Am 04.08.2012 13:14, schrieb Jared K. Smith:
> On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 9:16 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> so until someone knows what is going wrong in 3.5 the
>> right decision would have been build 3.4.7 for F17 too
>> instead psuh blindly 3.5 out - and after such decisions
>> someone is wonderin
Am 03.08.2012 22:41, schrieb Joe Zeff:
> On 08/03/2012 01:09 PM, Ian Malone wrote:
>> On 3 August 2012 19:14, Joe Zeff wrote:
>>> On 08/03/2012 03:26 AM, Suvayu Ali wrote:
That said, maybe the Fedora repos can keep more than one (say 2-3)
versions of the kernel in case some users
On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 9:16 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> so until someone knows what is going wrong in 3.5 the
> right decision would have been build 3.4.7 for F17 too
> instead psuh blindly 3.5 out - and after such decisions
> someone is wondering why people start ranting?
If there's one thing I k
On Fri, 03 Aug 2012 15:16:31 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
> my point was that i am testing many fedora-packages often long
> before updates-testing is seeing them and it doe snot help
> much if maintainers say "hm bugreport, however i push to stable"
>
> and YES the 3.5.x currently in F17 stable i
Am 03.08.2012 16:02, schrieb Michael Schwendt:
> On Fri, 03 Aug 2012 12:46:41 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Am 03.08.2012 12:38, schrieb Michael Schwendt:
>>> On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 12:26:43 +0200, Suvayu Ali wrote:
>>>
That said, maybe the Fedora repos can keep more than one (say 2-3)
Am 03.08.2012 14:54, schrieb Heinz Diehl:
> On 03.08.2012, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>> adn yes i installed the first 3.5 MINUTES after it was built on
>> koji on a for me very important machine
>
> An important machine should only be updated (stable or not - whatever)
> with a complete and funct
Joe Zeff wrote:
> I was under the impression that they were kept until the kernel they
> applied to was removed. And, as I understand it, the headers for each
> kernel are kept in a separate directory named after the version. If
> they're not kept (and my understanding of their location is correc
On 08/03/2012 01:09 PM, Ian Malone wrote:
On 3 August 2012 19:14, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 08/03/2012 03:26 AM, Suvayu Ali wrote:
That said, maybe the Fedora repos can keep more than one (say 2-3)
versions of the kernel in case some users need to downgrade and don't
have it in their cache?
By de
On 3 August 2012 19:14, Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 08/03/2012 03:26 AM, Suvayu Ali wrote:
>>
>> That said, maybe the Fedora repos can keep more than one (say 2-3)
>> versions of the kernel in case some users need to downgrade and don't
>> have it in their cache?
>
>
> By default, yum keeps the most rece
On 08/03/2012 03:26 AM, Suvayu Ali wrote:
That said, maybe the Fedora repos can keep more than one (say 2-3)
versions of the kernel in case some users need to downgrade and don't
have it in their cache?
By default, yum keeps the most recent 3 kernels installed. How often do
you think users ne
On Fri, 03 Aug 2012 16:14:20 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
> > 1) Ticket history reveals that there has been a very quick response
> > by davej: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_activity.cgi?id=843826
> > So, your bug report has not been ignored, albeit reassigned to a
> > different component withou
On Fri, 03 Aug 2012 12:46:41 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 03.08.2012 12:38, schrieb Michael Schwendt:
> > On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 12:26:43 +0200, Suvayu Ali wrote:
> >
> >> That said, maybe the Fedora repos can keep more than one (say 2-3)
> >> versions of the kernel in case some users need
On 03.08.2012, Reindl Harald wrote:
> adn yes i installed the first 3.5 MINUTES after it was built on
> koji on a for me very important machine
An important machine should only be updated (stable or not - whatever)
with a complete and functional backup prior to updating. New code
doesn't only co
Am 03.08.2012 12:38, schrieb Michael Schwendt:
> On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 12:26:43 +0200, Suvayu Ali wrote:
>
>> That said, maybe the Fedora repos can keep more than one (say 2-3)
>> versions of the kernel in case some users need to downgrade and don't
>> have it in their cache?
>
> IMO, the communit
On Fri, Aug 03, 2012 at 12:38:13PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 12:26:43 +0200, Suvayu Ali wrote:
>
> > That said, maybe the Fedora repos can keep more than one (say 2-3)
> > versions of the kernel in case some users need to downgrade and don't
> > have it in their cache?
>
On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 12:26:43 +0200, Suvayu Ali wrote:
> That said, maybe the Fedora repos can keep more than one (say 2-3)
> versions of the kernel in case some users need to downgrade and don't
> have it in their cache?
IMO, the community would be served better if they tried packages from
updates
On Fri, Aug 03, 2012 at 04:48:13PM +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
>
> I was more curious about the downgrade issue.having never tried it
> before. Seems as if "downgrade" doesn't really mean what it says in
> "man yum" since the repos only contain the latest update to a package
> in the "updates" r
On 03/08/12 09:48, Ed Greshko wrote:
I was more curious about the downgrade issue.having never tried it before. Seems as if "downgrade"
doesn't really mean what it says in "man yum" since the repos only contain the latest update to a package in
the "updates" repo and the initial release
On 08/03/2012 04:39 PM, Andre Robatino wrote:
> The 3.5.0 breakage is already reported, it's supposed to be fixed in the next
> VirtualBox release. Now that it's affecting F17 and not just Rawhide,
> hopefully
> that will be expedited.
>
> https://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/10709
Yes, I did find t
The 3.5.0 breakage is already reported, it's supposed to be fixed in the next
VirtualBox release. Now that it's affecting F17 and not just Rawhide, hopefully
that will be expedited.
https://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/10709
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or chan
On Fri, 03 Aug 2012 14:36:32 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> On 08/03/2012 02:32 PM, Frank Murphy wrote:
> > On 03/08/12 07:27, Ed Greshko wrote:
> >> Today the kernel was updated to 3.5.0-2. However, this has caused a
> >> breakage in compiling the VirtualBox Guest Additions.
> >>
> >> So, I wanted
On 08/03/2012 02:32 PM, Frank Murphy wrote:
> On 03/08/12 07:27, Ed Greshko wrote:
>> Today the kernel was updated to 3.5.0-2. However, this has caused a
>> breakage in compiling the VirtualBox Guest Additions.
>>
>> So, I wanted to go back to 3.4.6-2 and downgrade kernel-headers.
>>
>> I was und
On 03/08/12 07:27, Ed Greshko wrote:
Today the kernel was updated to 3.5.0-2. However, this has caused a breakage
in compiling the VirtualBox Guest Additions.
So, I wanted to go back to 3.4.6-2 and downgrade kernel-headers.
I was under the impression that "yum downgrade" would result in going
Today the kernel was updated to 3.5.0-2. However, this has caused a breakage
in compiling the VirtualBox Guest Additions.
So, I wanted to go back to 3.4.6-2 and downgrade kernel-headers.
I was under the impression that "yum downgrade" would result in going back on
version. But, the downgrade
24 matches
Mail list logo
