FC2T3 - Red Hat in rpm summaries
by Will H. Backman
rpm -qia | grep Red |grep -v Packager| grep -v Version | more
Shows a lot of references to "your Red Hat" system in the summary
lines. Don't know if these should be changed to Fedora.
--
Will Backman <whb(a)ceimaine.org>
Coastal Enterprises, Inc.
20 years
unknown video card and inittab
by bastard operater
I have a system that has a Matrox P650 video card in it. FC does not
recognize this card and there is no reason is should. The drivers are
closed source and poorly maintained by matrox. I can install FC2T3 on the
system using text mode (linux text nofb) and everything works. I would like
to float the idea that if the video card is not recognized by FC2 then the
default init run level should be 3. Currently the default is 5. What do
you think of this idea?
_________________________________________________________________
Watch LIVE baseball games on your computer with MLB.TV, included with MSN
Premium!
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/mlb&pgmarket=en-us/go/onm00200439ave/d...
20 years
FC2T3 apt repository
by R D
Hi,
Is there any apt repo for the above - I can't seem to find one anywhere!?
Cheers,
R
20 years
shared library and selinux
by J. Scott Amort
Hi All,
I am developing a shared library on FC2T2, and am running into a problem
with selinux. When I do a make install on my library, it places the
file libfoo.so.0.0.0 in /usr/local/lib as expected, but puts up an error
when running ldconfig:
/sbin/ldconfig: Input file /usr/local/lib/libfoo.so.0.0.0 not found.
The problem appears to be related to the selinux context, as the file
definitely exists. It is creating libfoo.so.0.0.0 with a type context
of lib_t, instead of the correct shlib_t. Once I change that and run
ldconfig, it creates the links as expected. Also of note is that the
user context is root (which makes sense as I sued to do the make
install) instead of system_u, and although this doesn't appear to affect
the use of the library, I wonder if it may be more consistent to have it
labelled as the latter. Is this a simple mistake on my part, or should
it be put in bugzilla? Thanks for any help.
Best,
Scott
20 years
3c556B NIC still broken in FC2-test3
by Ed Swierk
None of the 2.6 kernels that come with FC2-test{1,2,3} have been able to
talk to my network card, either when booting from the install CD or after
the system is installed. I filed a bug about this back in February
(https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116095) but it's
still marked NEW.
Has anyone else gotten this network card to work with a 2.6 kernel? It's
one of the two mini-PCI network cards that used to be available with the
ThinkPad T21.
--Ed
--
Ed Swierk
eswierk(a)kealia.com
20 years
boot.iso & cdrom askmethod network install methods failing on test3
by Panu Matilainen
Are the following working for others?
a) network install from boot.iso
b) cdrom askmethod install over network
My testbox (with RealTek RTL-8029 network adapter) fails both with "no
devices to support this install method" message and asks to provide
either driver disk or select device and gets stuck there - selecting the
correct driver manually doesn't help. The card *is* detected and loaded
(modules ne2k_pci and 8390) correctly automatically point (one of the
VT:s shows "eth0: RealTek RTL-8029 found at 0xe800, IRQ 9,
00:20:18:3A:DE:36" message), it's just that the message doesn't seem to
go all the way through or whatever.
That worked without any problems up to FC2-test2 at least, don't
remember whether I tried installing rawhide between test2-3 but don't
think so.
Got the box finally installed after a lot of cursing with the above
problem and somewhat flaky CD-drive .. actual testing will have to wait
till later.
- Panu -
20 years
FC2T3 install notes
by Will H. Backman
Downloaded the boot.iso 5 meg file, burned to CD.
PIII 667, 128M RAM, ATI Mach64, Ensoniq
Boot from cd, choose linux text, struggle with getting mirrors and path
correct. Every mirror seems to use slightly different paths to the
right files, and the install doesn't give any hints as to how far down
the path you need to enter. It becomes obvious once the install
complains that it cannot find the stage2 file.
Choose standard workstation install.
Install goes for maybe 2 hours, not bad for 2 gigs.
System reboots.
rhgb seems to run ok.
It configures X
First boot configures X again.
Create user, all is ok.
Applause for the developers.
Should a system that was installed in text mode default to run level 3?
20 years
RE: anaconda crash - CD install
by Fulko.Hew＠sita.aero
> First time I tried installing from CD -- I selected
>"no firewall" second time I selected firewall.... both
>times I got an error:
>
>An unhandled exception has occured. This is most
>likely a bug.
>Please copy the full text of this exception and file a
>detailed bug report against anaconda at....
>
>Tracebac (most recent call last):
> File /usr/lib/anaconda/gui.py, line 759, in
>nextClicked
> rc = self.currentWindow.getNext()
> File /usr/lib/anaconda/iw/firewall_gui.py, line 32,
>in getNext
>
>self.security.setSELinux(self.se_option_menu.get_history())
> File /usr/lib/anaconda/security.py, line 39, in
>setSELinux
> raise ValueError, Setting to invalid SELinux state
>%s" %(val,)
>ValueError: Setting to invalid SELinux state: -1
I need to throw a "me too" onto this bug report.
So for the time being, I will abandon the test 3 install from CD. :-(
20 years
cvs
by Guilherme Cantisano
I will use CVS with Fedora Core2, any problem ?
20 years
RE: OT - Journaling File Systems?
by Edwards, Scott (MED, Kelly IT Resouces)
-----Original Message-----
From: fedora-test-list-bounces(a)redhat.com
[mailto:fedora-test-list-bounces@redhat.com]On Behalf Of Tom Mitchell
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 7:24 PM
To: For testers of Fedora Core development releases
Subject: Re: OT - Journaling File Systems?
>On Tue, Apr 27, 2004 at 12:03:35PM -0500, Edwards, Scott (MED, Kelly IT
Resouces) wrote:
>> Does anyone know of any comparisons of ext3, jfs, xfs and reiser for
>> reliability?
>....
>> Next I tried XFS. I was excited at first because a normal bootup was
>> only 18 seconds. The first reboot after a 'plug pull' was only 27
>> seconds (and I think that included the 5 second wait). I was very
>> excited to see this improvement over ext3. However, it was short lived.
>> After the second 'plug pull' it took 1 minute and 16 seconds to boot.
>> But it claimed corrupted metadata and that the superblock was trashed
>> and could not even mount the partiton.
>
>Can you tell us (me) more about the hardware and test setup.....
>
>Disks, Single or multiple disk in system, Raid?, controllers,
>partition, SCSI, EIDE, FC, SIDE, cable width, speed, DMA
>tagged-queuing depth, hdparm -I, Buffer modes in the disk and
>controller, read buffers, write buffers, mkfs options.
It is actually a very simple/basic setup. It is a Single Board
Computer, 3.0 GHz Pentium 4. It has 2 IDE connectors and 2 SATA
connectors on the board. There is a CD-ROM drive pluged into IDE 1
and a single SATA drive plugged into the first SATA port. No RAID
or anything like that.
The machine is reconfigured at the moment with a IDE drive so I
can't give you the hdparm -I. I can say that because it thinks it
is a SCSI drive, hdparm won't allow me to turn off the write
caching.
I am curious why FC2 mounts it as a SCSI drive, whereas Knoppix
makes it an IDE drive (hdg). I am guessing that is a change in
the 2.6 kernel?
>XFS requires effective atomic and strictly ordered writes for meta
>data consistency. In multiple processor environments strong mutual
>exclusion locks are a requirement. I suspect that this is true for
>all file systems. Is this a multiprocessor box?
It only has one CPU. I'm confused about the whole Hyper-Threading
thing, Linux seems to treat it as multiple processors.
>Any 'plug pull' safe disk needs some sort of hardware logic to sense
>power failure, then self-power long enough to finish the committed
>writes and not start others. Does the power supply signal the system
>with a power-fail line? Does the mother board signal the OS with a
>power-fail interrupt? The more RAM on the disk dedicated for write
>buffering the more interesting the write buffer issues on the disk
>are.
I don't believe that there is any special anything for power fail.
The HD is a Hitachi 164.7GB Deskpro, which I'm pretty sure is just
an off the shelf drive. I'm trying to get the specs right now.
>What is the ratio of data to meta data in your test. XFS can allocate
>lots of data blocks for data and be lazy with the meta data. This
>implies that the data read from a file after a failure will be correct
>or simply absent in part depending on how it was written. This ratio
>with the meta data sync time etc. can define the number of faces on
>the die in terms of how often meta-data will be be corrupt.
I'm not really sure what the ratio is. The last few tests I have run
(which have ended up in corrupting the filesystem to the point it
wouldn't even boot) was simply start a 'cp -pirv /etc /tmp' and switch
off the power.
>Are you pulling the power plug on the disk (DC,5V,12V), disk box (AC) or
the
>wall plug (AC) for the entire system (disk,MB,processor,DRAM...)?
It would be the wall plug. The scenario I am testing for is someone
tripping over the power cord and accidentally pulling the plug out
of the wall while it is in operation.
Thanks
-Scott
20 years
