test August 2003

test@lists.fedoraproject.org

250 participants
351 discussions

console fonts and kernel 2.6
by Henk Breimer 29 Aug '03

29 Aug '03

boot-option vga=775 always resulted in nice compact console font on my box. No longer when I use kernel 2.6. I have not been able to find out why. Any explanation or hint where to look would be welcome. Asus P4PE GForce 2MX (asus 7100) henk

3 2

up2date fix
by M A Young 29 Aug '03

29 Aug '03

You can now get up2date working again by downloading https://rhn.redhat.com/help/RHNS-CA-CERT and copying it to /usr/share/rhn/RHNS-CA-CERT I don't think the rawhide up2date has the right certificate yet, so keep a copy of the RHNS-CA-CERT file in case it gets overwritten by an up2date update. Michael Young

7 13

Re: no ... *really* ... any ETA for updated beta?
by Nancy Cropley 29 Aug '03

29 Aug '03

well, let's see here. give that my pine sent-mail folder shows that i asked about this on exactly two occasions this month: ***** Robert, I count 7 emails in the past two days from you on this topic on Wednesday and Thursday. Give these guys a break, please. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

1 0

Re: up2date redhat-release and rawhide-release ping-pong
by Jef Spaleta 29 Aug '03

29 Aug '03

Féliciano Matias wrote: >I understand. >But where in bugzilla ? >It's not an up2date or rawhide bug. It's only a rhn bug/mistake. https://rhn.redhat.com/help/faq/#28 For someone who makes a big deal about the form and substance of the communication Red Hat has promised to provide about rhlp....you don't seem to have read the available documentation of the current services. Now here's a shocking bit of information for you....rhn has its own bugzilla product designation...so does the red hat website, for future reference when you decide to take issue with the next incarnation of rhl.redhat.com. And frankly...if a bug were filed under up2date naively...that's still better than just a mailinglist posting, it would at least be in the system...and then the up2date developer could reassign the bug to the correct location. No one expects beta testers to be perfect about where they file bugs..no one is going to suggest that its always obvious where the bug belongs. But you can't just post the issue to a mailinglist and expect it to be seen. You have to file the bug...so that the bug can be tracked in an organized way. Mailings might seem like an effective tool for beta testers to get information...but the point is to make developers more effective...and the developer segment of the community has said so far that bugzilla is the tool they want to use to keep track of bugs. They've said it repeatedly...they've never wavered or waffled on the issue...and yet the rest of the vocal red hat community still doesn't get the message. There is an expectation that beta testers READ the available documentation...especially beta testers that make a huge deal out of criticizing how Red Hat is handling the documentation of the switch to a more open project. What's the point of providing verbose documentation, when the people who are most likely to complain about the lack of it...aren't bothering to read the documentation for available services like rhn and bugreporting. Any attempt to appease people who are not directly involved with development issues is waste of valuable development effort...they will never be satified. -jef"I'm not sure i have anything marginally funny to say"spaleta

2 1

GNOME splash screen? RHN?
by Kyle Maxwell 29 Aug '03

29 Aug '03

Is anyone else seeing the GNOME splash screen take a long time to clear? It seems to be stuck on the Red Hat Network Monitor phase, so I'm not sure which is causing the hangup. There's nothing that appears relevant in the logs. I realize that this is very likely a problem with my local config, so I'm just curious if anyone else has experienced something similar. -- Kyle Maxwell <kylem(a)xwell.org>

3 5

Re: up2date redhat-release and rawhide-release ping-pong
by Jef Spaleta 29 Aug '03

29 Aug '03

Féliciano Matias wrote: >This problem have been reported : >http://www.redhat.com/archives/rhl-beta-list/2003-August/msg01388.html >http://www.redhat.com/archives/rhl-beta-list/2003-August/msg01405.html A reminder....posting to the beta list is not reporting a bug. This problem is only 'reported'...when there is a bugzilla entry for it. Just posting problems to the beta list is a good way to have them fall through the cracks. I could report bugs on my personal website blog as a i find them...and have the same unreasonable expectation that a red hat developer...the right red hat developer...would stumble on them there, as they would on this beta list. Sometimes is nice to open up a bug for general discussion, or sometimes even Elton's 'hey i posted my 1,211th bugticket to bugzilla have a look' messages are worth glancing at. But actually 'reporting' a problem to the right developer is done by actually using a bugzilla ticket. How about you reference the bugticket.....that is suppose to be in the system? -jef"its funny really...all this griping of expectation on what the new communication with Red Hat was promised to look like...but we can't seem to use the tools already in place to give feedback to the developers, i'm not sure the red hat community is ready for responsibility that an open development model would require"spaleta

3 2

up2date redhat-release and rawhide-release ping-pong
by Felipe Alfaro Solana 29 Aug '03

29 Aug '03

Hi! up2date seems to ping-pong between packages rawhide-release-9.0.93-2 and redhat-release-9.0.93-1. They obsolete each other so, if I up2date to redhat-release-9.0.93-1 and then run up2date again, redhat-release-9.0.93-1 is obsoleted by rawhide-release-9.0.93-2. If I up2date, rawhide-release-9.0.93-2 is installed, but running up2date again says rawhide-release-9.0.93-2 is obsoleted by redhat-release-9.0.93-1 and so on: fab:/usr/share/rhn# sync up2dfab:/usr/share/rhn# up2date -l Fetching package list for channel: redhat-linux-severn-i386-9.0.93... ######################################## Fetching package list for channel: redhat-linux-severn-i386-9.0.93-updates... ######################################## Fetching Obsoletes list for channel: redhat-linux-severn-i386-9.0.93... Fetching Obsoletes list for channel: redhat-linux-severn-i386-9.0.93-updates... Fetching rpm headers... ######################################## Name Version Rel ---------------------------------------------------------- rawhide-release 9.0.93 2 The following Packages are obsoleted by newer packages: Name-Version-Release obsoleted by Name-Version-Release ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- redhat-release-9.0.93-1 rawhide-release-9.0.93-2 fab:/usr/share/rhn# up2date rawhide-release Fetching package list for channel: redhat-linux-severn-i386-9.0.93... ######################################## Fetching package list for channel: redhat-linux-severn-i386-9.0.93-updates... ######################################## Fetching Obsoletes list for channel: redhat-linux-severn-i386-9.0.93... Fetching Obsoletes list for channel: redhat-linux-severn-i386-9.0.93-updates... Fetching rpm headers... ######################################## Testing package set / solving RPM inter-dependencies... ######################################## rawhide-release-9.0.93-2.no ########################## Done. Preparing ########################################### [100%] Repackaging... redhat-release ########################################### [100%] Installing... 1:rawhide-release ########################################### [100%] *** rpmts_SetVSFlags(0x9c48fe8) ts 0x9c49090 *** rpmts_IDTXglob(0x9c48fe8) ts 0x9c49090 *** rpmts_IDTXload(0x9c48fe8) ts 0x9c49090 *** rpmts_SetVSFlags(0x9c48fe8) ts 0x9c49090 *** rpmts_IDTXglob(0x9c48fe8) ts 0x9c49090 *** rpmts_IDTXload(0x9c48fe8) ts 0x9c49090 0x9d1e488 -- ts 0x9d21ca0 db 0x9db9f88 0x9c48fe8 -- ts 0x9c49090 db 0x9c43bd8 0x9ccb4c0 -- ts 0x9ccaf18 db 0x9cc8890 fab:/usr/share/rhn# up2date -l Fetching package list for channel: redhat-linux-severn-i386-9.0.93... ######################################## Fetching package list for channel: redhat-linux-severn-i386-9.0.93-updates... ######################################## Fetching Obsoletes list for channel: redhat-linux-severn-i386-9.0.93... Fetching Obsoletes list for channel: redhat-linux-severn-i386-9.0.93-updates... Fetching rpm headers... ######################################## Name Version Rel ---------------------------------------------------------- redhat-release 9.0.93 1 The following Packages are obsoleted by newer packages: Name-Version-Release obsoleted by Name-Version-Release ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- rawhide-release-9.0.93-2 redhat-release-9.0.93-1

3 3

OpenOffice.org release?
by Noah Silva [Mailing list] 29 Aug '03

29 Aug '03

Hi, Two questions. Neither is strictly Severn specific, but... a.) Ximian has made quite a few nice patches to OpenOffice.org (Except for the default save format being .doc...). Ximian has stated that these changes would be contributed back to OpenOffice.org. There is no other mention of this on either the Ximian or OpenOffice.org site, so I assume there will be no release from OpenOffice.org with these changes integrated anytime soon. Is Redhat planning to use any of these changes, or simply wait until OpenOffice.org picks them up? (I assume the latter, from the sound of the new upstream change policy). b.) If you look at the enhancement plans for openoffice here: http://tools.openoffice.org/releases/q-concept.html They are quite ambitious, but will probably take a very long time to complete. Also, since OpenOffice.org is such a large project with its own build process, its own object model, it's very difficult to get into developing it as a hobby on just a few hours a week (I have tried!). Does Redhat contribute directly to this? Might they in the future? I have a feeling that Sun has done 99% of the work since it has been open-sourced, just because it is so difficult to hack on. Of course I don't purport to say what anyone "should" do with their time or money, I just think that OOo is an important project, and I see it rejected too often for superficial and incorrect reasons. (If I hear anyone else say it's written in Java, the stick is coming out!) -- noah silva

4 4

AD DNS
by Stephan Schutter 29 Aug '03

29 Aug '03

Hi, I am in a large network that uses Active Directory DDNS and redhat can simply not resolve any other computernames in the network... well atleast thare is a large segment of them that can not be resolved. no workstations for example. I use the default setup and allow DHCP to configure everything. In windows it works fine, but in this version (I do not know about earlier versions) it does not work at all. I do nslookup to the same server using the same DNS server and get diferent results. eg. the DNS server (windows 2000) does not reply with the same anwer if you are redhat. WIN: Z:\tmp\scan>nslookup burner Server: dhcnic02.<removed>.com Address: 10.104.241.115 Name: burner.stores.<removed>.com Address: 10.89.17.84 REDHAT: Note: nslookup is deprecated and may be removed from future releases. Consider using the `dig' or `host' programs instead. Run nslookup with the `-sil[ent]' option to prevent this message from appearing. Server: 10.104.241.115 Address: 10.104.241.115#53 ** server can't find burner: SERVFAIL What is going on????!!! RedHat cant talk DNS??

6 10

RE: fontilus/control-center conflict
by Epps, Aaron M. 29 Aug '03

29 Aug '03

Does Red Hat currently have any plans to redesign the standard Gnome Control Center? To me, a group of icons in Nautilus is a pretty weak interface for a Control-Center. Does anyone remember what Ximian did back in the XD1 days, they had a nicely redesigned Control Center. Anyway, not a big deal, just curious... -----Original Message----- From: Michael Knepher [mailto:limbo@bluethingy.com] Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 12:14 AM To: rhl-beta-list(a)redhat.com Subject: Re: fontilus/control-center conflict On Tue, 2003-08-26 at 16:40, Kyle Maxwell wrote: > I'm updating my Severn system with the new severn-updates channel > (thanks RH!) and everything seems to be updating OK (still going), but > I ran into a file conflict between fontilus (fontilus-0.3-5) and > control-center (control-center-2.2.2-1 going to > control-center-2.3.5-1), requiring me to deselect control-center to > proceed. The messages are below. > The fontilus functionality has been rolled into the gnome control-center package for 2.3.x/2.4. Remove fontilus, then upgrade control-center. -- Michael Knepher <limbo(a)bluethingy.com> -- Rhl-beta-list mailing list Rhl-beta-list(a)redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhl-beta-list

2 1

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

test August 2003