On Thu, 2011-11-03 at 23:17 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Hopefully we'll try to figure out why so much heroic effort was needed
> > to keep from slipping any further than we did. That kind of thing tends
> > to burn people out and we don't want it happen regularly.
>
> I think it boils down
On Thu, 2011-11-03 at 23:23 -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 15:56:49 -0700,
> Adam Williamson wrote:
> >
> > I'd certainly second Robyn's thanks to all the awesome folks on the
> > devel, releng and QA teams who worked so hard to get this thing done and
> > shiny without
On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 22:08:58 +,
Andre Robatino wrote:
> For weeks, I had around 50 uninstallable updates in Rawhide. A few days ago
> that
> jumped to over 100. Is this due to updates pushed to 16 but not Rawhide? I
> don't
> have any uninstallable updates in 16 with updates-testing en
On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 15:56:49 -0700,
Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> I'd certainly second Robyn's thanks to all the awesome folks on the
> devel, releng and QA teams who worked so hard to get this thing done and
> shiny without slipping any further. We bent process a little to make the
> release
I posted delta ISOs for 16 Beta -> Final (AKA RC5) at
http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/deltaisos/16-Final/From_16-Beta/
(about 17% of the size of the F16 ISOs) and for 15 Final -> 16 Final at
http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/deltaisos/16-Final/From_15-Final/
(about 42% of the
On Thu, 2011-11-03 at 12:15 -0700, Robyn Bergeron wrote:
> Thank you to EVERYONE for your sleepless nights, endless testing, prompt
> bug-fixing, and endless patience through 5 release candidates.
For the record, Fedora 16 required a total of 20 TC / RC composes.
That's a new record, at least si
On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 04:09:57PM -0400, Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 13:25:21 -0400
> Felix Miata wrote:
>
> > 1-IPV6 vs IPV4
>
> Bingo! You are a genius! I had ipv6 disabled in my fedora 15
> about:config in firefox, on fedora 16 I had the default enabled
> setting. When I disable
On Thu, 2011-11-03 at 16:31 -0400, John Dulaney wrote:
> I must apologize for not being available for testing; school has
> priority.
No you mustn't! Except for those of us getting paid, no-one should feel
obliged to help out. Not contributing just gets you a score of 0 and any
contribution at a
For weeks, I had around 50 uninstallable updates in Rawhide. A few days ago that
jumped to over 100. Is this due to updates pushed to 16 but not Rawhide? I don't
have any uninstallable updates in 16 with updates-testing enabled. Is there an
easy way of automatically pulling the 16 updates into Rawh
The following Fedora 16 Security updates need testing:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/moodle-2.0.5-1.fc16
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/hardlink-1.0-12.fc16
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openswan-2.6.37-1.fc16
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/php
#245: proventester request
--+-
Reporter: davidstrauss | Owner: jdulaney
Type: proventester request | Status: assigned
Priority: major| Milestone:
On 11/03/2011 04:50 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
Explain yourself out of that one. I'm done with this thread.
I do not understand why you feel the need to be so confrontational and
hostile about this issue. It is neither productive nor helpful, and it
has the tendency to scare off testers fro
On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 15:35:48 -0500
Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> The price is ASCII text embedded in the HTML page. IPv6 has absolutely
> nothing to do with this issue. You could view the source code of the
> page and find the price. It is a rendering problem (that I, and others
> cannot reprodu
On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 15:50:40 -0500
Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> Toggling a little setting in Firefox
> will do jack squat.
If by "jack squat" you mean make it work versus not
work, you are right.
> Explain yourself out of that one.
Explain why "jack squat" equates to 100% correlation
with work
On 11/03/2011 03:45 PM, Jonathan Kamens wrote:
> Actually, if I understood correctly, what I believe he said was that
> the price data was fetched and inserted into the page by JavaScript,
> and the JavaScript code in question was unable to resolve the host
> name it needed to contact to fetch t
On 11/03/2011 04:35 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
The price is ASCII text embedded in the HTML page.
Actually, if I understood correctly, what I believe he said was that the
price data was fetched and inserted into the page by JavaScript, and the
JavaScript code in question was unable to resol
On 11/03/2011 03:30 PM, Kevin Martin wrote:
> Hmm, don't know that I agree with that. I've seen issues in other places
> with IPV6 turned on or off respectively. Perhaps the
> correct way to test that is to make sure to run firefox with all extensions
> turned off, IPV6 set on, see what newegg.
> From: awill...@redhat.com
> To: test@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 18:57:52 -0700
>
> So, that thing yesterday about RC4 being one last big push? I lied!
>
> We found two more blockers this morning, fixed 'em, and had our arms
> twisted at the go/no-go meeting to try and mak
On 11/03/2011 03:16 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> On 11/03/2011 03:09 PM, Tom Horsley wrote:
>> Bingo! You are a genius! I had ipv6 disabled in my fedora 15
>> about:config in firefox, on fedora 16 I had the default enabled
>> setting. When I disable it on f16, I can see the prices again.
>>
>>
On 11/03/2011 03:09 PM, Tom Horsley wrote:
> Bingo! You are a genius! I had ipv6 disabled in my fedora 15
> about:config in firefox, on fedora 16 I had the default enabled
> setting. When I disable it on f16, I can see the prices again.
>
> Apparently it can't lookup the IP for content.newegg.com
On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 13:25:21 -0400
Felix Miata wrote:
> 1-IPV6 vs IPV4
Bingo! You are a genius! I had ipv6 disabled in my fedora 15
about:config in firefox, on fedora 16 I had the default enabled
setting. When I disable it on f16, I can see the prices again.
Apparently it can't lookup the IP for
On 11/03/2011 02:36 PM, drago01 wrote:
> So 2 slips equal means "without a slip" for you?;)
Clarification: Final did not slip.
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 2:38 PM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 2:24 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
>> On 11/03/2011 02:15 PM, Robyn Bergeron wrote:
>>> At the Fedora 16 Final Go/No-Go meeting today, the Fedora 16 Final
>>> Release was declared GOLD and ready for release on November
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 2:24 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> On 11/03/2011 02:15 PM, Robyn Bergeron wrote:
>> At the Fedora 16 Final Go/No-Go meeting today, the Fedora 16 Final
>> Release was declared GOLD and ready for release on November 8, 2011.
>
> Congrats. This is the first release without a
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 8:24 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> On 11/03/2011 02:15 PM, Robyn Bergeron wrote:
>> At the Fedora 16 Final Go/No-Go meeting today, the Fedora 16 Final
>> Release was declared GOLD and ready for release on November 8, 2011.
>
> Congrats. This is the first release without a
On 11/03/2011 02:15 PM, Robyn Bergeron wrote:
> At the Fedora 16 Final Go/No-Go meeting today, the Fedora 16 Final
> Release was declared GOLD and ready for release on November 8, 2011.
Congrats. This is the first release without a slip in a while isn't it?
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedora
At the Fedora 16 Final Go/No-Go meeting today, the Fedora 16 Final
Release was declared GOLD and ready for release on November 8, 2011.
And to clarify: It is a nice, golden, almost... mustard-like color. :)
Thank you to EVERYONE for your sleepless nights, endless testing, prompt
bug-fixing, and
On 2011/11/03 08:16 (GMT-0500) Michael Cronenworth composed:
> On 11/03/2011 07:03 AM, Tom Horsley wrote:
>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115070
>> Anyone else see the same problem with newegg?
> I would have to guess it is a video driver issue instead of a Firefox
>
On Wed, 2011-11-02 at 16:42 +0100, Gianluca Cecchi wrote:
> On Wed Nov 2 15:17:09 UTC 2011 Richard Marko wrote:
> > Just tested and it works fine with RC4. (It was broken in RC1 or 2)
>
> And I confirm that installing in a Qemu/KVM (host is
> f15+virt-preview), with direct kernel+initrd boot from
On Wed, 2011-11-02 at 14:57 +0100, little.owl wrote:
> Hi Adam W.,
>
> I went through the bug review meeting log [1]. I agree with the final
> decision which was made during the meeting (#748272); the last problem is
> probably specific to the EFI implementation on the netbook.
>
> However, if
On Wed, 2011-11-02 at 07:11 -0700, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote:
> Parted output attached.
> Fedora 14 and Fedora 15 installed on this very same drive without any
> boot issues as I recall.
Those all look like they ought to work. I can see the first one at least
looks like it has, at some p
#252: Proven tester status for cwickert
--+-
Reporter: cwickert | Owner: mcloaked
Type: proventester request | Status: closed
Priority: major| Mi
#252: Proven tester status for cwickert
--+-
Reporter: cwickert | Owner: mcloaked
Type: proventester request | Status: assigned
Priority: major| Mi
#252: Proven tester status for cwickert
--+-
Reporter: cwickert | Owner: mcloaked
Type: proventester request | Status: assigned
Priority: major| Mi
#252: Proven tester status for cwickert
--+-
Reporter: cwickert | Owner: mcloaked
Type: proventester request | Status: assigned
Priority: major| Mi
#252: Proven tester status for cwickert
--+-
Reporter: cwickert | Owner: mcloaked
Type: proventester request | Status: assigned
Priority: major| Mi
On Wed, 2011-11-02 at 07:11 -0700, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote:
> Parted output attached.
> Fedora 14 and Fedora 15 installed on this very same drive without any
> boot issues as I recall.
Could you do us a favor?
If you post a problem under a certain topic/subject/thread, and add info
to
On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 08:53:15AM -0500, Kevin Martin wrote:
> On 11/03/2011 08:25 AM, Scott Robbins wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 08:16:52AM -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> >> On 11/03/2011 07:03 AM, Tom Horsley wrote:
> >>> Anyone else see the same problem with newegg?
> >> I would have
On 11/03/2011 08:25 AM, Scott Robbins wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 08:16:52AM -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
>> On 11/03/2011 07:03 AM, Tom Horsley wrote:
>>> Anyone else see the same problem with newegg?
>> I would have to guess it is a video driver issue instead of a Firefox
>> issue. You
On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 08:16:52AM -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> On 11/03/2011 07:03 AM, Tom Horsley wrote:
> > Anyone else see the same problem with newegg?
>
> I would have to guess it is a video driver issue instead of a Firefox
> issue. You might want to state the video card and driver
Compose started at Thu Nov 3 08:15:23 UTC 2011
Broken deps for x86_64
--
4ti2-1.3.2-7.fc17.1.x86_64 requires libgmp.so.3()(64bit)
1:anerley-0.3.0-5.fc17.i686 requires libedataserver-1.2.so.15
1:anerley-0.3.0-5.fc17.i6
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/11/11 13:03, Tom Horsley wrote:
> On my fedora 15 system with firefox 7.0.1, the price does appear.
> Same version of firefox, so I really don't understand what is
> happening here :-).
>
> Anyone else see the same problem with newegg?
I can't r
On 11/03/2011 07:03 AM, Tom Horsley wrote:
> Anyone else see the same problem with newegg?
I would have to guess it is a video driver issue instead of a Firefox
issue. You might want to state the video card and driver you are using
(proprietary or otherwise).
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fed
On Thursday 03 Nov 2011 08:03:25 Tom Horsley wrote:
> Yesterday we were trying to figure out why no prices show up
> on newegg.com on a friend's rhel 6 system when visiting it
> with firefox. The only google results I found was someone with
> the same problem when he disabled javascript (but javasc
On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 08:35:33AM -0400, Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Nov 2011 08:12:43 -0400
> Scott Robbins wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 08:03:25AM -0400, Tom Horsley wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > By golly, you're right. I normally use chrome or opera, so didn't see
> > it, but I see, op
On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 05:44:44 -0700
Adam Williamson wrote:
> It works here, and I'm even using noscript (though I've allowed
> newegg)...
Weird. If only we could figure out what is different :-).
In any case, since I got confirmation that at least one
other person sees the bug, I added a bugzilla
That is confusing
Subject:Fedora 15 updates-testing report
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 00:23:39 + (11/02/2011 08:23:39 PM)
The following Fedora 15 Critical Path updates have yet to be approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/abrt-2.0.3-5.fc15,libreport-2.0=
.4-4.fc15
from
https:
On Thu, 2011-11-03 at 08:12 -0400, Scott Robbins wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 08:03:25AM -0400, Tom Horsley wrote:
>
>
> > Yesterday we were trying to figure out why no prices show up
> > on newegg.com on a friend's rhel 6 system when visiting it
> > with firefox. The only google results I fo
On Thu, 3 Nov 2011 08:12:43 -0400
Scott Robbins wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 08:03:25AM -0400, Tom Horsley wrote:
>
>
> > Yesterday we were trying to figure out why no prices show up
> > on newegg.com on a friend's rhel 6 system when visiting it
> > with firefox. The only google results I fo
On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 08:03:25AM -0400, Tom Horsley wrote:
> Yesterday we were trying to figure out why no prices show up
> on newegg.com on a friend's rhel 6 system when visiting it
> with firefox. The only google results I found was someone with
> the same problem when he disabled javascript
The same problem with Chromium too.
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 12:04, Nicolae Ghimbovschi wrote:
> As I see from top information, Xorg is consuming a lot of cpu if I try
> to move something in Evolution calendar.
>
> Most of GUI actions resizing windows takes up to 90% of CPU. This I
> tried with Evo
Yesterday we were trying to figure out why no prices show up
on newegg.com on a friend's rhel 6 system when visiting it
with firefox. The only google results I found was someone with
the same problem when he disabled javascript (but javascript
was not disabled).
Today I tried it on my fedora 16 bo
Compose started at Thu Nov 3 08:15:25 UTC 2011
Broken deps for x86_64
--
PackageKit-zif-0.6.19-3.fc16.x86_64 requires zif >= 0:0.2.5
bibletime-2.8.1-1.fc16.x86_64 requires libclucene.so.0()(64bit)
cluster-snmp-0.18.7-
Thanks! I have applied the patch and it worked :)
changed the following in the
/etc/grub.d/30_os-proberOSXUUID="`grub-probe --target=fs_uuid --device
${DEVICE} 2> /dev/null`"
to
OSXUUID="`grub2-probe --target=fs_uuid --device ${DEVICE} 2> /dev/null`"
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 13:11, Michael Schwendt
On Thu, 3 Nov 2011 11:52:16 +0100, MS (Michael) wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Nov 2011 11:34:53 +0200, NG (Nicolae) wrote:
>
> > After running grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub2/grub.cfg, I saw that
> > /boot/grub2/grub.cfg was not updated.
> >
> > grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub2/grub.cfg
> > Generating grub.cfg
On Thu, 3 Nov 2011 11:34:53 +0200, NG (Nicolae) wrote:
> After running grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub2/grub.cfg, I saw that
> /boot/grub2/grub.cfg was not updated.
>
> grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub2/grub.cfg
> Generating grub.cfg ...
> Found linux image: /boot/vmlinuz-3.1.0-5.fc16.x86_64
> Found ini
As I see from top information, Xorg is consuming a lot of cpu if I try
to move something in Evolution calendar.
Most of GUI actions resizing windows takes up to 90% of CPU. This I
tried with Evolution.
I think it could be due to the nvidia proprietary drivers. But not
sure, it was working fine in
Hi,
After preupgrade from F15 to F16 I'm experiencing performance issues
related to Google Chrome.
I know that this is some how an off-topic. But it was not a problem in F15.
May be somebody has an idea why that happens.
Creating a new tab it takes like ~3 seconds.
I'm using GNOME shell with
Hello,
I need help with a GRUB2 issue.
Yesterday I did a preupgrade from F15 to F16.
I've added a new custom menu entry for grub in /etc/grub.d/40_custom
After running grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub2/grub.cfg, I saw that
/boot/grub2/grub.cfg was not updated.
grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub2/grub.cf
On 11/02/2011 06:44 PM, Matej Cepl wrote:
> Dne 2.11.2011 07:42, Joachim Backes napsal(a):
>> Firefox's error console says:
>>
>> Error: gBrowser.addProgressListener was called with a second argument,
>> which is not supported. See bug 608628.
>> Source File: chrome://browser/content/tabbrowser.xml
60 matches
Mail list logo
