users October 2003

users@lists.fedoraproject.org

284 participants
265 discussions

Re: Fedora and the System Administrator -- "have" -> "had"
by Jef Spaleta 03 Oct '03

03 Oct '03

Bryan J. Smith wrote: > "Fedora Legacy"??? I'm new here so my ignorance is far fetching (so > feel free to "smack" me ;-). better than smacking you....i'm going to tell you to read the documentation at fedora.redhat.com. ALL useful discussion on any policies relating to fedora, pretty much require you to have read the fedora.redhat.com website pages, at a bare minimum. Since I'm a realist...I'm going to say that you have to make an attempt to understand what you read there. Spending a few hours and trying to read back over the last 3 months of conversations on this mailinglist would probably also help get you on the right page...though that takes some non-trivial skill and experience at filtering small signals from large amplitude background noise. http://fedora.redhat.com/participate/terminology.html outlines where Fedora Legacy will fit into the new world order. -jef"brandishing the cluestick since 1841"spaleta

2 1

SMP kernel status
by Terry Polzin 03 Oct '03

03 Oct '03

The release notes for SEVERN II stated that the SMP kernel had problems, was a bit flakey (or words to that effect) and that a fix would be posted in a few days. So where is it? If it has been fixed that is.

2 3

Re: SMP kernel status
by Jef Spaleta 03 Oct '03

03 Oct '03

Terry Polzin wrote: > Up2date says I am in fact up2date. I have not loaded a single update > since upgrading from severn-I to severn-II RHN does reflect my > belonging to the severn-II channel but do you belong to the severn-II update sub-channel...hmmmmmm Channel Name Packages: Severn Beta 2 (i386) 1461 | \->Severn Beta 2 (i386) Updates 1456 -jef"seems everyone else is confused by this whole..must actually use the rhn website to subscribe to available sub channels..idea"spaleta

2 1

Re: Bugzilla filing
by Jef Spaleta 03 Oct '03

03 Oct '03

Charles Curley wrote: > * Do I file on Red Hat's bugzilla or fedora's? As of now last i heard severn is at redhat's bugzilla. Fedora.us's bugzilla is just for add on packages still being maintained separately by the the people working at Fedora.us. The structural support for the move from RHL to Fedora isn't all there yet. >* Red Hat's Bugzilla "version" field has no entry for severn. Which > version do I file it under? Product: Red Hat Linux Beta Version: beta1 if its severn beta 1 >* Should I use "openoffice" or "installation" in the component field? that's a bit tougher...you might want to search through previous bug reports of a similar nature and see where they are placed. Even if its not clear, its best to report it and if the developer tells you its in the wrong place, you can refile it where they suggest. I would also suggest that any further questions about the test/beta releases that you are going to have should be directed to fedora-test-list mailing list. Not that this question is off topic here, and the announcement this week was more than enough information to dominate the discussion on every possible list like a tidal wave. But now that the mental flood waters are receeding and the next test/beta iso set is coming out...it would be good to have fedora-test-list become focused again on the beta/test discussion..leaving some of the more general questions about the non technical beta/test issues of Fedora for this list here. -jef

2 1

Upgrade process for Fedora?
by griffisb＠bellsouth.net 03 Oct '03

03 Oct '03

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. 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? 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? When General Availability comes out in November, would I be burning another set of CD's? Is there a clean upgrade process, or would I have to wipe out my install and then install the new package from scratch? I see that Severn comes with Open Office 1.0.2 (at least I think it does, based on the applications list). Is there an RPM for OOo 1.1, or would I download, untar and install from OpenOffice.Org? How do I find out the versions of Gimp, Scribus and GnuCash that Fedora ships with? Finally - I have DSL and a CD-R, so either upgrade process is fine for me - but I am building a laptop to ship to my sister. She lives 12 hours away, and would be on dial-up. My hope is to configure and mail a laptop to her by next week. I had been thinking along the lines of SuSE 8.2 (easy to use, good manual), Mandrake (although I break that often), or Debian (I have YET to get a clean Debian install, though - but I was thinking of doing a Knoppix to harddisk install to get around that problem). 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?

2 1

up2date says 'The package <package_name> is not signed with GPG Signature'
by mb 03 Oct '03

03 Oct '03

Hi, I'm updating my Severn-Beta2 installation, but up2date for every package I got that message. How can I avoid that msg? Regards Mario

2 1

Re: Fedora and the System Administrator -- there are a lot of variables here ...
by Jef Spaleta 03 Oct '03

03 Oct '03

Edward Croft wrote: > Yes, I knew BlueCurve was a theme, but there was also writeups that they > did stuff to kde and gnome that ended up breaking some things in kde The key here...is you haven't learned to to be skeptical about what you read...and you haven't learned who to trust, or how to evaluate someone's personal biases, and how to distinguish between rumor and fact. Perhaps this url will provide some balanced and fair counter argument to the other 'writeups' you have taken the time to read. http://www.cyber.com.au/users/mikem/redhat8kde.html -jef"understanding the inherent biases in any blog, mailinglist or news or press reporting is essential to obtaining a balance view of the issue...the daily show and fox news should both be commended for making their biases self-evident instead of hiding behind the false and misleading claim of impartiality."spaleta

1 0

Re: Just some redhat musings
by akonstam＠trinity.edu 03 Oct '03

03 Oct '03

On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 03:02:29AM +0200, Martin Stricker wrote: > Kevin Waterson wrote: > > > But what of the little guy? The guy who decided to throw his lot > > in by developing applications for linux freely, in the hope that > > he will be able to freely have access to linux just as he has made > > his application freely available for redhat to bundle with its OS. > > > With the advent of enterprise level RedHat products, can we expect > > the community to still give freely of their time to fix and test > > RedHat products, or, does RedHat adopt the tried and tested MS model > > of testing its products on those who purchase it? > > I understand what you mean. But the target of the GPL (the license under > which most Linux software is published) is not to provide software free > of charge. Instead you are getting the code for free, and you may change > and distribute it freely! One example: You can download all the source > RPMs of RHEL *for free*, compile them yourself, burn them onto CD and > *sell* these CDs! Of course you cannot call them Red Hat (or any other > trademark). When you look at other Linux companies you don't always get > that freedom: Red Hat releases the source code for *all* their > distributed software! When Red Hat bought Cygwin they put the > proprietary Cygwin software under the GPL and published the source code! > S.u.S.E on the other hand releases most of their self-developed software > under a license which prohibits most of the use of it. > > What some persons on this list (myself included) are complaining about > is this: With RHL until 7.3 you got a very stable distro and updates for > a long period of time for a very affordable price. This made RHL very > attractive for small businesses and simple servers. With the > discontinuation of RHL this part of the market is no longer supported by > Red Hat, instead I would have to go either for Fedora Core (free of > charge, but only 9 months of updates - I need at least the double time, > better more - and the software may not be as stable and tested as I'm > used to) which is fine for home users, or for RHEL which will provide > the stability and long-term updates support I need, but is too expensive > for my needs. Currently Red Hat's product portfolio is missing a > mid-priced and mid-supported distro, which before was RHL. I need a very > stable distro for my servers, and I cannot reinstall (and validate! a > two-month procedure!) every half a year. So Fedora Core is not an option > for me. RHEL would be nice, but is too expensive (and provides more > support than I need). Either Red Hat gets out a mid-range product > *soon*, or I need to switch my servers to another OS. > > Best regards, > Martin Stricker > -- I think the analysis if Martin's above succinctly gets to the core of the real problem. We at Trinity run 100 or so machines for student and faculty use and the Fedora Core just won't do it for us. We have not the staff for the fast turn around nor the money to purchase that many RHEL copies. (I am not sure but I am assuming your would need a copy bought for each machine. Correct me if I am wrong.) -- ------------------------------------------- Aaron Konstam Computer Science Trinity University 715 Stadium Dr. San Antonio, TX 78212-7200 telephone: (210)-999-7484 email:akonstam@trinity.edu

2 3

Re: Just some redhat musings
by Jef Spaleta 03 Oct '03

03 Oct '03

Aaron Konstam wrote: > I think the analysis if Martin's above succinctly gets to the core of > the real problem. We at Trinity run 100 or so machines for student and > faculty use and the Fedora Core just won't do it for us. We have not > the staff for the fast turn around nor the money to purchase that many > RHEL copies. (I am not sure but I am assuming your would need a > copy bought for each machine. Correct me if I am wrong.) I suggest you take a good long look at the Fedora Legacy subproject..which is defined on the terminology page on the fedora.redhat,com website. It's important that those who are at all willing to contribute to a community organized way to handle security updates for an extended period of time, that they start getting together to discuss how they want to handle it. There is no reason a community response to a the upcoming EOL for rh 7.3 can not be in place and ready to go this december. No reason, other than everyone who is interested in seeing EOL's extended, foolishly sitting on the fence hoping and praying RH changes their mind. -jef

1 0

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

03 Oct '03

> I am running SuSE 8.2 Personal (also tried Mandrake 9.1 and briefly tried Debian Woody). I may be wrong, but I believe that YaST and YaST2 are not redistributable. Since YaST is the installer for SuSE, you end up with something you can not freely load on other machines. I -MAY- be wrong, but I think that is the whole reason behind not having downloadable SuSE ISO's, and why on the few occasions you DO find SuSE ISO's on a public FTP server, they are pulled quickly. > > That's part of the reason I am here. I am looking for a desktop distribution that is freely distributable, easy to install, and that will have good user guides. I would hope with a community project, you do not pay for up2date - but use a similar tool - although I'm often wrong. I feel that with the backing of RH, Fedora will meet all those requirements. Since I'm downloading Severn ISO's right now, take my above comments as a rank amatuer newbie. > > Guess I should have read the COMPLETE thread before posting. Good thing I had the "newbie" disclaimer in there. Thanks Buck for confirming that you can install SuSE on mutiple computers as long as no profit is involved. But I'll STILL give Fedora a test drive!

2 1

Jump to page: