users October 2005

users@lists.fedoraproject.org

716 participants
1217 discussions

Moving LVM PV to different IDE controller help
by MLists 02 Nov '05

02 Nov '05

Recently needed to remove a failing drive from one of my servers. That drive was a physical volume (/dev/hdd) containing VG1, containing LV1. I installed a new drive (temporarily) on /dev/hdb created a new volume group VG2 containing a single logical volume LV1... formatted ext3 and transferred the data. Now that the failing drive has been removed from the server I want to move the new drive from /dev/hdb to /dev/hdd (ie. move th drive to the secondary IDE controller). My problem is that the system doesn't see the volume group if I just move the drive. What do I have to do to tell the system to look for VG2 on /dev/hdd instead of /dev/hdb? Thanks, >>>>> Mike <<<<<

3 2

[FC4] Cannot uninstall SCIM
by Leon Pu 02 Nov '05

02 Nov '05

Hi all, my scim-1.4.2-4.fc4 installation doesn't work in my FC4, scim doesn't popup after I trigger the shortcut ctrl+space. So I want uninstall it to try a new installation. But the uninstallation failed with following message. [message] /etc/X11/xinit/xinput.d/scim has not been configured as an alternative for xinput-ja_JP /etc/X11/xinit/xinput.d/scim has not been configured as an alternative for xinput-ko_KR /etc/X11/xinit/xinput.d/scim has not been configured as an alternative for xinput-zh_CN /etc/X11/xinit/xinput.d/scim has not been configured as an alternative for xinput-zh_TW /etc/X11/xinit/xinput.d/scim has not been configured as an alternative for xinput-bn_IN /etc/X11/xinit/xinput.d/scim has not been configured as an alternative for xinput-gu_IN /etc/X11/xinit/xinput.d/scim has not been configured as an alternative for xinput-hi_IN /etc/X11/xinit/xinput.d/scim has not been configured as an alternative for xinput-kn_IN /etc/X11/xinit/xinput.d/scim has not been configured as an alternative for xinput-ml_IN /etc/X11/xinit/xinput.d/scim has not been configured as an alternative for xinput-pa_IN /etc/X11/xinit/xinput.d/scim has not been configured as an alternative for xinput-ta_IN /etc/X11/xinit/xinput.d/scim has not been configured as an alternative for xinput-te_IN error: %postun(scim-1.4.2-4.fc4.i386) scriptlet failed, exit status 1 [message] Both "rpm -e scim-1.4.2-4.fc4" and "yum remove scim" failed with preceding message. Best regards, Leon __________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page! http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

3 3

firefox 1.0.1 and java
by Gerhard Magnus 01 Nov '05

01 Nov '05

Once I installed the new firefox 1.0.1 I lost the java runtime environment I had finally been able to get working with firefox 1.0. The "About Mozilla Firefox" window says I'm running "Firefox/1.0.1 Fedora/1.0.1-1.3.2". I assume this new version of firefox is using files from the directory tree that starts /usr/lib/firefox-1.0.1, which means I need to make a symbolic link (using the ln -s command) from /usr/java/jre1.5.0/plugin/i386/ns7/libjavaplugin_oji.so to /usr/lib/firefox-1.0.1/plugins. This is the same procedure I successfully used before to make the link in the /usr/lib/firefox-1.0/plugins directory. For some reason this procedure is not working -- the new link in /usr/lib/firefox-1.0.1/plugins appears in red instead of blue. I've tried deleting the link (using rm -r) from both the /usr/lib/firefox-1.0/plugins and the /usr/lib/firefox-1.0.1/plugins directories. Although they no longer show up (using ls -al) the link creation (using ln -s) still gives a non-functioning link. Then when I do a locate libjavaplugin_oji.so I get -- /usr/java/j2re1.4.2_06/plugin/i386/ns610/libjavaplugin_oji.so /usr/java/j2re1.4.2_06/plugin/i386/ns610-gcc32/libjavaplugin_oji.so /usr/java/jre1.5.0/plugin/i386/ns7/libjavaplugin_oji.so /usr/java/jre1.5.0/plugin/i386/ns7-gcc29/libjavaplugin_oji.so /usr/lib/firefox-1.0/plugins/libjavaplugin_oji.so /usr/lib/firefox-1.0.1/plugins/libjavaplugin_oji.so which seems to be saying the links are still there in both firefox directories! When I try ls -l on the /usr/lib/firefox-1.0.1/plugins directory I get: lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 20 Mar 6 16:51 libjavaplugin_oji.so -> libjavaplugin_oji.so flashing in red -- it looks like the link is linking to itself. Or something.... Any suggestions on how to clean this up or at least to hack through it further?

6 8

gcc not compiling
by Dotan Cohen 01 Nov '05

01 Nov '05

I'm just getting started in programming C. My first attempt: #include < stdio.h> void main () { printf("\nHello World!\n"); } Threw this error: [dotancohen@localhost ~]$ gcc hello.c hello.c:1:20: error: stdio.h: No such file or directory hello.c: In function 'main': hello.c:3: warning: incompatible implicit declaration of built-in function 'printf' hello.c:2: warning: return type of 'main' is not 'int' hello.c:4:2: warning: no newline at end of file So I googled for "1:20: error: stdio.h: No such file or directory" and found a post that suggests that the answer to the problem is found in the gcc manual. So I started reading it, but it is long and I'm not finding anything! I think that I'm missing a library stdio.h but I don't know where to find it, and where to put it once I do find it. Or am I completly wrong? The error message is pretty clear. Dotan Cohen http://technology-sleuth.com/question/how_can_i_be_safe_online.html

7 8

ICH5 > 2.6.11 kernel panic
by tlc 01 Nov '05

01 Nov '05

P4P800-E Delux / 3.0E / 2GB ram / 80GB sata ( ICH5 ) FC3 upgraded to FC4 2.6.11.12 #5 SMP Thu Oct 20 17:18:06 EDT 2005 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux SATA set to compatibility mode, secondary PATA + SATA. SATA boot drive, CD/DVDRW on PATA ( secondary ) The 2.6.11 kernel works fine, it sees my sata drive as /dev/sda and my cds as /dev/hdc and /dev/hdd When I try to upgrade past 2.6.11, I get a kernel panic on boot. Kernel panic - not syncing: VFS : Unable to mount root fs on unknown-block(0,0) I have not paid much attention to the problem ( lack of time ) but I would like to get this resolved as hald and udev act funny under 2.6.11, so I compile a 2.6.14 kernel and I get the same error. I have also tried the default FC4 kernels and past 2.6.11 I get the same problem, and I have it on more then one machine. I have it on base installs after I do an upgrade. So I am assuming a driver was changed, or split, or something .. I can't paste the boot up log because it scrolls by too fast and the file system does not mount so it can not save it any where. I suspect it is not finding/using the sata drive and hence the error. Anyone have any clues?

1 1

server Crashing
by Gary Stainburn 01 Nov '05

01 Nov '05

Hi folks. I've got a new install FC4 box which keeps crashing. I've replaced the memory because it looked like a mem fault, but it's still happening, and has suddenly got worse. Looking in /var/log/messages shows entries like below. I've done a yum update this morning but it hasn't made any difference. Anyone got any ideas what's wrong?: Oct 31 11:53:51 eddie kernel: Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 00000024 Oct 31 11:53:51 eddie kernel: printing eip: Oct 31 11:53:51 eddie kernel: c012daf9 Oct 31 11:53:51 eddie kernel: *pde = 00000000 Oct 31 11:53:51 eddie kernel: Oops: 0000 [#1] Oct 31 11:53:51 eddie kernel: Modules linked in: Oct 31 11:53:51 eddie kernel: CPU: 0 Oct 31 11:53:51 eddie kernel: EIP: 0060:[<c012daf9>] Not tainted VLI Oct 31 11:53:51 eddie kernel: EFLAGS: 00010246 (2.6.13-1.1532_FC4) Oct 31 11:53:51 eddie kernel: EIP is at do_exit+0x625/0x942 Oct 31 11:53:51 eddie kernel: eax: 00000000 ebx: c16d4550 ecx: df7e6c80 edx: 00000000 Oct 31 11:53:51 eddie kernel: esi: df7ec6c0 edi: 00000000 ebp: 00000001 esp: c16e6f54 Oct 31 11:53:51 eddie kernel: ds: 007b es: 007b ss: 0068 Oct 31 11:53:51 eddie kernel: Process udev (pid: 28, threadinfo=c16e6000 task=c16d4550) Oct 31 11:53:52 eddie kernel: Stack: 0000038d 00000000 bfe98750 bfe986b4 00000003 c16e6000 c01b1e69 0000038d Oct 31 11:53:52 eddie kernel: 0000ea00 ffffffea c1686500 0000ea00 c16e6000 c012df6d 00001000 00000000 Oct 31 11:53:52 eddie kernel: c16e6fbc c0414a2c 00000004 0000000e 0000000b 080d8078 ffffffea ffffffea Oct 31 11:53:52 eddie kernel: Call Trace: Oct 31 11:53:52 eddie kernel: [<c01b1e69>] sys_stat64+0x23/0x28 Oct 31 11:53:52 eddie kernel: [<c012df6d>] do_group_exit+0x12b/0x349 Oct 31 11:53:52 eddie kernel: [<c0104465>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb Oct 31 11:53:52 eddie kernel: Code: 89 d8 e8 7c 74 10 00 85 ed 74 1a 8b 83 6c 04 00 00 8b b8 98 00 00 00 85 ff 74 0a b8 01 00 00 00 e8 6a ea 17 00 8b 43 04 8b 40 04 <8b> 40 24 85 c0 74 0b ff 88 00 01 00 00 83 38 02 74 6e 8b 83 80 Oct 31 11:53:52 eddie kernel: <1>Fixing recursive fault but reboot is needed! -- Gary Stainburn This email does not contain private or confidential material as it may be snooped on by interested government parties for unknown and undisclosed purposes - Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, 2000

7 13

RE: Linux killer!
by Timothy A. Holmes 01 Nov '05

01 Nov '05

-----Original Message----- From: fedora-list-bounces(a)redhat.com [mailto:fedora-list-bounces@redhat.com] On Behalf Of STYMA, ROBERT E (ROBERT) Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 11:21 AM To: 'Robin.Laing(a)drdc-rddc.gc.ca'; 'For users of Fedora Core releases' Subject: RE: Linux killer! > > If they are not supposed to be watching the videos on the school > computers, then block them at the firewall as our business > does. When > they cannot watch them on Windows it won't make any difference. > I think the point is that if Linux is to make a bigger dent in the Windows desktop, more things have to "just work". In a similar experiment to the one which started this thread, I slowly converted a non-technical family with three computers from windows to Linux and recorded the issues which came up. (http://www.swlink.net/~styma/LinuxForTheMasses.shtml) The current distributions of Linux still need a technical person to get things working. The technical person would still have no clue as to how to get these things working. Many of them require a fair amount of research on the web. I understand the reasons mp3's and wmv's don't play right out of the box, but to get "Joe Sixpack" using Linux requires an update process simple enough for "Joe Sixpack" to use to get this functionality working. If making Linux really simple is not working out, another model might be to have pay subscriptions to remote maintenance services. The FC3 and FC4 boxes I maintain for my friends I can access remotely via SSH and VNC. On a Windows box, if tech support cannot talk you through the problem, the user ends up taking the box in and paying big bucks. ssh, /etc/hosts.allow, and iptables could provide a very effective support mechanism. On my friends boxes, I am the only one with the root password, not that they would understand what root was anyway. Just my 2 cents worth. My point is that Linux needs to be simple in addition to being better. Bob Styma -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list(a)redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list [Timothy A. Holmes] It goes again to the issue of what is the purpose of Linux -- if it is to replace or at least provide significant competition to Windows, then I agree, if it is to stay in its server / techie niche market, than it has achieved that. The linux community as a whole (all distros) needs to define its purpose and begin improvement based on that. A further area of difficulty is the installers. RPMs work most of the time, as does synaptic on Ubuntu, but once you get outside of that, forget it -- my experience with compiling from source is terrible at best (over 60 hours trying to get a satellite tracking program working on Fedora Core 3 (I finally gave up, reformatted the box, and installed windows -- the equivalent windows program installed in 3 minutes (including download) FOLKS THAT'S GOTTA CHANGE) if one thing will kill linux, it is the whole installer issue -- we gotta fix that. Right now, there is no way that I would consider taking our school to linux for front end applications (stuffs not available for linux, and wine DOES NOT WORK (that's a whole other story but the time total on that one was about 20 hours before I gave up) It comes down to one very very simple thing -- STUFFS GOTTA JUST WORK -- if we want to have linux become mainstream in our society Thanks for listening TIM Timothy A. Holmes IT Manager / Network Admin / Web Master / Computer Teacher Medina Christian Academy A Higher Standard... Jeremiah 33:3 Jeremiah 29:11 Esther 4:14

5 4

RE: Linux killer!
by Styma, Robert E (Robert) 01 Nov '05

01 Nov '05

> ---- > Anticipation that a Linux Desktop is a easy swap replacement > for Windows > Desktop is simply a matter of expectations. It is what it is and where > it is any given place in time. Railing here on this list is the > equivalent to pissing in the wind. > > The thread began with issues relating to proprietary software using > proprietary codecs and if more people were using Linux, there would be > more pressure to adopt codecs that Linux users could utilize without > doing technical tango. > As you said, "It is what it is" and that seems to apply to the proprietary codecs also. The mplayer developers have done a marvelous job integrating the windows codecs. Searching out this information is non-trivial (without some luck) and difficult for the uninitiated. This mailing list has a pretty good cross section of current Fedora users and has some extremely intelligent and knowledgeable people on it. It may well be that since software installation does and should require some sort of administrative account (eg. root) and putting the root account in the hands of the uneducated can be a terrible thing, a different model is needed to further encroach upon Windows. Bob Styma

6 5

RE: Linux killer!
by Styma, Robert E (Robert) 01 Nov '05

01 Nov '05

> > If they are not supposed to be watching the videos on the school > computers, then block them at the firewall as our business > does. When > they cannot watch them on Windows it won't make any difference. > I think the point is that if Linux is to make a bigger dent in the Windows desktop, more things have to "just work". In a similar experiment to the one which started this thread, I slowly converted a non-technical family with three computers from windows to Linux and recorded the issues which came up. (http://www.swlink.net/~styma/LinuxForTheMasses.shtml) The current distributions of Linux still need a technical person to get things working. The technical person would still have no clue as to how to get these things working. Many of them require a fair amount of research on the web. I understand the reasons mp3's and wmv's don't play right out of the box, but to get "Joe Sixpack" using Linux requires an update process simple enough for "Joe Sixpack" to use to get this functionality working. If making Linux really simple is not working out, another model might be to have pay subscriptions to remote maintenance services. The FC3 and FC4 boxes I maintain for my friends I can access remotely via SSH and VNC. On a Windows box, if tech support cannot talk you through the problem, the user ends up taking the box in and paying big bucks. ssh, /etc/hosts.allow, and iptables could provide a very effective support mechanism. On my friends boxes, I am the only one with the root password, not that they would understand what root was anyway. Just my 2 cents worth. My point is that Linux needs to be simple in addition to being better. Bob Styma

4 3

Automatic way of terminating a program
by Paul Smith 01 Nov '05

01 Nov '05

Dear All Is there some automatic way of terminating a program at a previously specified time? Thanks in advance, Paul

5 5

← Newer
1
...
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
...
122
Older →

Jump to page: