Ed Greshko wrote:
> Too bad that doesn't answer my question
correct, you are. i sent wrong link.
this describes it's use, and probably why op installed it;
http://rpmfind.rediris.es/rpm2html/suse-9.3-i586/deb-1.10.27-3.i586.html
--
peace out.
tc,hago.
g
.
in a free world witho
On 01/08/2010 10:54 AM, Ed Greshko wrote:
Joachim Backes wrote:
Anybody has the same (or similar) problem with latest F12 updates
(Package deb vs. perl-5.8.6)?
Total size: 42 M
Is this ok [y/N]: y
Downloading Packages:
Running rpm_check_debug
ERROR with rpm_check_debug vs depsolve:
perl
g wrote:
> Ed Greshko wrote:
>
>
>> What is "deb"? I could not find that in any of the fedora repositories
>> that I've enabled.
>>
>
> http://yum.baseurl.org/search?q=deb-1.10.27-3.&wiki=on&changeset=on&ticket=on
>
>
Too bad that doesn't answer my question
--
Q: How did you get i
Ed Greshko wrote:
> What is "deb"? I could not find that in any of the fedora repositories
> that I've enabled.
http://yum.baseurl.org/search?q=deb-1.10.27-3.&wiki=on&changeset=on&ticket=on
--
peace out.
tc,hago.
g
.
in a free world without fences, who needs gates.
**
help microsoft s
Joachim Backes wrote:
> Anybody has the same (or similar) problem with latest F12 updates
> (Package deb vs. perl-5.8.6)?
>
>
> Total size: 42 M
> Is this ok [y/N]: y
> Downloading Packages:
> Running rpm_check_debug
> ERROR with rpm_check_debug vs depsolve:
> perl =
Joachim Backes wrote:
> Anybody has the same (or similar) problem with latest F12 updates
> ERROR with rpm_check_debug vs depsolve:
> perl = 5.8.6 is needed by (installed) deb-1.10.27-3.i586
> Complete!
> (1, [u'Please report this error in http://yu
Anybody has the same (or similar) problem with latest F12 updates
(Package deb vs. perl-5.8.6)?
sudo yum update
Loaded plugins: presto, refresh-packagekit
Setting up Update Process
Resolving Dependencies
--> Running transaction check
---> Package acl.i686 0:2.2.49-2.fc12 set to be u
of
> > KDE and into GNOME, I can run any application with
> sound and they work
> > fine. All sound worked fine prior to today's
> updates, which included the
> > latest pulse updates.
>
Hi;
this happened to me.
I only run KDE, so did not test gnome.
F ->
don't know why Xine backend no longer works, but gstreamer fixed it. I
added this problem to BZ #551496. I'll update that bug, with your
solution. I have checked the other machine and it has Xine as the backend.
Maybe after another set of updates, either to KDE or pulse, I will try
swit
und and they work
> fine. All sound worked fine prior to today's updates, which included the
> latest pulse updates.
for giggles, you can try swapping phonon backends to see if that helps you
any.
systemsettings -> multimedia (backends tab).
On f12, both xine and gstreamer ba
today's updates, which included the
latest pulse updates.
lspci:
00:05.0 Audio device: nVidia Corporation MCP61 High Definition Audio (rev a2)
I checked alsamixer and nothing is muted. Checked Pulse Audio Volume
Control and everything looks OK there. Again, I want to emphasize that
(
--- On Wed, 12/30/09, Rich Emberson wrote:
> Trying to do a
> yum makecache
> on my fedora 12 i386 machine and it starts downloading
> updates/filelists_db
> and the download rate gets slower and slower, from 100s of
> KBs/second to KBs to 100s of B/s to Bytes/seccond
>
&
On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 1:28 PM, Rich Emberson wrote:
> Trying to do a
> yum makecache
> on my fedora 12 i386 machine and it starts downloading updates/filelists_db
> and the download rate gets slower and slower, from 100s of KBs/second to
> KBs to 100s of B/s to Bytes/sec
Trying to do a
yum makecache
on my fedora 12 i386 machine and it starts downloading updates/filelists_db
and the download rate gets slower and slower, from 100s of KBs/second to KBs
to 100s of B/s to Bytes/seccond
to 0 B/s - basically stopping.
I can Control-C to restart but the same happens again
On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 09:50:50 +, Frank wrote:
> On 24/12/09 09:43, KC8LDO wrote:
> > Due to the continuing problems I'm having with Samba on my F11 box I
> > looked to see if there are any updates, seems there are, but its not
> > reflected in the official Fedora r
On 24/12/09 09:43, KC8LDO wrote:
> Due to the continuing problems I'm having with Samba on my F11 box I
> looked to see if there are any updates, seems there are, but its not
> reflected in the official Fedora repo's.
>
> The latest version of one RPM I see, using yumex
Due to the continuing problems I'm having with Samba on my F11 box I looked
to see if there are any updates, seems there are, but its not reflected in
the official Fedora repo's.
The latest version of one RPM I see, using yumexm, is
"samba-3.4.2-0.42.fc11". However there a
being, you can revert to the older version like so:
sudo rpm -e --nodeps firefox xulrunner && sudo yum install -y
--disablerepo=updates firefox xulrunner
...note you'll be running Firefox w/o the latest updates, but some
people need Firebug (like me).
--
fedora-list mailing list
fe
Cameron Simpson wrote:
> On 22Dec2009 08:24, Ed Greshko wrote:
> | Frank Cox wrote:
> | > On Mon, 2009-12-21 at 16:31 -0600, Brian Wood wrote:
> | >> I downloaded/built/installed a new version of sqlite, but that hasn't
> | >> helped.
> | >
> | > This is likely your problem. Firefox probably exp
On 22Dec2009 08:24, Ed Greshko wrote:
| Frank Cox wrote:
| > On Mon, 2009-12-21 at 16:31 -0600, Brian Wood wrote:
| >> I downloaded/built/installed a new version of sqlite, but that hasn't
| >> helped.
| >
| > This is likely your problem. Firefox probably expects to find sqlite
| > installed fro
Frank Cox wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-12-21 at 16:31 -0600, Brian Wood wrote:
>
>> I downloaded/built/installed a new version of sqlite, but that hasn't
>> helped.
>>
>
> This is likely your problem. Firefox probably expects to find sqlite
> installed from a Fedora rpm and not a homebuilt one.
On Mon, 2009-12-21 at 16:31 -0600, Brian Wood wrote:
> I downloaded/built/installed a new version of sqlite, but that hasn't
> helped.
This is likely your problem. Firefox probably expects to find sqlite
installed from a Fedora rpm and not a homebuilt one.
--
MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Melville Sask ~
Yesterday I allowed the system to install some security updates.
Since then when I've tried to start Firefox, I get "The application has
been updated, but your version of SQLite is too old and the
application cannot run." I downloaded/built/installed a new version
of sqlite,
On 15/12/09 17:56, Konstantin Svist wrote:
> On 12/15/2009 09:44 AM, Frank Murphy (Frankly3D) wrote:
>> On 15/12/09 17:42, Konstantin Svist wrote:
>>
>>> How come I don't see fresh kernel versions in updates-testing? Should I
>>> be looking elsewhere?
&g
On 12/15/2009 09:44 AM, Frank Murphy (Frankly3D) wrote:
On 15/12/09 17:42, Konstantin Svist wrote:
How come I don't see fresh kernel versions in updates-testing? Should I
be looking elsewhere?
The infrastructure just moved house.
Give them a chance.
Sorry, I must'
On 15/12/09 17:42, Konstantin Svist wrote:
> How come I don't see fresh kernel versions in updates-testing? Should I
> be looking elsewhere?
>
The infrastructure just moved house.
Give them a chance.
--
Regards,
Frank Murphy
UTF_8 Encoded.
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-l
How come I don't see fresh kernel versions in updates-testing? Should I
be looking elsewhere?
--
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
There are some good wireless changes/fixes in 2.6.32 which would be
very worthwhile having in both f12 and f11. I assume it will be pushed
to f12 - yes ?
But, are there plans to make 2.6.32.1 available for f11 ?
If (yes) {
Great!!
} else {
Would it make sense to c
Hi John,
My F12 worked perfectly on my ATI Technologies Inc RV350 AS [Radeon
9550] with no xorg.conf from the first day.
After couple of updates compiz started crashing and xrandr stopped
recognizing settings properly. I used xorg.conf for a while only as a
work around.
Now after couple of recent
tance, encouragement, and advice for using
Fedora."
To: fedora-list@redhat.com
Subject: Re: 1 update available and no updates available
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 23:25:15 +0100
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 16:13:10 -0600
Hi Steve
> Try "yum clean metadata" then "yum update" (not "upg
After each new kernel update in Fedora 12 x86_64 , default time out is reset
to 15secs and freshly installed kernel is set as default. Since the
proprietary WLAN drivers from RPMFusion comes one or two days after each
kernel update, after each kernel update I have to manually edit settings for
gru
After the latest batch of F12 updates, VirtualBox won't run 64-bit
guests anymore, giving the following error message:
VT-x/AMD-V hardware acceleration has been enabled, but is not operational.
Your 64-bit guest will fail to detect a 64-bit CPU and will not be able
to boot.
Please ensure tha
On 11/29/2009 04:27 PM, Skunk Worx wrote:
--I no longer need an xorg.conf with "XAA" accel enabled to prevent X
crashes. EXA seems to be working reliably now.
Still getting occasional crashes. Several hours of use this time rather
than several minutes in the box stock f12.
This crash took o
On 11/29/2009 04:27 PM, Skunk Worx wrote:
EXA seems stable with kernel modesetting though...great!
Although X isn't crashing hard, I'm seeing the display freeze and
recover occasionally (usually while switching from one firefox tab (html
text) to another FF tab (with a large image).
[mi]
After updates today my radeon driver does not start properly if the
kernel nomodeset option is used.
The X log has a message :
"Couldn't find valid PLL dividers"
Good news though in other areas :
--I can shell into the machine with ssh, it's not a hard crash.
--If I se
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 16:13:10 -0600
Hi Steve
> Try "yum clean metadata" then "yum update" (not "upgrade").
>
Thank you for quick answer.
Clean metadate gives:
Indlæste udvidelsesmoduler: presto, refresh-packagekit
32 metadata filer slettet
17 sqlite filer slettet
0 metadata filer slettet
And
On 11/29/2009 04:08 PM, Allan Dreyer Andersen wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Behind this strange sounding subject is strange occurence for me.
> I'm new to Fedora and have installed F12. All updates are installed by
> few days ago I notice the normal 'Updates available' icon
Hi all
Behind this strange sounding subject is strange occurence for me.
I'm new to Fedora and have installed F12. All updates are installed by
few days ago I notice the normal 'Updates available' icon in my Gnome
menu.
If I click on the icon I get 'All software are updated
Michael;
Great, so its not just me and I'm not going nuts.
Thanks;
Leland C. Scott
KC8LDO
- Original Message -
From: "Michael D. Setzer II"
To: "KC8LDO" ;
Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2009 4:54 AM
Subject: Re: Strange Nautilus behavior after updates and re
On 15 Nov 2009 at 0:21, KC8LDO wrote:
From: "KC8LDO"
To:
Date sent: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 00:21:17 -0500
Organization: Private Account
Subject:Strange Nautilus behavior after updates and rebooting
machine with
Anybody notice strange Nautilus behavior after updates and rebooting machine
with a persistent VNC connection setup? I don't leave the machine on all
the time thus the rebooting. I've been getting rather annoyed with the way
Nautilus is failing to display my home folder's conte
On Sat, 2009-10-31 at 07:23 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> Did I read your previous message incorrectly? I thought you were saying
> that "none of the manufacturer's warranties them beyond a year now."
> And now you seem to be saying that you can get 3 and 5 year warranties
> on WD and Seagate drive
Craig White wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-10-31 at 06:24 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
>
>>> hardly surprising at all...consumer grade SATA hard drives have
>>>
>> become
>>
>>> unreliable and that is why none of the manufacturer's warranties
>>>
>> them
>>
>>> beyond a year now.
>>>
On Sat, 2009-10-31 at 06:24 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> > hardly surprising at all...consumer grade SATA hard drives have
> become
> > unreliable and that is why none of the manufacturer's warranties
> them
> > beyond a year now.
> >
> >
> Really? All of my Seagate drives that I purchase here in
Mike Cloaked wrote:
>
> Ed Greshko wrote:
>
>>
>>> hardly surprising at all...consumer grade SATA hard drives have become
>>> unreliable and that is why none of the manufacturer's warranties them
>>> beyond a year now.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Really? All of my Seagate drives that I purcha
ver which
make of drive is in it unless you know something I don't!
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/two-major-failures-after-yesterday-updates---anyone-else-tp26109441p26137810.html
Sent from the Fedora List mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
--
fedora
Craig White wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-10-30 at 13:45 -0700, Mike Cloaked wrote:
>
>> This evening I removed the HD and installed the brand new hard drive.
>> The
>> machine now readily booted to a PartedMagic LiveCD and I was able to
>> partition the drive to prepare for an f11 clean install which I
On Fri, 2009-10-30 at 13:45 -0700, Mike Cloaked wrote:
> This evening I removed the HD and installed the brand new hard drive.
> The
> machine now readily booted to a PartedMagic LiveCD and I was able to
> partition the drive to prepare for an f11 clean install which I have
> now
> just completed.
ying to get to the bottom of what happened to the other machine
- which was clearly a software issue.
Have a good weekend.
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/two-major-failures-after-yesterday-updates---anyone-else-tp26109441p26136595.html
Sent from the Fedora List ma
t had any reply since the end of August!
On the suggestions for trying to boot a livecd - I did try and after the
POST, it gave "port 00:" at the top of the screen and a line of "stuff" -
but did nothing further. I now have a new replacement HD which I will
install over the week
Gabriel Ramirez wrote:
> On 10/29/2009 02:23 PM, Mike Cloaked wrote:
>
>>
>> In my wife's case she reported that when hitting the enter key to login
>> under kdm the screen went black, and this was followed by a cursor at top
>> right and repeated lines containing text, with "nouveau_fifo_free
On 10/29/2009 02:23 PM, Mike Cloaked wrote:
>
> In my wife's case she reported that when hitting the enter key to login
> under kdm the screen went black, and this was followed by a cursor at top
> right and repeated lines containing text, with "nouveau_fifo_free:freeing
> fifo 1"
>
> So this ap
On 29Oct2009 08:44, Craig White wrote:
| On Thu, 2009-10-29 at 08:24 -0700, Mike Cloaked wrote:
| > I am at a total loss as this takes out both operational desktops at home -
| > it is of course possible that it is not connected with any updates - but two
| > machines going out within
Mike Cloaked wrote:
>
>
> # service paranoia start
> OK so the two machines conspired to fail in the same 12 hour period soon
> after some updates - it is a hardware conspiracy! Now I know...
>
> Now I'll just have to make sure I don't update my phone, TV,
> waits till you install new software to break. I've
> seen it happen way too often over the years in our lab
> at work for it to be a coincidence :-).
Powercycles do shake down hardware so there is more than an element of
truth to the belief. It's particularly visible for disks.
("How do you get
machines were/are on independent ups'es - so I can't see it is power
related unless some spike managed to get through the ups boxen.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/two-major-failures-after-yesterday-updates---anyone-else-tp26109441p26117024.html
Sent from the Fedo
start
OK so the two machines conspired to fail in the same 12 hour period soon
after some updates - it is a hardware conspiracy! Now I know...
Now I'll just have to make sure I don't update my phone, TV, or anything
else just in case they are part of the same plot!
# service paranoi
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 09:41:22 -0700 (PDT)
Mike Cloaked wrote:
> OK - maybe I am just very very unlucky today
I have this long standing theory that hardware deliberately
waits till you install new software to break. I've
seen it happen way too often over the years in our lab
at work for it to be a
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 02:14:53 -0700 (PDT)
Mike Cloaked wrote:
> I would like to know if this is a chance event or related to kernel changes,
> particularly related to ext4?
This machine (an i7-940) is working fine using the latest F11 updates and it
has an ext4 filesystem.
I reboo
age that could have been
connected. I don't use quotas but one of the systems guys at work told me
that there were known problems with quotas in ext4 - and I am wondering if
this is connected - if there is nothing possibly related to the updates then
I will accept that I just had two disks die
On Thu, 2009-10-29 at 08:24 -0700, Mike Cloaked wrote:
> I am at a total loss as this takes out both operational desktops at home -
> it is of course possible that it is not connected with any updates - but two
> machines going out within 12 hours seems a very unfortunate coincidence
On 10/29/2009 11:24 AM, Mike Cloaked wrote:
> Yes I rebooted both machines yesterday morning shortly after the updates
> were in. They appeared to run fine until the first failed catastrophically
> last night. The second failed whilst I was on my way to work - my wife
> phoned me to
running on f11 very successfully for some time.
>> I
>> had no reason to suspect the hardware at all and both were running fine
>> from
>> new a couple of years ago - but I am now wondering if this has anything
>> to
>> do with updates that came in on 28th Oc
ason to suspect the hardware at all and both were running fine from
> new a couple of years ago - but I am now wondering if this has anything to
> do with updates that came in on 28th October. The new kernel and a number of
> other updates were installed yesterday morning on both machines
new a couple of years ago - but I am now wondering if this has anything to
do with updates that came in on 28th October. The new kernel and a number of
other updates were installed yesterday morning on both machines. Both were
also using ext4 files systems.
I would like to know if this is a chance
FYI: I was able to install the latest updates but not without
first removing the following two items before proceeding:
(1) ibus-table-additional-1.2.0.20091014-1.fc11.noarch from updates has
depsolving problems
--> Missing Dependency: ibus-table = 1.2.0.20090902-1.fc11 is needed
by pack
Ed Greshko wrote:
Bill Davidsen wrote:
Ed Greshko wrote:
Bill Davidsen wrote:
Ed Greshko wrote:
Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
An attempt to install the latest updates produced the following
errors from yumex. Machine is x86_64 with all updates except the
latest.
jon
Missing Dependency
Bill Davidsen wrote:
> Ed Greshko wrote:
>> Bill Davidsen wrote:
>>> Ed Greshko wrote:
>>>> Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
>>>>> An attempt to install the latest updates produced the following
>>>>> errors from yumex. Machine i
Ed Greshko wrote:
Bill Davidsen wrote:
Ed Greshko wrote:
Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
An attempt to install the latest updates produced the following
errors from yumex. Machine is x86_64 with all updates except the
latest.
jon
Missing Dependency: libibus.so.0()(64bit) is needed by package
ibus
Rex Dieter wrote:
Tom Horsley wrote:
On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 09:56:30 -0500
Rex Dieter wrote:
OK, so a broken dep is found somewhere, now what? Stop the presses,
manually find what is broke, restart updates-push from the beginning?
Not fun.
But what happens now is the presses DON'T stop
Rex Dieter wrote:
Tom Horsley wrote:
On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 15:51:52 +0200
Michael Schwendt wrote:
Skipping the updates-testing repo and pushing updates directly into the
updates repo is frowned upon.
I still can't understand why the repo update process isn't automated
at least to
/archives/fedora-test-list/2009-September/msg00713.html
And than you for it!
Skipping the updates-testing repo and pushing updates directly into the
updates repo is frowned upon.
--
Bill Davidsen
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations o
On Wed, 2009-09-30 at 13:30 -0400, Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 11:20:43 -0500
> Rex Dieter wrote:
>
> > And, if this batch of updates included critical (security or otherwise)
> > fixes, that wouldn't influence your opinion?
>
> No. My system has
On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 11:20:43 -0500
Rex Dieter wrote:
> And, if this batch of updates included critical (security or otherwise)
> fixes, that wouldn't influence your opinion?
No. My system has already been up for a long time without those
fixes anyway, but if there is one I'm des
On 09/30/2009 10:00 PM, Valent Turkovic wrote:
>
> I don't know how to instruct livecd-creator to use previous versions,
> and info would be appreciated.
livecd-creator uses yum which in turns relies on the repositories. I
assume you are using a local repository. Remove the latest version and
re
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 6:22 PM, Rahul Sundaram
wrote:
> On 09/30/2009 09:53 PM, Valent Turkovic wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 3:51 AM, Jonathan Ryshpan
>> wrote:
>>> An attempt to install the latest updates produced the following errors from
>>> yume
On 09/30/2009 09:53 PM, Valent Turkovic wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 3:51 AM, Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
>> An attempt to install the latest updates produced the following errors from
>> yumex.
>> Machine is x86_64 with all updates except the latest.
>>
>
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 4:15 PM, Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 15:51:52 +0200
> Michael Schwendt wrote:
>
>> Skipping the updates-testing repo and pushing updates directly into the
>> updates repo is frowned upon.
>
> I still can't understand why the rep
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 3:51 AM, Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
> An attempt to install the latest updates produced the following errors from
> yumex.
> Machine is x86_64 with all updates except the latest.
>
> jon
>
> Missing Dependency: libibus.so.0()(64bit) is needed by pa
Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 09:56:30 -0500
> Rex Dieter wrote:
>
>> OK, so a broken dep is found somewhere, now what? Stop the presses,
>> manually find what is broke, restart updates-push from the beginning?
>> Not fun.
>
> But what happens n
On Wed, 2009-09-30 at 10:15 -0400, Tom Horsley wrote:
> I still can't understand why the repo update process isn't automated
> at least to the extent of testing updates on a virtual machine
> which has all optional packages installed to see if the updates
> install correctl
On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 09:56:30 -0500
Rex Dieter wrote:
> OK, so a broken dep is found somewhere, now what? Stop the presses,
> manually find what is broke, restart updates-push from the beginning? Not
> fun.
But what happens now is the presses DON'T stop, but just spew
the bro
Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 15:51:52 +0200
> Michael Schwendt wrote:
>
>> Skipping the updates-testing repo and pushing updates directly into the
>> updates repo is frowned upon.
>
> I still can't understand why the repo update process isn't
Bill Davidsen wrote:
> Ed Greshko wrote:
>> Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
>>> An attempt to install the latest updates produced the following
>>> errors from yumex. Machine is x86_64 with all updates except the
>>> latest.
>>> jon
>>>
>>>
On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 15:51:52 +0200
Michael Schwendt wrote:
> Skipping the updates-testing repo and pushing updates directly into the
> updates repo is frowned upon.
I still can't understand why the repo update process isn't automated
at least to the extent of testing updates on a
Once upon a time, Bill Davidsen said:
> Given that the upgrade installs a new kernel (2.6.30.8-64 from memory)
> which doesn't do networking, more than chill is required. I did this to my
> production laptop, then managed to do it again on a desktop. Since it
> happened after midnight, I just s
dora-test-list/2009-September/msg00713.html
Skipping the updates-testing repo and pushing updates directly into the
updates repo is frowned upon.
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject
On 09/30/2009 07:10 PM, Bill Davidsen wrote:
Ed Greshko wrote:
Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
An attempt to install the latest updates produced the following
errors from yumex. Machine is x86_64 with all updates except the
latest.
jon
Missing Dependency: libibus.so.0()(64bit) is needed by package
Ed Greshko wrote:
Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
An attempt to install the latest updates produced the following errors from yumex.
Machine is x86_64 with all updates except the latest.
jon
Missing Dependency: libibus.so.0()(64bit) is needed by package
ibus-chewing-1.2.0.20090818-1.fc11.x86_64
with the name of the package (note that it should be
the source rpm name). You can find that using rpm -qi .
Alternatively, look for the update at
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates and add a comment there. You
would note that someone has already done that for this problem at
https
On Wed, 2009-09-30 at 13:02 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > Just what I planned to do. But it seemed to be a good idea to tell the
> > packagers that there is a problem, otherwise it might be a while before
> > they fixed it (8-).
>
> If that's the goal, please use bugzilla.
> http://bugz.fedora
On 09/30/2009 09:49 AM, Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
> Just what I planned to do. But it seemed to be a good idea to tell the
> packagers that there is a problem, otherwise it might be a while before
> they fixed it (8-).
If that's the goal, please use bugzilla.
http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/ is a sh
On Wed, 2009-09-30 at 11:12 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
> > An attempt to install the latest updates produced the following errors from
> > yumex.
> > Machine is x86_64 with all updates except the latest.
> >
> > jon
> >
> >
Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
> An attempt to install the latest updates produced the following errors from
> yumex.
> Machine is x86_64 with all updates except the latest.
>
> jon
>
> Missing Dependency: libibus.so.0()(64bit) is needed by package
> ibus-chewing-1.2.
An attempt to install the latest updates produced the following errors from
yumex.
Machine is x86_64 with all updates except the latest.
jon
Missing Dependency: libibus.so.0()(64bit) is needed by package
ibus-chewing-1.2.0.20090818-1.fc11.x86_64 (installed)
Missing Dependency: libibus.so.0
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 5:21 AM, delsvr wrote:
> I'm waiting on the wine 1.1.30 development build (tagged yesterday), and I
> wanted to make sure I was refreshing the right page (i.e.
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=4106). Thanks.
I'd use instead:
https://admin.fedorapr
Hi,
Is the best way to track the latest package updates, short of yum updating,
through this site?
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/index
I'm waiting on the wine 1.1.30 development build (tagged yesterday), and I
wanted to make sure I was refreshing the right page (i.e.
On Mon, 2009-09-21 at 14:03 +0100, John Austin wrote:
> Hi
>
> I have just returned from holiday and updated F11 to latest state
> Server Centos 5.3 also updated
>
> There was no problem afaik before the upgrades
>
> My F11 client uses kdm, xfce, evolution ...
> and my home directory is an
On Mon, 2009-09-21 at 14:03 +0100, John Austin wrote:
> Hi
>
> I have just returned from holiday and updated F11 to latest state
> Server Centos 5.3 also updated
>
> There was no problem afaik before the upgrades
>
> My F11 client uses kdm, xfce, evolution ...
> and my home directory is an
On 09/23/2009 11:13 PM, Clemens Eisserer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> About once a day, packagekit starts on my laptop and updates its
> package-lists.
> Beside the fact that this eats my traffic, I find it quite annoying
> because starting yum usually means a LOT of disk IO slowing down
1 - 100 of 977 matches
Mail list logo
