>
> this forces a GLIBC-Upgrade, see my others posts
Yes - I sai
1 - 100 of 190 matches
Mail list logo
