triage March 2013

triage@lists.fedoraproject.org

1 participants
23 discussions

[Bug 253630] Clash of short-cut in search dialog
by Red Hat Bugzilla 09 Jun '25

09 Jun '25

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=253630 lexual <lex.lists(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC|lex.lists(a)gmail.com | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

6 6

needinfo canceled: [Bug 619461] [abrt] crash in qbittorrent-1:2.2.8-2.fc12: message: Process /usr/bin/qbittorrent was killed by signal 11 (SIGSEGV)
by Red Hat Bugzilla 06 May '25

06 May '25

Product: Fedora Version: 12 Component: qbittorrent Karel Klíč <kklic(a)redhat.com> has canceled Bug Zapper <fedora-triage-list(a)redhat.com>'s request for needinfo: Bug 619461: [abrt] crash in qbittorrent-1:2.2.8-2.fc12: message: Process /usr/bin/qbittorrent was killed by signal 11 (SIGSEGV) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=619461

2 1

needinfo canceled: [Bug 633653] [abrt] lekhonee-gnome-0.9-1.fc12: wordpress_get_categories: Process /usr/bin/lekhonee-gnome was killed by signal 11 (SIGSEGV)
by Red Hat Bugzilla 06 May '25

06 May '25

Product: Fedora Version: 12 Component: lekhonee-gnome Karel Klíč <kklic(a)redhat.com> has canceled Bug Zapper <fedora-triage-list(a)redhat.com>'s request for needinfo: Bug 633653: [abrt] lekhonee-gnome-0.9-1.fc12: wordpress_get_categories: Process /usr/bin/lekhonee-gnome was killed by signal 11 (SIGSEGV) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=633653

2 1

[Bug 781341] New: Unnecessary Requires - shorewall and tcpwrappers
by Red Hat Bugzilla 02 Jun '13

02 Jun '13

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Unnecessary Requires - shorewall and tcpwrappers https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=781341 Summary: Unnecessary Requires - shorewall and tcpwrappers Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: high Priority: unspecified Component: fail2ban AssignedTo: axel.thimm(a)atrpms.net ReportedBy: vogel(a)folz.de QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: herrold(a)owlriver.com, mattdm(a)mattdm.org, axel.thimm(a)atrpms.net, tim(a)niemueller.de, vogel(a)folz.de, jonathan.underwood(a)gmail.com, ruben(a)rubenkerkhof.com, wdierkes(a)rackspace.com, triage(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, maxamillion(a)fedoraproject.org, voronin.andrey(a)gmail.com, bugzilla.redhat.com(a)ewood.users.cementhorizon.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Clone Of: 244275 Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #244275 +++ Description of problem (copied from Bug #244275): fail2ban doesn't require shorewall to function, and in fact, as we ship it, it makes use of the Fedora firewall - installing an extra firewall which is the not used in the default configuration is a bit gratuitous and confusing to the user. Also, the Requires: tcpwrappers isn't needed unless the user decides to enable the tcpwrapper action (disabled by default) Additional information: Bug #244275 contains suggestions and possible patches for a fix, but was closed with NOTABUG as noted in the comment from the EPEL maintainer: --- Additional comment from maxamillion(a)fedoraproject.org on 2012-01-12 22:46:49 EST --- Since this is just the EPEL package and I don't maintain fail2ban for Fedora, I will be keeping it in line with Fedora proper. Please feel free to discuss this with the Fedora package maintainer. As I wrote in some comments in Bug #244275, I'm interested in a fix for Fedora, which is why I file this bug now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 9

[Bug 135381] The "Alt Gr" key on int'l keyboards is not working from a windows vnc client
by Red Hat Bugzilla 27 Mar '13

27 Mar '13

Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=135381 --- Comment #39 from Tako Schotanus <tako(a)codejive.org> --- Well, I saw that the vnc server was updated recently so I made sure I updated my system to the latest versions of all packages and now it works (except for the euro sign on the E, but I can live with that) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=x3FYoZLPLv&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 135381] The "Alt Gr" key on int'l keyboards is not working from a windows vnc client
by Red Hat Bugzilla 27 Mar '13

27 Mar '13

Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=135381 Tako Schotanus <tako(a)codejive.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |tako(a)codejive.org --- Comment #38 from Tako Schotanus <tako(a)codejive.org> --- BTW, I know this bug is closed but I'm still seeing this problem in F18 , so it definitely hasn't been fixed. And in Gnome 3 the keyboard preferences doesn't seem to have a "Reset To Defaults" so I can't use the work-around that was talked about either. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=P4aSdBVtIg&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 199246] [enh] support bridges
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Mar '13

22 Mar '13

Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=199246 --- Comment #36 from Dean Hunter <deanhunter(a)comcast.net> --- I have tried macvtap. While it works with NetworkManager I have two problems with this approach: 1) It requires a second network for connectivity from the VM guest to the host. 2) It requires manual use of a GUI to set it up. I need something that I can script, start, and come back when it is ready to use. So far, http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/17/html/System_Administrators_Gu… is the most recent reference I have found. It only works if NetworkManager is replace is replaced by network on the host, but this can be scripted. I am using this on a server class machine so wireless networking is not important. What do I lose with this approach? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=S8O18rFMnl&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 199246] [enh] support bridges
by Red Hat Bugzilla 21 Mar '13

21 Mar '13

Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=199246 --- Comment #35 from johnny.westerlund(a)gmail.com --- If you need a simple work-around for simple bridging there is support for it in virt-manager by using a macvtap device. To bridge a guest to your configured em1/eth0 just edit your virtual-machine in virt-manager on the nic in virt-manager of the virtual machine there should be a drop drown list for: "Source device". Just pick "Host device eth0 : macvtap" -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=c8s8SBVfp5&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 199246] [enh] support bridges
by Red Hat Bugzilla 20 Mar '13

20 Mar '13

Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=199246 --- Comment #34 from Dean Hunter <deanhunter(a)comcast.net> --- That is good and I am willing to do whatever I can to help test it. But what we really need to know NOW is the recommended work-around. I am willing to accept that the network management applet of the Gnome Control Center can not be used or displays erroneous or misleading information. But does the NetworkManager service work correctly? if so, what should the ifcfg-br1 and ifcfg-em1 files look like? Are there steps to be taken before configuring NetworkManager? What about routing? These are some of the details we hope will become transparent and I am certain you know them better than we do. There is a lot of information available that seems dated in one regard or another and virsh iface-bridge, which seemed like a big step forward, returns an error (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=919625) It is my understanding that a bridge could be configured to make the virtual machine guests appear on the network as if they were network peers of the physical machine host; they would used the same DHCP as the physical machines, the same address range, the same DNS, etc. I have tried piecing together the configuration, but nothing I have done quite works. Please, is there a document you could reference or instructions you could provide for of us that are not expert enough in the networking utilities to dig it out on our own? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=CFSI5264Nn&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Bug 199246] [enh] support bridges
by Red Hat Bugzilla 20 Mar '13

20 Mar '13

Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=199246 --- Comment #33 from Dan Williams <dcbw(a)redhat.com> --- The code is going to land, it's just not going to make the F19 feature freeze deadline. And because of this, we want to make sure it's rock-solid before that happens, since people don't have the heads-up that the feature process would normally give. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=LrTld1HzsJ&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

triage March 2013