users October 2003

users@lists.fedoraproject.org

284 participants
265 discussions

Re: Fedora and the System Administrator
by Miguel M 07 Oct '03

07 Oct '03

Erik Williamson wrote 2003-10-02 >I inquired about what would happen if one was to (after one year) simply >get the SRPMS that are released as updates, compile and redistribute to >existing machines... but that's a no-no. And what would happen if (after one year) one downloads the update SRPMS to existing machines and compiles independently the same packages in everyone of them? Thanks Erik, Miguel _________________________________________________________________ Instant message in style with MSN Messenger 6.0. Download it now FREE! http://msnmessenger-download.com

14 47

Clock Applet Problem
by Amit Bapat 07 Oct '03

07 Oct '03

Gnome Clock Applet Shows GMT time even when the system is set to PDT. In xterm windows, the time is correct. For example: -----------> in xterm <------------ $ date Tue Oct 7 08:40:50 PDT 2003 But clock applet shows: 15:40 I looked at the preferences of clock applet, checking/unchecking 'Use UTC' option has no effect on time displayed. If I login as other user, the clock applet shows the right time. So I know that this is specific to the user settings. But where are the clock applet settings stored? -amit

1 0

Re: Mozilla mouseovers
by Brian C. Huffman 07 Oct '03

07 Oct '03

Spam detection software, running on the system "graze.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or block similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Alright...this is gonna be ugly. This happens in a web-based application (OpenGroupware) so it's difficult to send an actual URL. But here is the line of generated HTML that causes the offending mouseover: [...] Content analysis details: (5.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 2.4 RATWARE_HASH_2_V2 Bulk email fingerprint (hash 2 v2) found 1.2 RATWARE_HASH_2 Bulk email fingerprint (hash 2) found 0.1 HTML_FONTCOLOR_UNKNOWN BODY: HTML font color is unknown to us 0.8 HTML_30_40 BODY: Message is 30% to 40% HTML 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 1.1 HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_10 BODY: HTML: images with 800-1000 bytes of words

1 0

Fedora and the System Administrator
by Erik Williamson 06 Oct '03

06 Oct '03

Hi All, I've looked around, read most of the archives on this list & have seen the topic sort of mentioned, but not directly... so here goes: I've got about 120 machines (servers & workstations) running 7.3 and 9. I was going to roll RH9 out department-wide, but then realized that it's end-of-life is scheduled for April 2004, which is smack-dab in the middle of the semester. I've recently been asked/told to limit OS releases to every 2 years. I feel that this is fair. I've looked into RHEL; my "higher-ups" are VERY squeamish about paying for anything. I'm contemplating switching to another distribution with longer life-cycles, but I'm very comfy with RHL, and don't want to switch. (finally) My question is this: What is the anticipated life-cycle for Fedora releases? I know that there will be core updates every four months - by 'core' I gather this means kernel, gcc, glib, X, etc... but how long will a core release last - is it based on popularity/stability? I've seen lots of talk about other companies that provide support for end-of-life RH releases, and can assume that it will continue with Fedora, but for a university with a $50M+ defeceit this year, paying is not an option. Any thoughts/views would be greatly appreciated - Cheers & Thanks! Erik. -- e r i k w i l l i a m s o n erik(a)cpsc.ucalgary.ca system admin . department of computer science . university of calgary

27 98

Boot Problem
by Ozkan ALTUNER 06 Oct '03

06 Oct '03

Hi, I downloaded and installed severn. After successful installation it doesn't boot at all. I see the graphical boot screen but when it comes to "starting printing system" it hangs. How can i solve it? Thanks, Ozkan

2 2

Re: Fedora and the System Administrator -- "have" -> "had"
by David Jansen 05 Oct '03

05 Oct '03

On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 07:58:10AM -0500, Bryan J. Smith wrote: > On Fri, 2003-10-03 at 07:41, Paul Gear wrote: > > That's not what they claim. At http://fedora.redhat.com/about/rhel.html > > they claim Fedora is for "Early adopters, enthusiasts, developers". The > > rest of their products (WS, ES, AS) are for business. There is no > > "consumer" product. > > Okay, change my "have" to "had" and I am now correct. Red Hat _used_ to > refer to the RHL series as "consumer." > > Fedora is no longer "consumer" like RHL was. I stand corrected. > > We now have "Fedora" and "enterprise" : "ethusiast" and "business" Thanks, that sums up what was on my mind while catching up on the last couple of days of this list. Let's home Fedora Legacy can provide the missing middle road between the two existing options. Or some other third-party support service, we will see what the future may bring. David (who is also looking into ways to convince work (= university) to allocate some budget for RHEL...) -- David Jansen mailto:jansen@strw.leidenuniv.nl Leiden Observatory ( Sterrewacht Leiden ) P.O. Box 9513, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands Phone: (+31) 71 5275810 Fax: (+31) 71 5275819

6 8

Re: RE: Fedora and the System Administrator -- are my assumptions onSuSE incorrect?
by griffisb＠bellsouth.net 05 Oct '03

05 Oct '03

> > Thanks, Bruce. > > If you are calling an older computer a "LUG" I have an IBM PC 300PL that > I am using for that purpose. I have spent the last three days trying to > get it to work. I just downloaded everything but the source code to a > shared folder on my Windows computer but I still have a problem as I > don't know what network card is in the IBM. This isn't the list for > support on SUSE, (I am subscribed) so I won't ask for help here. > > I'll check out Fedora when it is actually released. Right now I just > want a working Linux. > > Thanks again, > > Buck Nah - LUG would be a Linux User's Group - although the IBM might be a LUG, too -lol. Anyway- have you tried (er, ahem) Red Hat 9.0? You can download the ISO's and burn them to CD. Since Fedora is based on RH Consumer's Version, 9.0 might be a good place to start. I'm seriously thinking about kicking myself in that direction. I need to load up a laptop for my sister and mail it out to her. I was thinking of using Fedora, but was kindly and gently reminded that Fedora is beta - so I'll probably install RH, then go to Fedora when I visit her. Another alternative would be to download Knoppix. It has good hardware detection. You could boot up Knoppix (it runs from CD) and see if it detects your Ethernet card. If so, you can do an lsmod to try and see the modules loaded for your Ethernet card. Since Knoppix runs from CD, you can use it as a rescue disk in case your installation gets hosed. I'm not one to talk about trying RH. I haven't tried it yet - but it is on my short list. I've tried 3 other distributions and have combed through the "Running Linux 4th Edition" and "Multitool Linux" books. I downloaded the RH9.0 ISO's, but will probably just buy a boxed set so I can include a user's guide when I ship the laptop to my Sis.

2 1

any decent docs on the new 2.6.0-based /etc/modprobe.conf?
by Robert P. J. Day 04 Oct '03

04 Oct '03

is there somewhere a decent intro on the new /etc/modprobe.conf file? i've been running a 2.6.0-test kernel for a while now, but i've hung on to my /etc/modules.conf file. as a test this morning, i ran /sbin/generate-modprobe just to see the output. the first time i tried it, i got a fairly lengthy output, which was fine, as i noticed the utility was pulling information out of /etc/modprobe.conf.dist. the second time i ran it, it simply kept running and running and ... and when i looked in /tmp, there were almost 4000 files with the name /tmp/modprobe*, and /etc/modprobe.conf.dist was now empty. not surprisingly, i don't really trust this program any more. so, any decent HOWTOs on this? rday

1 0

NVidia on Severn2 -> It works.
by Rodrigo Del C. Andrade 04 Oct '03

04 Oct '03

First thing that happened when I installed the beta was the lack of X, 'cause I have a GeForce4, so if ppl are goin to install and use a NVidia models GeForce or Tnt (I cant garantee for quadro or others), this info will come in handy. Here is how I installed NVidia drivers on Severn release 2: Download the latest driver: wget ftp://download.nvidia.com/XFree86/Linux-x86/1.0-4496/NVIDIA-Linux-x86-1.0-4… If you try to run this as is, you will only got an error when it tries to recompile a module for our kernel acusing diferent compilers, so lets do this at comand line: ./NVIDIA-Linux-x86-1.0-4496-pkg2.run --add-this-kernel Gotta thanks the NVidia programmers for that one. After it all done you can run the new installer: ./NVIDIA-Linux-x86-1.0-4496-pkg2-custom.run and everything should be fine. Update /etc/X11/XFree86Config you it wasnt already prepared for their drivers and have fun with your bug hunting with the possibility to watch dvds on tv-out during breaks :) Vantroy ps: Is this the definitive logo for Fedora Core? It is kinda ... basic... ps2: I upgraded from Shrike and couldnt select pckages. Thats bad :(

6 7

Re: Upgrade process for Fedora?
by Jef Spaleta 03 Oct '03

03 Oct '03

griffisb wrote: > I'm considering installing Fedora on a new laptop and wanted to know > what the upgrade process is. I am not familiar with Red Hat, so > familiarity with Fedora is nill. Right now the only thing available are TEST releases of Fedora Core. It's very important to recognize that running TEST/BETA releases comes with inherent risks. Once you install a test/beta release the expectation that it will upgrade cleanly to the next official release is unfounded. The expectation that a test2->test3 upgrade will run smoothly is also unfounded. You have to think of the goals involved with the test release process. The point of the test release process is to make it so that you can upgrade from previous official releases to newer official releases. If you upgrade from official->test or test->test or test->official, then you should be expecting breakage...becuase the engineering goals for the test releases are focused on making official->official upgrades smooth. I do have some experience with Mandrake, SuSE and Debian,though. > If I install Severn (Test 2?), how would I upgrade to Severn (Test 3?) when it comes out? Better question...is upgrading from test2 to test3 WORTH testing? The point of the test releases is to do testing....the upgrade path that NEEDS testing is from rhl9,8,7.x->Fedora Core 1. Test3 will potential have packaging fixes that make it impossible to cleanly upgrade from test2 to test3. If you upgrade from test2 to test3...will the packagers care much for your bugreports on the problems? My understanding that making sure test2->test3 upgrades work correctly is a low priority in the infinite list of things that should be working better. > Would I need to download the ISOs and burn them to CD again? Or is > there a Debian-like apt-get update, apt-get upgrade? There are very clever ways to attempt to upgrade from test2->test3. And they all fall in the "works for me" category sometimes. But if there is a problem, you very well might not get much love from the bugzilla trackers on the issues you have, becuase its outside the expected upgrade path. > When General Availability comes out in November, would I be burning > another set of CD's? general rule....there is no expected clean upgrade path from beta/test releases. It can be done, it will most likely not be done as cleanly as an official release->official release upgrade path. This is one of the risks beta testers have to except as part of the process. The goal of beta testing..is to not make beta testing easy...but to make official release upgrading easy. Burn development to to ensure that test releases will upgrade clean can very much get in the way of the technical measures that need to happen to make sure official releases upgrade well. Not all solutions are win-win, works for all situations, solutions. If something has to be done to make an official->official upgrade work well, at the cost of test->official upgrade...so be it...the test/beta installers are told that test/beta releases are prone to breakage...upgrading from them is no different. > Would it be expecting too much to install Fedora, burn CD's as it goes > GA, then ship and talk her through the upgrade process? Since Fedora > is based on RH 9.0 (if I read right), could I assume RH9.0 User Guides > would be appropriate? this is TEST release...if she isn't competent enough to be an active participant in the testing process...submitting bugreports and giving feedback to developers about those bugs...she should NOT be trying to use the fedora core 0.94 test release on a day to day basis. There is an inherent expectation in the test/beta release that something could serious break, and the people running the test/beta release better understand that, and be prepared to give feedback on the bugs they find. Wait for the official release of Fedora Core. -jef ________________________________________________________________________

2 1

Jump to page: