On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 3:51 AM, Christopher A. Williams
chriswfed...@cawllc.com wrote:
NetworkManager is refusing to start and the entries for the ethernet
connection are also gone.
Yes, it's nothing whatsoever to to with X or the panel or what not: if
you tail -f /var/log/messages while
Bugzilla'd here,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492246
Cheers,
Miles
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 7:39 PM, Laszlo BERES [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Miles Sabin wrote:
The RHEL signing keys have, however, been used by an unauthorized
party to sign unauthorized packages. Some people would say that that
qualified as compromised on any reasonable definition.
Signing
On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 5:21 PM, Anders Karlsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Miles Sabin [EMAIL PROTECTED] [20080824 16:39]:
We know nothing of the sort. In fact the RH announcement suggests
exactly the opposite ... why else distribute a script to check for
compromised RHEL packages?
Because
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 5:44 PM, Rahul Sundaram
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael J Gruber wrote:
- Fedora's key will be changed, not RHEL's, which has been compromised.
No indication of the latter. The setup is different. Refer
http://www.awe.com/mark/blog/200701300906.html
Only if you
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 6:08 PM, Rahul Sundaram
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The RHEL signing keys have, however, been used by an unauthorized
party to sign unauthorized packages. Some people would say that that
qualified as compromised on any reasonable definition.
Yes but if it requires
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 6:18 PM, Rahul Sundaram
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There are bogus packages already signed and quite possibly out in the
wild ... what do you mean there's no need to generate a new key?
All I would say it really depends on the setup and I gave you a link earlier
with
