On Sat, 2013-12-21 at 17:06 +1100, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> I'll dig up more logs and stuff and see what's causing it.
It looks like a DRM issue
It booted into runlevel3 just fine, which pointed to an X related error.
This is what the Xorg log gave me:
> egrep EE Xorg.1.log
> (WW) warning,
On Sat, 2013-12-21 at 02:02 -0300, "Germán A. Racca" wrote:
> Kernel 3.12.5-302.fc20.x86_64 works fine here (Dell Vostro 3500).
Ah. I'm on a vostro 3400. It's got both broadcom and nvidia chipsets
though (slightly customized).
--
Thanks,
Warm regards,
Ankur (FranciscoD)
http://fedoraproject.org
On Fri, 2013-12-20 at 19:07 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Dec 20, 2013, at 5:57 PM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Is anyone else having trouble with 3.12 kernels?
>
>
> No problem for me with: 3.12.5-301.fc21.x86_64 or with
> 3.13.0-0.rc4.git0.1.fc21.x86_64.
>
> > I don't have enou
On Sat, 2013-12-21 at 02:02 -0300, "Germán A. Racca" wrote:
> Kernel 3.12.5-302.fc20.x86_64 works fine here (Dell Vostro 3500).
Ah. I'm on a vostro 3400. It's got both broadcom and nvidia chipsets
though (slightly customized).
--
Thanks,
Warm regards,
Ankur (FranciscoD)
http://fedoraproject.org
On Fri, 2013-12-20 at 19:07 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Dec 20, 2013, at 5:57 PM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Is anyone else having trouble with 3.12 kernels?
>
>
> No problem for me with: 3.12.5-301.fc21.x86_64 or with
> 3.13.0-0.rc4.git0.1.fc21.x86_64.
>
> > I don't have enou
On 12/20/2013 09:02 PM, "Germán A. Racca" wrote:
On 12/20/2013 09:57 PM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
Hi,
Is anyone else having trouble with 3.12 kernels? Both of them stop at
the Fedora bubble for me. They just stop. Here are screens-hots that I
took:
http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/kernel-3.12-fail
On 12/20/2013 06:57 PM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
Hi,
Is anyone else having trouble with 3.12 kernels? Both of them stop at
the Fedora bubble for me. They just stop. Here are screens-hots that I
took:
http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/kernel-3.12-failures/2013-12-21%
2011.31.27.jpg
http://ankursinh
On 12/19/2013 06:09 AM, Neal Becker wrote:
Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2013-12-18 at 20:18 -0500, Neal Becker wrote:
Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2013-12-18 at 11:56 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2013-12-18 at 07:33 -0500, Neal Becker wrote:
Neal Becker wrote:
Just updated
On 12/20/2013 09:57 PM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
Hi,
Is anyone else having trouble with 3.12 kernels? Both of them stop at
the Fedora bubble for me. They just stop. Here are screens-hots that I
took:
http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/kernel-3.12-failures/2013-12-21%
2011.31.27.jpg
http://ankursinha.
On 12/20/2013 12:02 PM, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
In the Installation Source dialog, the Updates option is checked and
greyed out. And even so, there is no place here to specify a url.
Should I be using Additional Repositories? BTW, I have local copies of
the OS and Updates repos.
You've left ou
The following Fedora 19 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
63
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-19262/quassel-0.9.1-1.fc19
56
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-19963/openstack-glance-2013.1.4-1.fc19
13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FED
The following Fedora 18 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
27
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-21875/389-ds-base-1.3.0.9-1.fc18
13
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-22949/net-snmp-5.7.2-7.fc18
10
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2
--
libbluedevil-2.0-0.4.20131220.fc20 (FEDORA-2013-23719)
A Qt wrapper for bluez
Update Information:
Fresh bluedevil snapshot, includes many bug (particularly crasher) fixes.
--
On Dec 20, 2013, at 5:57 PM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is anyone else having trouble with 3.12 kernels?
No problem for me with: 3.12.5-301.fc21.x86_64 or with
3.13.0-0.rc4.git0.1.fc21.x86_64.
> I don't have enough data to decide if it's a kernel issue or something
> else, but it comes u
On Fri, 2013-12-20 at 19:34 -0500, Richard Ryniker wrote:
> >So strange as it may seem - it appears that it has to be shut for more than
> >a
> >short time to fail.
>
> Might it be a hibernation issue? After some period of time, perhaps your
> machine wants to move from suspend to hibernate.
N
Hi,
Is anyone else having trouble with 3.12 kernels? Both of them stop at
the Fedora bubble for me. They just stop. Here are screens-hots that I
took:
http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/kernel-3.12-failures/2013-12-21%
2011.31.27.jpg
http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/kernel-3.12-failures/2013-12
>So strange as it may seem - it appears that it has to be shut for more than a
>short time to fail.
Might it be a hibernation issue? After some period of time, perhaps your
machine wants to move from suspend to hibernate.
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https:/
Kamil Paral wrote on Fri, 20 Dec 2013 05:00:24 -0500
>The bandwidth problem should be solved by a simple program:
>a. you run it on computer A (lacking bandwidth) - it gathers the list of
>installed packages and exports a file
>b. then you run it on computer B (good bandwidth) - feed it the file
On fös 20.des 2013 19:24, Adam Williamson wrote:
I've stuck a meeting agenda item for the group membership stuff in for
Monday, we can chat about it there...maybe you could draft some specific
changes to the current group description texts?
The only issues that I have been bit concern with is n
Sorry to intrude here, but I am not getting this answered on the Fedora
Community list. I have dug through the installation guides (both f20
and 19) and have not found the answer...
I have learned that the OS repo location can be specified via repo=url,
but all attempts so far not shown a way
On Fri, 2013-12-20 at 13:02 -0500, Kamil Paral wrote:
> > I didn't really mean to preclude the use of a minimal package set, I'm
> > just trying to exclude the problems we've been having whereby the test
> > cases and criteria are kind of getting 'gamed' with odd choices =) I'll
> > see if I can fi
On Fri, 2013-12-20 at 12:51 -0500, Kamil Paral wrote:
> > > as discussed, being in the group is not intended to be actually
> > > necessary for any QA tasks, we're just going to have it to allow you to
> > > get voting rights and fedorapeople space and as a
> > > handy-but-probably-incomplete list
On Fri, 2013-12-20 at 05:13 -0500, Temlakos wrote:
> Well, pots and kettles aside:
>
> I just ran the update. The only thing I'm curious about:
>
> 1. Fedup did not start any kind of GUI. It stayed in command-line prompt
> mode. Actually that was an improvement: I could better watch its
> prog
On 12/20/2013 11:51 AM, Kamil Paral wrote:
as discussed, being in the group is not intended to be actually
necessary for any QA tasks, we're just going to have it to allow you to
get voting rights and fedorapeople space and as a
handy-but-probably-incomplete list of people involved with QA. no
> I didn't really mean to preclude the use of a minimal package set, I'm
> just trying to exclude the problems we've been having whereby the test
> cases and criteria are kind of getting 'gamed' with odd choices =) I'll
> see if I can find a happy medium...
I think a general sentence like this cou
> > as discussed, being in the group is not intended to be actually
> > necessary for any QA tasks, we're just going to have it to allow you to
> > get voting rights and fedorapeople space and as a
> > handy-but-probably-incomplete list of people involved with QA. no plans
> > to change any of our
> I've made a few abortive tries at re-doing the storage tests and
> basically given up because it's just a hideous thing to try and cover,
> but I thought while I'm still on a momentum roll from F20 and remember
> some of the issues that came up during F20 validation, I'd take another
> cut at it.
On 12/20/2013 05:04 AM, Phil Dobbin wrote:
On 19/12/13 23:49, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:39 PM, Gavin Flower
mailto:gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz>>
wrote:
long time. It wasn't frozen. The update ran well last time. But I
probably would run it when I had to be
On 19/12/13 23:49, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:39 PM, Gavin Flower
mailto:gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz>>
wrote:
long time. It wasn't frozen. The update ran well last time. But I
probably would run it when I had to be away from it anyway. You see,
in Americ
> Given that, I propose re-wording as follows:
>
> "All applications that can be launched using the standard graphical
> mechanism of a release-blocking live image after an installation of that
> image must start successfully and withstand a basic functionality test."
I have read the whole thread
30 matches
Mail list logo
