Re: wayland in rawhide

On 11/26/2015 06:32 AM, Ian Malone wrote: On 25 November 2015 at 22:01, Adam Williamson wrote: On Wed, 2015-11-25 at 15:40 -0500, Przemek Klosowski wrote: On 11/25/2015 03:25 PM, drago01 wrote: On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 9:17 PM, Adam Williamson

Re: wayland in rawhide

On 11/20/2015 09:34 AM, Ian Malone wrote: On 12 November 2015 at 14:59, Ray Strode wrote: Hi, On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 5:51 AM, Jared K. Smith wrote: I've been testing Wayland myself since around the F22 time period, but "middle click paste" and

Re: dnf even allows to uninstall RPM and systemd without warnings

On 06/23/2014 06:54 PM, Gerald B. Cox wrote: First of all thank you for your reasoned response. I simply disagree. I understand the fact about require bugs, and the tons of dependent packages. I've seen that also when I've tried to remove a package and noticed it had a myriad of dependencies

Re: F22 System Wide Change: Replace Yum With DNF

On 06/13/2014 09:03 AM, drago01 wrote: On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote: Am 13.06.2014 14:53, schrieb Jan Zelený: That being said, the reason for not renaming dnf to yum is that renaming this project to yum will do nothing else than to confuse its

Re: F22 System Wide Change: Replace Yum With DNF

On 06/13/2014 11:01 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: well, hopefully it does not fit the same way if it needs to drive offside a nice road in context of software: stability i am tired hear people talking about milliseconds of boot-performance and what update tool is slightly faster here and there

Re: Incorrect order of /usr/bin and /usr/sbin in path

On 05/05/2014 10:43 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Mon, 05.05.14 10:35, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY (kkeit...@redhat.com) wrote: On 05/05/2014 10:28 AM, Adam Jackson wrote: On Sun, 2014-05-04 at 18:59 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: however, the semantics of /usr/sbin is to contain superuser binaries

Re: dnf versus yum

On 01/04/2014 03:09 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Sat, 2014-01-04 at 10:50 +0100, Mattia Verga wrote: This is the first time I heard of DNF. Looking at the page where differences between DNF and yum are explained (http://akozumpl.github.io/dnf/cli_vs_yum.html) my question is: do we really need

Re: dnf versus yum

On 01/02/2014 02:25 PM, Dan Mashal wrote: On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 11:09 AM, Richard Vickery richard.vicker...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 7:28 AM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote: look like it starts to happen again: a replacement which is not ready

Re: Where does loopback short circuit ?

On 08/29/2013 04:28 PM, Neil Horman wrote: On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 01:06:23PM -0700, Les Howell wrote: On Thu, 2013-08-29 at 18:04 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 10:02:27AM -0700, John Chludzinski wrote: I've had a debate with some co-workers about whether or not a

Re: F20 System Wide Change: No Default Sendmail

On 07/21/2013 03:17 AM, drago01 wrote: On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 8:58 AM, Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net wrote: Le Sam 20 juillet 2013 21:14, Adam Williamson a écrit : I asked for evidence, not hypotheses. All you are currently doing is making an assertion, over and over and over

Re: F20 System Wide Change: No Default Syslog

On 07/19/2013 02:56 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 07/19/2013 06:45 PM, Billy Crook wrote: I haven't seen anyone asking to ship two sysloggers. I perhaps should have been clearer and say two logging systems which we currently are doing and one of those cannot be disabled or removed so

Re: F20 System Wide Change: No Default Syslog

On 07/18/2013 08:09 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Wed, 17.07.13 22:35, Ding Yi Chen (dc...@redhat.com) wrote: This should be simpler than forcing those stubborn mind (such as me) to change, No? We don't force anyone. You can just install rsyslog and you have everything as you love it.

Re: F20 System Wide Change: No Default Syslog

On 07/17/2013 08:20 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 07/17/2013 12:05 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 09:21:39AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 07/17/2013 12:58 AM, Ding Yi Chen wrote: You still have not addressed the third party programs and scripts that

Re: F20 System Wide Change: No Default Syslog

On 07/17/2013 11:05 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 12:00:05PM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 17.07.2013 11:21, schrieb Jóhann B. Guðmundsson: On 07/17/2013 12:58 AM, Ding Yi Chen wrote: You still have not addressed the third party programs and scripts that

Re: F20 System Wide Change: No Default Syslog

On 07/17/2013 11:21 AM, john.flor...@dart.biz wrote: From: scl...@netwolves.com This seems like such a specious argument. Maybe it made sense when we were talking about disk drives that were megabytes in size, but now we have 500 gigabyte drives usually as a minimum. You don't ever work

Re: F20 System Wide Change: No Default Syslog

On 07/15/2013 08:29 PM, Lars Seipel wrote: On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 02:46:27PM -0600, Eric Smith wrote: I don't actually care whether there's a binary journal or not, but far more of us have real usecases for /var/log/messages, so we shouldn't give up that being available by default. If you use

Re: F20 System Wide Change: No Default Syslog

On 07/15/2013 10:55 AM, Dan Fruehauf wrote: +1 - same here. You're far from being alone. I'm still trying to get used to the new systemd in Fedora and still trying to think why I need it. Altogether for my day to day use I find it as added complexity with no real benefit cerca f15.

Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience

On 03/14/2013 06:52 AM, Denys Vlasenko wrote: On 03/11/2013 08:49 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: On 03/11/2013 02:41 PM, Björn Persson wrote: Yes, why not display the Grub menu? Because it's the year 2013. Not 1999. Whether any text is displayed or not, there still needs to be a long enough

Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience

On 03/14/2013 07:06 AM, Denys Vlasenko wrote: On 03/11/2013 10:48 PM, Björn Persson wrote: Lennart Poettering wrote: (And on EFI systems that do not initialize USB anymore during POST, you have to go through the OS to get into the boot loader anyway...) That's going to be real fun when the OS

Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience

On 03/12/2013 07:04 AM, drago01 wrote: On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote: Am 12.03.2013 09:55, schrieb drago01: On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 10:22 PM, seth vidal skvi...@fedoraproject.org wrote: On Mon, 11 Mar 2013 16:18:33 -0500 Michael Cronenworth

Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience

On 03/12/2013 09:33 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Tue, 12.03.13 09:13, Steve Clark (scl...@netwolves.com) wrote: How many times do you boot your system each day? 10? Okay thats a whole 20 additional seconds. This is way up on my list of most non-sensical arguments about building OSes

Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience

On 03/12/2013 02:23 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 12.03.2013 19:03, schrieb Chris Murphy: i learned it many years ago by facing the boot-menu Well you wouldn't learn it today because of how grub2-mkconfig and grubby interact. ah and because things got worser you would make it more worse

Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience

On 03/11/2013 05:04 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Mon, 11.03.13 21:45, Nicolas Mailhot (nicolas.mail...@laposte.net) wrote: Le Lun 11 mars 2013 21:16, Lennart Poettering a écrit : On Mon, 11.03.13 13:08, Chris Murphy (li...@colorremedies.com) wrote: On Mar 11, 2013, at 11:31 AM, Björn

Re: Non responsive state for systemd

On 03/04/2013 07:05 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Mon, 04.03.13 10:24, David Highley (dhigh...@highley-recommended.com) wrote: Lennart Poettering wrote: On Mon, 04.03.13 07:56, David Highley (dhigh...@highley-recommended.com) wrote: Twice now we have one Fedora 18 system where systemd

Re: Non responsive state for systemd

On 03/06/2013 07:08 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Wed, 06.03.13 06:55, Steve Clark (scl...@netwolves.com) wrote: On 03/04/2013 07:05 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Mon, 04.03.13 10:24, David Highley (dhigh...@highley-recommended.com) wrote: Lennart Poettering wrote: On Mon, 04.03.13

Re: Proposed F19 Feature: systemd/udev Predictable Network Interface Names

On 01/29/2013 01:13 PM, Andrew McNabb wrote: On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 06:11:19PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote: Walk /sys/class/net, filter on type, filter out bridges, filter out wireless if you want to. sysfs should have all the information you need without name-based heuristics. You have

Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Package Signature Checking During Installation

On 01/08/2013 10:55 AM, Peter Jones wrote: On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 03:52:02PM +, Petr Pisar wrote: On 2013-01-08, Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com wrote: = Features/PackageSignatureCheckingDuringInstall = https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/PackageSignatureCheckingDuringInstall *

Re: pulseaudio maintainership status

On 12/26/2012 11:26 AM, Brendan Jones wrote: On 12/25/2012 10:50 AM, Julian Sikorski wrote: Dear list, Dear Lennart, a week ago I have submitted a pulseaudio bug alongside with the patch [1]. There was no response so far. Knowing that Lennart is busy with systemd these days, I proceeded to

Re: systemd requires HTTP server and serves QR codes

On 10/09/2012 02:17 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Tue, 09.10.12 10:31, Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) wrote: On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 04:05:10PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: ? On Tue, 09.10.12 09:49, Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) wrote: allowing regular users to

Re: *countable infinities only

On 06/15/2012 12:05 PM, Jay Sulzberger wrote: On Fri, 15 Jun 2012, Mathieu Bridon boche...@fedoraproject.org wrote: On Thu, 2012-06-14 at 15:46 -0400, Jay Sulzberger wrote: Please forgive this top posting. I will not answer now your radical defense of Microsoft, except to say two things: 1.

Re: *countable infinities only

On 06/12/2012 08:10 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote: On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 10:57 AM, drago01 wrote: On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 4:09 PM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote: On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Chris Smart wrote: On 09/06/12 19:34, drago01 wrote: If Fedora does not implement some form of Secure Boot

Re: *countable infinities only

On 06/12/2012 06:15 AM, drago01 wrote: On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Nicu Buculeinicu_fed...@nicubunu.ro wrote: On 06/12/2012 12:58 PM, drago01 wrote: On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 9:44 AM, Nicu Buculei wrote: The point is we have a target audience: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User_base

Re: *countable infinities only

On 06/12/2012 10:58 AM, Jay Sulzberger wrote: On Tue, 12 Jun 2012, drago01drag...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Nicu Buculeinicu_fed...@nicubunu.ro wrote: On 06/12/2012 12:58 PM, drago01 wrote: On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 9:44 AM, Nicu Buculei wrote: The point is we

Re: *countable infinities only

On 06/02/2012 11:27 AM, Chris Adams wrote: Once upon a time, Kevin Koflerkevin.kof...@chello.at said: And I don't think having to disable Secure Boot in the firmware is a hurdle which will make our users simply walk away. I didn't simply walk away either back in the day where RHL wouldn't boot

Re: *countable infinities only

On 06/02/2012 05:26 PM, drago01 wrote: On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 11:14 PM, Gregory Maxwellgmaxw...@gmail.com wrote: I think regressing to the installs being somewhat easier than ten yearsish ago is still a better place to be than the cryptographic lockdown. I disagree and once again it is not

Re: *countable infinities only

On 06/02/2012 07:55 PM, Chris Adams wrote: Once upon a time, Steve Clarkscl...@netwolves.com said: Who are these users? I have been using Linux since 0.99 while working with many users of Windows,none of them expressed an interest in trying linux. Well, we obviously have different

Re: *countable infinities only

On 06/02/2012 08:20 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: On Sat, Jun 02, 2012 at 07:51:52PM -0400, Steve Clark wrote: Who are these potential users? How many people running windows have you convinced to also load Linux? I have been using Linux since 0.99 and have not been able to convince any to use

Re: *countable infinities only

On 06/02/2012 08:56 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: On Sat, Jun 02, 2012 at 08:43:41PM -0400, Steve Clark wrote: On 06/02/2012 08:20 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: On Sat, Jun 02, 2012 at 07:51:52PM -0400, Steve Clark wrote: Who are these potential users? How many people running windows have you

Re: *countable infinities only

On 05/31/2012 09:14 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: Chris Adams wrote: - Secure boot is required to be able to be disabled on x86 (the only platform Fedora will support it). And this is exactly why we should just require our users to disable it! I don't see any advantage at all from supporting this

Re: Action required: Rawhide: /tmp is now on tmpfs

On 06/01/2012 10:23 AM, Alexey I. Froloff wrote: On Fri, Jun 01, 2012 at 09:27:16AM -0400, Brian Wheeler wrote: my biggest problem was that tmpfs by default allocates half of physical RAM for partition. So I just allocated big enough swap and added a line to /etc/fstab with appropriate size=

Re: *countable infinities only

On 06/01/2012 11:54 AM, drago01 wrote: On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 5:40 PM, Kevin Koflerkevin.kof...@chello.at wrote: Cosimo Cecchi wrote: I don't want to jump in the technicality of this discussion, but I can only hope any solution that requires users to fiddle with BIOS settings in order to

Re: *countable infinities only

On 06/01/2012 12:02 PM, Cosimo Cecchi wrote: On Fri, 2012-06-01 at 17:54 +0200, drago01 wrote: On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 5:40 PM, Kevin Koflerkevin.kof...@chello.at wrote: Cosimo Cecchi wrote: I don't want to jump in the technicality of this discussion, but I can only hope any solution that

Re: [HEADS-UP] Rawhide: /tmp is now on tmpfs

On 06/01/2012 03:00 PM, Alexey I. Froloff wrote: On Fri, Jun 01, 2012 at 01:50:55PM -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: Not a single person who has claimed a performance or semantic win for this /tmp move has replied when asked for proof. $ time dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/file bs=1M count=10240

Re: [HEADS-UP] Rawhide: /tmp is now on tmpfs

On 05/31/2012 08:57 AM, Roberto Ragusa wrote: On 05/31/2012 12:55 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 05/31/2012 12:45 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote: Now /var/tmp should be more persistent which we don't need, Correct, using /var/tmp is wrong and a mistake. IMO, advising people to modify their code to

download.fedoraproject.org ??

Hello, I am trying to access EPEL but download.fedoraproject.org only gives me a blank screen or from yum I get pel/metalink | 265 B 00:00 Could not parse metalink

Re: download.fedoraproject.org ??

On 04/24/2012 11:27 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Tue, 24 Apr 2012 11:24:56 -0400 Steve Clarkscl...@netwolves.com wrote: Hello, I am trying to access EPEL but download.fedoraproject.org only gives me a blank screen or from yum I get pel/metalink | 265 B 00:00 Could not parse metalink

Re: /tmp on tmpfs

On 04/02/2012 05:30 PM, M A Young wrote: On Mon, 2 Apr 2012, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Mon, 02.04.12 16:55, Steve Grubb (sgr...@redhat.com) wrote: What about forensics? Any reboot erases information that might have been needed to see what happened during a break in. /tmp is already

Re: /tmp on tmpfs

On 04/03/2012 11:35 AM, Chris Adams wrote: Once upon a time, Brian Wheelerbdwhe...@indiana.edu said: * The competition for space between things in /tmp and VM. When someone abuses space in /tmp (on purpose or not) then the system is going to start swapping and performance is going to suffer

Re: /usrmove? - about the future

PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 07:23:24PM -0500, Steve Clark wrote: On 02/15/2012 05:19 PM, mike cloaked wrote: I use bash completion all the time every single day - I guess I have become a corner case! No you haven't. All the developers I have worked with since the early

Re: /usrmove? - about the future

On 02/15/2012 05:49 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote: On 02/15/2012 11:55 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 15.02.2012 10:53, schrieb Brendan Jones: On 02/15/2012 10:47 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 14.02.2012 19:16, schrieb Jóhann B. Guðmundsson: On 02/14/2012 10:23 AM, Alfredo Ferrari wrote: Do the

Re: /usrmove? - about the future

On 02/15/2012 05:19 PM, mike cloaked wrote: On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 8:30 PM, Adam Williamsonawill...@redhat.com wrote: On Wed, 2012-02-15 at 18:10 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 15.02.2012 17:59, schrieb Rahul Sundaram: On 02/15/2012 05:06 PM, Steve Clark wrote: On 02/15/2012 05:49 AM, Panu

Re: /usrmove?

On 02/10/2012 05:28 AM, Olav Vitters wrote: On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 01:11:06AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: Yes, I'm arguing that the feature is undesirable by design and should not have been approved, not for Fedora 17, not for Fedora 18, not even for Fedora 31337. It has been approved, other

Re: UsrMove feature breaking yum upgrade upgrades from older releases to F17?

On 01/27/2012 01:43 PM, Jef Spaleta wrote: On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 8:43 AM, Reindl Haraldh.rei...@thelounge.net wrote: if you finally want have /bin as symlink forever this whole change is only wasted time and makes no sense at all If you haven't read the new summary write-up on the benefits

Re: how to have yum prefer one dependency over others

On 10/05/2011 01:51 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Sat, 2011-09-17 at 13:20 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: (That said, there definitely needs to be a way to disable it, and maybe it should even be disabled by default. I personally always uninstall yum- presto. For me, it's much faster to just

Re: what if native systemd service is slower than old sysvinit script?

On 09/17/2011 01:09 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Fri, 2011-09-16 at 23:22 -0400, Steve Clark wrote: Oh, I must have misunderstood - Gene's Mailist comment: . Temptinh as it might be, just please keep session management away from the init daemon and let it do its one important job properly

Re: what if native systemd service is slower than old sysvinit script?

On 09/16/2011 08:08 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Fri, 2011-09-16 at 08:48 -0400, Genes MailLists wrote: 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

Re: what if native systemd service is slower than old sysvinit script?

On 09/16/2011 11:03 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: On 09/17/2011 06:33 AM, Steve Clark wrote: Were not? From: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/systemd systemd System and Session Manager That page does answer your question. systemd can work as a session manager but it isn't part of Fedora

Re: what if native systemd service is slower than old sysvinit script?

On 09/15/2011 02:07 AM, drago01 wrote: On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 7:25 AM, Ralf Corsepiusrc040...@freenet.de wrote: On 09/14/2011 06:23 PM, drago01 wrote: On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 5:34 PM, Ralf Corsepiusrc040...@freenet.dewrote: snip Anyway, some more figures: On the same machine, bootup

Re: grub / grub2 conflicts

On 09/15/2011 12:01 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 04:56:43PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: For grub1 guests, it has turned out not to matter which specific version of grub [as long as it was grub1] was used, as apparently grub-install updates all files needed in

Re: what if native systemd service is slower than old sysvinit script?

On 09/14/2011 04:35 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: On 09/13/2011 11:03 PM, Micha? Piotrowski wrote: Hi 2011/9/13 Tom Lanet...@redhat.com: (This isn't new with 9.1, btw --- the last version or so of 9.0 for F16 was the same, since we switched over to native systemd files.) I used this

Re: what if native systemd service is slower than old sysvinit script?

On 09/14/2011 11:28 AM, Tom Lane wrote: =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Miloslav_Trma=E8?=m...@volny.cz writes: 2011/9/14 Jóhann B. Guðmundssonjohan...@gmail.com: An simple test to measure this reliably is to strip down the legacy sysv init script to the start up command only and have a strip down unit file

Re: PostgreSQL 9.1 and Lucene Core for F16

On 09/12/2011 10:55 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Bruno Wolff IIIbr...@wolff.to writes: On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 03:16:47 -0400, Tom Lanet...@redhat.com wrote: OK, it's built and filed at https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/postgresql-9.1.0-1.fc16 One thing I noticed is that service postgresql

Re: Default services enabled

On 08/23/2011 01:48 PM, JB wrote: JBjb.1234abcdat gmail.com writes: ... Here are some more detailed thoughts. Sys init. - Sys init as a process #1 should be beyond approach by design, and delegate all work to other process(es), whether in a permanent or an ad-hoc manner, that can

Re: Default services enabled

On 08/22/2011 12:03 PM, JB wrote: Steve Grubbsgrubbat redhat.com writes: ... You're not seeing the hundreds - no thousands of emails about systemd? You are not seeing that all the expected facilities of init are not covered? There is well founded rebellion here. ... Yes, you are right. And

Re: Default services enabled

On 08/20/2011 03:31 PM, Steve Grubb wrote: On Saturday, August 20, 2011 02:17:04 PM Lennart Poettering wrote: On Sat, 20.08.11 09:41, Steve Grubb (sgr...@redhat.com) wrote: On Friday, August 19, 2011 10:50:01 PM Kevin Kofler wrote: Tim Waugh wrote: Oh, I just noticed this:

Re: Default services enabled

On 08/20/2011 08:09 AM, Lars Seipel wrote: On Sat, 2011-08-20 at 00:13 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: if you can give a warning you can also stop the socket this is what the user expects and if your software-design is not able to act logically it is broken Stopping the service but leaving the

Re: Fedora 15 and mount points

On 08/12/2011 11:03 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 12.08.2011 17:00, schrieb Tomasz Torcz: On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 10:46:27AM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: I thought that their outputs, especially that of findmnt, would've clarified the output of mount, except for the three sandbox bind mounts.

Re: thanks for F15 mdadm systemd unit

On 07/22/2011 01:16 PM, drago01 wrote: On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Reindl Haraldh.rei...@thelounge.net wrote: Am 22.07.2011 16:33, schrieb drago01: On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Reindl Haraldh.rei...@thelounge.net wrote: Am 21.07.2011 13:14, schrieb Bryn M. Reeves: On 07/20/2011

Re: thanks for F15 mdadm systemd unit

On 07/21/2011 07:38 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 21.07.2011 13:14, schrieb Bryn M. Reeves: On 07/20/2011 11:05 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: hopefully systemd will aslo live for 40 years as sysvinit did or the next replacement will be finished BEFORE release including the correspondending parts of

Re: systemd: Is it wrong?

On 07/10/2011 05:46 AM, Jon Masters wrote: On Sat, 2011-07-09 at 23:32 -0400, Steve Dickson wrote: On 07/08/2011 10:57 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote: Or in other words: configuration via command line arguments or environment variables sucks. I disagree. It doesn't suck. It's the way UNIX and

Re: systemd: Is it wrong?

On 07/10/2011 11:32 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote: On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 05:46:18AM -0400, Jon Masters wrote: I disagree. It doesn't suck. It's the way UNIX and Linux have done this for dozens of years, and it's the way countless sysadmins know and love. Sucks might be true from the point of

Re: systemd: Is it wrong?

On 07/10/2011 01:49 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 11:49:19AM -0500, Chris Adams wrote: Command line arguments and/or environment variables allow script-based startup to adapt to current conditions without having to edit a configuration file. Now maybe you could argue that

Re: systemd: Is it wrong?

On 07/10/2011 04:20 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 03:15:33PM -0400, Jon Masters wrote: On Sun, 2011-07-10 at 16:32 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 05:46:18AM -0400, Jon Masters wrote: The big kernel lock doesn't suck. It's the way SMP UNIX did things

Re: systemd: Is it wrong?

On 07/10/2011 05:35 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 03:56:25PM -0500, Chris Adams wrote: Once upon a time, Matthew Garrettmj...@srcf.ucam.org said: The suggestion isn't that having the options is wrong Well, that's what you said before (conveniently snipped from your

Re: glibc 2.14-4 eats my data (Re: F15 ext3, eCryptfs + samba = data corruption (Re: F15 Error mounting eCryptfs: [-5] Input/output error on different disks))

On 07/08/2011 12:32 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote: W dniu 8 lipca 2011 18:21 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski mkkp...@gmail.com napisał: Hi, 2011/7/8 Andreas Schwabsch...@redhat.com: Use valgrind. I attach valgrind output. ==1312== 1 errors in context 1 of 116: ==1312== Source and destination

Re: glibc 2.14-4 eats my data (Re: F15 ext3, eCryptfs + samba = data corruption (Re: F15 Error mounting eCryptfs: [-5] Input/output error on different disks))

On 07/08/2011 01:19 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote: 2011/7/8 Jakub Jelinekja...@redhat.com: On Fri, Jul 08, 2011 at 01:12:04PM -0400, Steve Clark wrote: So it does appear to be related to the memcpy change in libc. So eCryptfs is buggy, just fix it. The compatibility stuff that has been added

Re: glibc 2.14-4 eats my data (Re: F15 ext3, eCryptfs + samba = data corruption (Re: F15 Error mounting eCryptfs: [-5] Input/output error on different disks))

On 07/07/2011 01:13 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote: Hi, When I did a glibc downgrade to 2.13.90-9 eCryptfs mount problem no longer appears, also there is no data corruption problem. Glibc changes somehow breaks eCryptfs and probably also samba. W dniu 5 lipca 2011 21:25 użytkownik Michał

Re: SYSTEMD: Give us a option for upstart

On 06/23/2011 03:29 AM, Benny Amorsen wrote: Steve Clarkscl...@netwolves.com writes: If your are concerned with boot times suspend to disk! Suspend to disk is dead slow even with an SSD. That really is no alternative. Suspend to RAM is nice when it works which is about 4 times out of 5 on

Re: SYSTEMD: Give us a option for upstart

On 06/23/2011 08:49 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 23.06.2011 14:10, schrieb Steve Clark: On 06/23/2011 03:29 AM, Benny Amorsen wrote: Steve Clarkscl...@netwolves.com writes: If your are concerned with boot times suspend to disk! Suspend to disk is dead slow even with an SSD. That really

Re: The behaviour of systemctl.

On 06/19/2011 10:25 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 07:09:14PM -0400, Steve Clark wrote: Aaron, haven't you figured it out yet? As far as Lennart is concerned it is his way or the highway! My $.02 after following all the threads about sysemd/ctl. Steve

Re: The behaviour of systemctl.

On 06/19/2011 06:54 AM, Aaron Sowry wrote: On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 10:03:05AM +0100, Martin Dengler wrote: Your point about column headers is taken (explicitly, in my mail) and bears no more repeating since there's a bug about it. I didn't realise there was a bug for this, which is it? Your

Re: what key between Ctrl Alt

On 06/17/2011 09:05 AM, Felix Miata wrote: On 2011/06/17 08:53 (GMT-0300) Domingo Becker composed: The shortest way is by using keyboard, as Rahul says: 1. Press the key between Ctrl and Alt. What key between Ctrl Alt? The last good[1] keyboards made (AFAIK) predate keyboards with windows

Re: what key between Ctrl Alt

On 06/17/2011 09:43 AM, Tomas Mraz wrote: On Fri, 2011-06-17 at 09:05 -0400, Felix Miata wrote: On 2011/06/17 08:53 (GMT-0300) Domingo Becker composed: The shortest way is by using keyboard, as Rahul says: 1. Press the key between Ctrl and Alt. What key between Ctrl Alt? The last good[1]

Re: systemd: please stop trying to take over the world :)

On 06/14/2011 04:06 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Mon, 13.06.11 19:02, Denys Vlasenko (dvlas...@redhat.com) wrote: On Mon, 2011-06-13 at 12:37 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote: On Mon, 2011-06-13 at 18:01 +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: We invoke sethostname() from inside systemd since that is one of

Re: [Fed-Devel] Re: SYSTEMD: Give us a option for upstart

On 06/14/2011 07:08 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: On 06/14/2011 04:36 PM, Rudolf Kastl wrote: I never proposed having alternatives for each of the core systems either... There is already a viable alternative that works. inittab contains atm exactly one line... the one with the default runlevel...

Re: Fedora 14 and Sandy Bridge graphics

On 06/12/2011 12:55 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 12.06.2011 18:53, schrieb drago01: On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 6:45 PM, Reindl Haraldh.rei...@thelounge.net wrote: upstart is still maintained and shipped, you should be able to install and use it. and why in the world is systemd forced after a

Re: SYSTEMD: Give us a option for upstart

On 06/12/2011 05:39 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 12.06.2011 23:35, schrieb Josh Boyer: On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Reindl Haraldh.rei...@thelounge.net wrote: PLEASE give us a option for systems upgraded with yum NOT USING systemd and force upstart as before * the system is running since

Re: SYSTEMD: Give us a option for upstart

On 06/12/2011 06:18 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 13.06.2011 00:13, schrieb Steve Clark: WTF every three years a new pig is forced to run through the city and if any subsystem is runnign well and debugged some idiot comes out of his hole and try replace and force everybody to use

Re: systemd: please stop trying to take over the world :)

On 06/10/2011 09:36 AM, Michal Schmidt wrote: On 06/10/2011 03:07 PM, Denys Vlasenko wrote: I understand your desire to replace everything by systemd. I really do. syslogd, klogd, mount, fsck, and a dozen other things I forget or don't know. You're exaggerating. Why does systemd link against

Re: systemd: please stop trying to take over the world :)

On 06/10/2011 09:07 AM, Denys Vlasenko wrote: Hi Lennart, systemd is eating a lot more memory than any other init process I ever played with. Granted, systemd does a bit more that typical init, but I think using *eleven plus megabytes* of malloced space is a bit much. systemctl --all shows

Re: systemd questions

On 05/20/2011 12:00 AM, Chuck Ebbert wrote: On Thu, 19 May 2011 14:59:57 +0200 Lennart Poetteringmzerq...@0pointer.de wrote: I am sorry that reality bothers you so much, but it is the hard old real world ... See, I am so young, I still have the idealism that we can fix what is broken. And

Re: ipv6 tools + ipv4 tools fusion.

On 04/27/2011 11:57 PM, Paul Wouters wrote: On Wed, 27 Apr 2011, Chuck Anderson wrote: On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 02:59:09AM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: because the same hostname can have A and AAA records and the people commonly use ping (sysadmins) must be able to decide what they will test?

Re: [thunderbird] Default browser is no longer read from prefs

On 04/13/2011 03:26 AM, Christopher Aillon wrote: On 04/12/2011 06:40 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: On 04/13/2011 06:47 AM, Christopher Aillon wrote: commit 7986a8567a9dbb2a6f8187b91a021d5ad350f96f Author: Christopher Ailloncail...@redhat.com Date: Tue Apr 12 18:15:07 2011 -0700 Default

Re: F15: NIS, NFS mounts and systemd

On 04/05/2011 04:08 PM, Severin Gehwolf wrote: On Tue, 2011-04-05 at 22:03 +0200, Micha? Piotrowski wrote: W dniu 5 kwietnia 2011 21:49 uz.ytkownik Micha? Piotrowski mkkp...@gmail.com napisa?: W dniu 5 kwietnia 2011 21:48 uz.ytkownik Micha? Piotrowski mkkp...@gmail.com napisa?: Try to add

Re: preupgrade f13 to f14 hangs on reboot

On 04/04/2011 10:55 AM, Przemek Klosowski wrote: On 04/03/2011 06:04 PM, Steve Clark wrote: I am trying to use preupgrade a fedora 13 system to fedora 14. When I reboot the system just hangs. The hardware is a Jetway MB with an intel D510 cpu and 2 GB of memory sata drive. All I see on reboot

preupgrade f13 to f14 hangs on reboot

I am trying to use preupgrade a fedora 13 system to fedora 14. When I reboot the system just hangs. The hardware is a Jetway MB with an intel D510 cpu and 2 GB of memory sata drive. All I see on reboot is a blinking cursor in the upper left corner of the screen. I have to ctl-alt-del to get