On 01/06/2010 01:27 PM, Fulko Hew wrote:
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Adam Jackson a...@redhat.com
mailto:a...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 11:23 -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
Quoting Adam Jackson (a...@redhat.com mailto:a...@redhat.com):
On Wed, 2010-01-06 at
On 01/06/2010 03:21 PM, Till Maas wrote:
How about making the gnome-panel give away its focus to the newly
created window? Within the gnome-panel, it should be pretty obvious
which actions should give away the focus and which should not. I do not
know, how easy to implement it is, though.
On 12/16/2009 11:43 AM, Seth Vidal wrote:
you're an experienced user? You're comfortable knowing what does and
what does not require a reboot? Then why are you using PK?
Disable pk and do the updates directly via yum.
Bam - no more requests to reboot.
I get what you're saying, and it's
On 10/19/2006 08:23 AM, William W. Austin wrote:
Not that I've got an answer for your question, but you might want to
tell your computer that it's not 2006.
--
Peter
When privacy is outlawed only outlaws will have privacy.
-- Zimmermann
--
fedora-devel-list mailing
It's likely that some people have not noticed this message because you
replied to an unrelated thread instead of starting with a new message
entirely. This is best avoided.
On 12/14/2009 02:45 PM, William Reich wrote:
Hello List...
I am working on trying to port a LINUX kernel
driver from
On 12/14/2009 11:45 PM, John Poelstra wrote:
You have an interesting idea about tagging feature pages needing an
owner. In reality that pretty much represents all the pages in
'Category:FeaturePageIncomplete' If they had an active owner or
developer working on the feature they wouldn't be
On 12/11/2009 02:41 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2009-12-10 at 08:57 +0100, Matěj Cepl wrote:
Dne 10.12.2009 07:36, Vasily Levchenko napsal(a):
Does it not work without an xorg.conf, that would be the first goal.
No.
File a bug please, attaching your xorg.conf, Xorg.0.log and output
On 12/04/2009 03:57 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
- glibc32, glibc64 (dead packages?)
These packages are used in the build system so we don't have to install
.i686 glibc packages in the x86_64 buildroot, and other things of that
nature. They're not dead, but they very rarely need modification.
On 12/03/2009 12:24 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 12/02/2009 06:40 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
People doing network installs can either add the updates repo to their
kickstart, or check the box in the anaconda UI, so that the updates
repos are considered at install time. No download of duplicate
On 12/03/2009 08:20 AM, Seth Vidal wrote:
On Thu, 3 Dec 2009, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 00:32 -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
We wouldn't be talking about removing the original GA set - just adding
updated pkgs into the path. So you'd still have the number of pkgs -just
all
On 12/02/2009 09:12 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Seth Vidal wrote:
If you're looking for perfect division, sure - but the reality is this:
19K items in a single dir and ext3 and nfs and many many other things crap
themselves returning that list.
If you make 36 subdirs (26+10) performance gets
On 12/01/2009 11:49 AM, Sir Gallantmon wrote:
Couldn't something like that be implemented into GRUB/GRUB2? Unlike PLoP,
GRUB doesn't really have a size restriction, so maybe smarter methods of
detection could be implemented.
The approach of loading what amounts to DOS TSRs is something you
(on my on tangent...)
On 12/02/2009 12:48 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
I hypothesize that we could place all rpms for a given release
in a single directory (seth will hate this as he wants to split them up
based on first letter of their name for better filesystem performance),
Ugh, first letter
On 12/02/2009 05:03 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 15:52 -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
Isn't this, eventually, what the packagedb is supposed to be able to
do?
I gather it's a ls in a directory kind of thing, not an interface to
one tool or another kind of thing. But I could be
On 12/02/2009 03:53 PM, Seth Vidal wrote:
On Wed, 2 Dec 2009, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
3. replace static mirrors with proxy-ing of kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org
(make sure it works with web infrastructure instead of fighting it)
I don't think that would work fine with a lot of our mirrors.
I
On 12/02/2009 05:58 PM, Seth Vidal wrote:
On Wed, 2 Dec 2009, Peter Jones wrote:
On 12/02/2009 03:53 PM, Seth Vidal wrote:
On Wed, 2 Dec 2009, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
3. replace static mirrors with proxy-ing of kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org
(make sure it works with web infrastructure
On 12/02/2009 05:58 PM, Seth Vidal wrote:
On Wed, 2 Dec 2009, Peter Jones wrote:
(on my on tangent...)
On 12/02/2009 12:48 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
I hypothesize that we could place all rpms for a given release
in a single directory (seth will hate this as he wants to split them up
On 12/02/2009 06:05 PM, James Antill wrote:
On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 17:46 -0500, Peter Jones wrote:
so that every directory has about the same number of things.
This should be fairly easy to code, but has a big downside:
Packages will move directories.
1. This will upset yum
On 11/30/2009 01:27 PM, Peter Jones wrote:
On 11/30/2009 12:27 PM, Matthias Clasen wrote:
3. 'Chain-booting' from cd to usb sounds like an elegant way to avoid
the 'Can't boot USB' problem. Did we figure out how Mandriva are doing
it ?
No, we didn't. There are some things we might be able
On 12/01/2009 10:42 AM, Sir Gallantmon wrote:
I found another tool that claims to be able to search and boot a USB device,
from a floppy disk no less! The tool is called PLoP[1], and it is a custom
boot manager that can boot USB, CD, and hard disks.
Maybe that will help some people figure
On 11/27/2009 02:25 PM, Casey Dahlin wrote:
On 11/27/2009 06:03 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 03:28:19AM -0500, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
A literal zero prior to preprocessing is either a bug, or some kind
of dead-
code causing place-holder.
Not necessarily .. the C
On 11/27/2009 03:05 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
For an idea what to expect, see the draft release notes at
http://rpm.org/wiki/Releases/4.8.0
I notice that explicit ordering syntax that doesn't trigger a strict
requires isn't on this list. It's really something we need sooner rather
than
On 11/27/2009 04:56 PM, Felix Miata wrote:
Physics don't. A two dimensional screen will never be able to more than
simulate 3D. 3D requires more dead dinosaurs, coal and/or other sources of
electrical energy than 2D to produce.
This isn't necessarily the case, in theory or in practice. I
On 11/30/2009 11:39 AM, Casey Dahlin wrote:
On 11/30/2009 10:39 AM, Peter Jones wrote:
On 11/27/2009 02:25 PM, Casey Dahlin wrote:
On 11/27/2009 06:03 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 03:28:19AM -0500, Gregory Maxwell
wrote:
A literal zero prior to preprocessing
On 11/30/2009 12:27 PM, Matthias Clasen wrote:
3. 'Chain-booting' from cd to usb sounds like an elegant way to avoid
the 'Can't boot USB' problem. Did we figure out how Mandriva are doing
it ?
No, we didn't. There are some things we might be able to do here, though,
which may solve this
On 11/23/2009 07:01 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 6:43 PM, Jesse Keating jkeat...@j2solutions.net
wrote:
This is precisely the dialog that has been removed from F12 and is not
planned to be returned.
My understanding was that this was removed because collecting the
On 11/24/2009 03:49 PM, James Antill wrote:
On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 14:22 -0500, Peter Jones wrote:
That reason isn't /quite/ right. One big problem is that if you train a
user to input the root password over and over, what he learns is to type
the root password into a dialog box. The result
On 11/24/2009 02:15 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
We came up with several possible courses of action. First, we
acknowledge that abrt team is working on improving duplicate detection,
but Matej noted that this is intrinsically hard work and abrt will
likely never be able to eliminate or even
On 11/24/2009 04:25 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 16:17 -0500, Peter Jones wrote:
On 11/24/2009 04:07 PM, Sir Gallantmon wrote:
If there are systems that cannot boot to USB, why not offer a boot disc that
would automatically search for USB drives, offer a list of bootable
On 11/24/2009 04:58 PM, John Reiser wrote:
On 11/24/2009 01:38 PM, Peter Jones wrote:
On 11/24/2009 04:25 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
Mandriva Flash - Mandriva's commercial system-on-a-USB-stick thingy -
does exactly what you confidently proclaim to be impossible. It comes
with a CD ISO you
On 11/23/2009 01:24 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
I haven't tried the the fast user switching in fedora... Hopefully it is
using some kernel mode secure path to prevent users from stealing each others
credentials, if it isn't then one should be established for it. Why not use
the
same facility
On 11/18/2009 08:47 PM, King InuYasha wrote:
In any case, 32-bit shouldn't be considered legacy until every type of
computer sold is 64-bit. And the fact is, that isn't true. Netbooks are
entirely 32-bit currently, and a majority of low end desktops are still
32-bit only.
This simply isn't
On 11/18/2009 08:11 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Mike McGrath mmcgr...@redhat.com said:
I think that's too subjective though.
What is subjective about allowing unprivileged to do things that
previously only root could do?
I'd be more in favor of a simple,
broad view of what
On 11/19/2009 02:49 PM, Colin Walters wrote:
* Do we have a fedora-default-policykit-policy?
Sounds like the right way to go.
* How do we get this installed on upgrades? Code in preupgrade?
code in preupgrade seems like a very *bad* way. Maybe Provides:
system-policykit-policy on each of
On 11/19/2009 03:37 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
On 11/19/2009 12:16 PM, Simon Andrews wrote:
Bill Nottingham wrote:
Jeff Garzik (jgar...@pobox.com) said:
This sounds like a tacit admission that the default install for
servers is bloody stupid (== same as desktop), unless the admin
REMOVES
On 11/19/2009 04:13 PM, Casey Dahlin wrote:
On 11/18/2009 09:23 PM, King InuYasha wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 8:18 PM, Ikem Krueger
1: Date/Time stamp, Unix time doesn't work in 32-bit past 2038 (not
really affecting us much, most of us will replace our PCs long before then)
I believe
On 11/18/2009 01:52 PM, nodata wrote:
Am 2009-11-18 19:50, schrieb Tony Nelson:
On 09-11-18 13:44:43, nodata wrote:
Am 2009-11-18 19:16, schrieb Bruno Wolff III:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 17:45:26 +,
Bastien Nocerabnoc...@redhat.com wrote:
Once we get the new user management stuff
On 11/18/2009 03:24 PM, nodata wrote:
Am 2009-11-18 21:02, schrieb Peter Jones:
On 11/18/2009 01:52 PM, nodata wrote:
Am 2009-11-18 19:50, schrieb Tony Nelson:
On 09-11-18 13:44:43, nodata wrote:
Am 2009-11-18 19:16, schrieb Bruno Wolff III:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 17:45:26 +
On 11/18/2009 04:10 PM, Casey Dahlin wrote:
On 11/18/2009 03:06 PM, Peter Jones wrote:
On 11/18/2009 02:35 PM, Casey Dahlin wrote:
On 11/18/2009 02:32 PM, Casey Dahlin wrote:
On 11/18/2009 01:19 PM, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
I may be wrong, but I understand that this behaviour
On 11/17/2009 02:48 AM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
On 11/17/2009 02:43 AM, nodata wrote:
Am 2009-11-17 01:55, schrieb Chris Ball:
Hi,
I've written up a draft of an F13 filesystem rollback feature using
Btrfs snapshots that are automatically created by yum:
On 11/17/2009 11:48 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Jones pjo...@redhat.com writes:
Do they support rollbacks after commit? If they don't, they're not
really as useful for this as they could be.
Rollback *after* commit? This must be some other usage of the term
commit than is standard
On 11/17/2009 11:48 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Jones pjo...@redhat.com writes:
Do they support rollbacks after commit? If they don't, they're not
really as useful for this as they could be.
Rollback *after* commit? This must be some other usage of the term
commit than is standard
On 11/17/2009 02:15 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Peter Jones pjo...@redhat.com wrote:
On 11/17/2009 11:48 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Jones pjo...@redhat.com writes:
Do they support rollbacks after commit? If they don't, they're not
really as useful
On 11/17/2009 04:17 PM, Stewart Adam wrote:
On 2009/11/16 10:56 AM, Peter Jones wrote:
On 11/11/2009 01:30 AM, Stewart Adam wrote:
On 2009/11/10 5:41 PM, Peter Jones wrote:
On 11/10/2009 05:37 PM, Caryl Bigenho wrote:
Hi,
My MacBook is a 4,1. Will it work on my machine?
A 64-bit EFI
On 11/11/2009 01:30 AM, Stewart Adam wrote:
On 2009/11/10 5:41 PM, Peter Jones wrote:
On 11/10/2009 05:37 PM, Caryl Bigenho wrote:
Hi,
My MacBook is a 4,1. Will it work on my machine?
A 64-bit EFI image should work on a MacBook4,1 . A 32-bit EFI image
won't.
If the silver MBP is also
On 11/11/2009 04:51 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 11/11/2009 12:07 PM, Stewart Adam wrote:
I will update it eventually to DeviceKit, but I can't invest the time at
the moment. Would it be possible to have it temporarily removed from the
repos?
If it works as it is, you can take over kudzu
On 11/10/2009 02:40 PM, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
Hello,
I'm creating an EFI bootable USB image on my rawhide system with this
command-line:
./livecd-iso-to-disk.sh --format --efi --overlay-size-mb 400 \
--delete-home --extra-kernel-args selinux=0 ./soas04.iso /dev/sdb1
The
On 11/10/2009 03:49 PM, John Reiser wrote:
pre-Santa Rosa mac will only boot 32-bit EFI images,
and post-Santa Rosa macs will only boot 64-bit EFI images.
Also, it is only recently that a Mac might boot from USB2.0 at all;
Firewire (IEEE 1394) was required for most of Apple history.
All EFI
On 11/10/2009 05:37 PM, Caryl Bigenho wrote:
Hi,
My MacBook is a 4,1. Will it work on my machine?
A 64-bit EFI image should work on a MacBook4,1 . A 32-bit EFI image
won't.
--
Peter
RFC 882 put the dots in .com.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
On 10/29/2009 01:17 PM, Martin Dubuc wrote:
How is it possible to figure out what driver is associated with which
interface. We used to have some of this information available in
/sys/config/hwconf. I am especially interested to know details of Wi-Fi
interfaces (for instance ath5k or iwlagn).
On 10/27/2009 03:03 PM, Ola Thoresen wrote:
On 27. okt. 2009 19:18, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
You can install rfkill package and use same-named command:
Nice app. Thanks for the tip.
But does anyone have any idea about how to disable the hardware kill
switch, when linux insists it is enabled no
On 10/27/2009 03:49 PM, Martin Dubuc wrote:
This is a very nice tool. Unfortunately, on my system running Fedora 11, I
get the following erro:
Can't open RFKILL control device: No such file or directory
Using strace, I discovered that rfkill is trying to open path /dev/rfkill,
but this path
On 10/26/2009 10:51 AM, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Mon, 2009-10-26 at 20:13 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 10/26/2009 08:15 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Mon, 2009-10-26 at 19:07 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 10/26/2009 07:03 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Sun, 2009-10-25 at 21:05 +0530, Rahul
On 10/26/2009 10:51 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 10/26/2009 08:21 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
Which affects who? koji certainly seems to be keeping up with the load.
What I'm trying to pry out of you is what you'd be hoping to accomplish
by using it. The answer so far seems to be I'd spend
On 10/26/2009 11:22 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 10/26/2009 08:45 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
Please don't put words in my mouth, I did not say never try at all. I
said that spending less time building things is only an obvious benefit
if we don't lose real functionality, and don't waste time
On 10/22/2009 10:22 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
32 bits will be here for a long, long time, of course
At most 29 years. 32-bit GNU/Linux doesn't support dates beyond 2038.
This only actually means we've got 29 years to extend time_t .
--
Peter
All parts should
On 09/10/2009 06:27 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Mark Wielaard m...@redhat.com writes:
Jesse Keating jkeating at redhat.com writes:
This is my issue too. There is claim that it was tested, yet it wasn't
tested in the same place we require every other feature to be tested,
that being rawhide.
On 09/03/2009 12:29 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Hans de Goede (j.w.r.dego...@hhs.nl) said:
It really is like having to support gentoo, versus having to support a
distro using pre build packages. And I would really like to move to the
having to
support a pre-build package model for the
On 09/08/2009 12:04 PM, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
On 09/08/2009 11:10 AM, Peter Jones wrote:
There's a related problem here - glibc32 .
I don't think we distribute glibc32.
Hrm. Yeah, probably jumped the gun there. Just want to make
sure we keep it in mind.
--
Peter
I hope you
On 08/27/2009 06:02 AM, Howard Wilkinson wrote:
I have had to patch the code for cpqarrayd to get it working under
Fedora 11. It was failing with a stack smashing exception. I have fixed
this by replacing stack structures with dynamic allocation. Where should
I send the patch ... the last
On 08/27/2009 12:21 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
Hi All,
I have a little touch screen device that I'm playing around with. It
has EFI and its easy enough to get it to boot something other than
what its meant to. It seems the LiveCD doesn't have EFI support there.
Any hints welcome.
Right now,
On 07/01/2009 01:22 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 11:51 -0400, Seth Vidal wrote:
On Wed, 1 Jul 2009, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Seth Vidal wrote:
yum install system-autodeath
That just turns off networking (so then how do you preupgrade from there?
And it lets people keep running
On 06/10/2009 12:05 PM, King InuYasha wrote:
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 3:43 AM, Christopher Brown
snecklif...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/6/10 King InuYasha ngomp...@gmail.com:
I would like to see GRUB Legacy replaced in Fedora 12 with GRUB 2,
especially with a couple odd systems here that don't
On 06/10/2009 05:17 PM, Jeremy Katz wrote:
On Wednesday, June 10 2009, King InuYasha said:
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 11:36 AM, Adam Jackson a...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 2009-06-10 at 11:07 -0500, King InuYasha wrote:
Well, the existing GRUB used in distros was declared Legacy a long
time ago.
On Tue, 2006-03-21 at 22:35 +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
I burned a copy of CD 5 with 800 blank sectors at the end and it worked
perfectly. I also noticed that CD 2 has the problem (although I hadn't
noticed it before), CDs 3 and 4 don't have a problem (I still have to repeat
tests on CD
On Mon, 2006-03-13 at 18:36 -0500, Janina Sajka wrote:
Warren Togami writes:
Janina Sajka wrote:
Should I expect this to work? Is there some other mechanism to boot a
different kernel just once--on the next boot?
http://togami.com/~warren/guides/remoteraidcrazies/
My guide here
On Wed, 2006-03-08 at 03:04 -0500, Ivan Gyurdiev wrote:
Then there's the minor inconvenience of gnome-netstatus being broken
with my atheros chip:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179406
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181861
We don't ship an Atheros
On Wed, 2006-03-08 at 22:26 -0700, Stanton Finley wrote:
And these:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178143
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182147
Almost certainly a BIOS bug in both cases.
--
Peter
On Wed, 2006-03-08 at 23:39 -0700, Stanton Finley wrote:
This then begs the question why do the FC2, FC3, and FC4 installation
media boot and install on the same machine without incident? What's
different about the FC5 installation image kernel and can it be fixed?
Because the behavior of the
69 matches
Mail list logo
