users September 2008

users@lists.fedoraproject.org

463 participants
706 discussions

USB slow when two devices connected
by Aldo Foot 02 Sep '08

02 Sep '08

My F8 system has two USB ports in the front side. I had a USB DVDRW connected to one of the ports and was writing an ISO image to CDR. Then I plugged in a USB stick to transfer some files from it to my desktop, the transfer was stalling and was slow even after the CDR task ended. Then I unplugged the DVDRW and the USB stick transfer rate was as fast as lightning. Why was the USB stick file transfer so slow when the DVDRW was plugged in? ~af

3 4

ocsigen install / sqlite3 library
by Jimmy Provoyeur, Jr. 02 Sep '08

02 Sep '08

Has anyone successfully been able to install ocsigen framework webserver onto Fedora 9, if so any installation steps, tips, hints,etc.... I am also trying to install sqlite and it's taking forever onthe "make" file; any thoughts on this would be greatly appreciated.

2 3

Fedora 9 Freeze At Login
by Kyle Lanigan 02 Sep '08

02 Sep '08

So I've put in Fedora 9 just the other day, but it doesn't matter when I login into Fedora 9 after booting up into it, that everything freezes once the login screen goes away after entering my username and password. I'm not sure what I'm suppose to do to get this working. Kyle Lanigan k.a.lanigan(a)gmail.com

9 15

Latewst announcew list posting
by Aaron Konstam 02 Sep '08

02 Sep '08

For those curious about the status of updates here is te latest scoop. 11] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-August/msg01215.html Intrusion Recovery Slow and Steady A politely phrased request[1] was made on 25-08-2008 by Mike Chambers for information about when normal service would resume in the Fedora Project after the disruptions[1a]. Enigmatically Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski observed[2] that there had been "some speculation on fedora-advisory-board that might explain the information blackout, so please don't jump to conclusions until you really know what happened" This led Chris Adams to observe that the list archives appeared to be offline and to restate the request for information "[...] in the absence of information, rumors and speculation fill the gap (which is not good)." [1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-August/msg01102.html [1a] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FWN/Issue140#Mysterious_Fedora_Compromise [2] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-August/msg01122.html Several days later (on 28-08-2008) a similar request was made[3] by Alan Dunn. He wondered whether bodhi was pushing updates out again, and Josh Boyer responded[4] that planning and implementation of "how to revoke the current gpg key used to sign RPMs" were in progress. Jesse Keating cautioned[5] that the migration to a new key would be slow "I'm currently re-signing all of the 8 and 9 content with these new keys so that we can make them available along with the new updates with the new key for these product lines. This is going to take some time due to the nature of how our signing works." [3] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-August/msg01308.html [4] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-August/msg01309.html [5] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-August/msg01310.html A proposal mooted[6] on @rel-eng by Warren Togami and others provided some insight into at least the part of the plans that involve the problem of how to distribute a new package signing key. [6] http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/rel-eng/2008-August/001627.html "nodata" asked[7] whether the new plans included a means to push out critical security updates even while there was a general outage. The thinking behind this seems to be that an attacker could decide to knock out Fedora infrastructure in order to gain some time to exploit a known vulnerability even if a simple fix existed. Jesse Keating replied[8] confidently that in such a scenario the Fedora Project would do "whatever it takes [...] to get a critical update onto a public webserver should the need arise" and cautioned against wasting time trying to plan for every possible scenario. Toshio Kuratomi added[9] that although it might be possible to speed up recovery "[...] unfortunately if the infrastructure problem is bad enough, there's no way we can push package X out until the problem is at least partially resolved." [7] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-August/msg01313.html [8] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-August/msg01314.html [9] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-August/msg01316.html On 27-08-2008 Paul Johnson noted that it was possible to "compose and build" and asked "when will updates via yum become available for rawhide?" Jeremy Katz responded[10] that "[a]t the moment, the compose is falling over for new reasons unrelated to the infrastructure changes. Hopefully we'll see a rawhide make its way out to the masses real soon now." [10] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-August/msg01249.html Later Mike Chambers and Ola Thoresen reported[11] that updating from Fedora 9 to Rawhide seemed to be working. Several Rawhide Reports also appeared[12]. [11] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-August/msg01350.html [12] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-August/msg01339.html = Infrastructure = This section contains the discussion happening on the fedora-infrastructure-list http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure Contributing Writer: HuzaifaSidhpurwala Some noteworty praise Paul W. Frields writes for fedora-infrastructure-list [1] Paul forwarded a mail [2] send by Tim Burke, who is the Director of Linux Development inside Red Hat, praising the efforts of fedorans who rose to the occasion to bring things back on track after the recent incidents in Fedora infrastructure. [1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-infrastructure-list/2008-August/msg0… [2] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-August/msg01023.html Maintaining a partial cvs workarea Axel Thimm writes for fedora-infrastructure-list [3] Axel described how he was keeping a partial check-out of packages, ie the ones which he was maintaining. Now he would like to be able to cvs up and have all updates flow in, but if he does do so cvs will want to get all other thousand packages in. He is currently using a for loop with pushd/popd, but this process is extremely slow. Axel asked if there was a better way of doing this? -- ======================================================================= Most public domain software is free, at least at first glance. ======================================================================= Aaron Konstam telephone: (210) 656-0355 e-mail: akonstam(a)sbcglobal.net

1 0

F9 install: anaconda fails: Unable to read package metadata.
by Colin Brace 02 Sep '08

02 Sep '08

Hi all, I tried reinstalling F9 from the DVD on a new disk this afternoon, but anaconda kept failing at the point when it started installing packages: "Unable to read package metadata. This may be due to a missing repodate directory. Please ensure that your install tree has been correctly generated." Bug-buddy was then launched at this point; there was no way of changing any configuration, only rebooting. Eventually I installed F8, then tried updating from the DVD. Still the same error. For the time being, I am running F8 again. Yes, I checked the media. Any ideas what is going on here? Thanks. ----- Colin Brace Amsterdam http://lim.nl -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/F9-install%3A-anaconda-fails%3A-Unable-to-read-packag… Sent from the Fedora List mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

4 7

(no subject)
by landon kelsey 02 Sep '08

02 Sep '08

I have Fedora 9/KDE 4.0.5 and have used yum to get the latest updates! Now some mysterious "software update" system is updating! For example: One morning I woke up and I got a new kernel all of a sudden! 2.6.25.14-108.fc9.i686 I have looked everywhere to find a dialog to shut off this software updater! Once such a dialog appeared and I selected NOT to make updates. This didn't help! I have found (logged in as root) settings->software updates dialog where I set everything to "do nothing" I looked in system services and yumupdatesd or yum-updatesd does not appear! I did find this out! ps -ef|grep -i package root 15885 1 0 13:55 ? 00:00:00 /usr/sbin/packagekitd landon4 15891 2711 0 13:59 pts/1 00:00:00 grep -i package [landon4@localhost Timer]$ so something is running! Thanks! under settings->software updates I found a dialog that set "update" settings for some facility I've never heard of! I suspect this sneaked in about 2-4 weeks ago! I noticed something running this morning! I have set everything to do nothing so I'll see what happens! I have had empty yum updates for a while now! I did do the script: yum clean all yum clean metadata yum clean dbcache yum update still yum update yields nothing I brought up the software updates dialog and set updates to all updates/hourly/notify perhaps the package kit "add on" changed everything ______________________________________________________________ Is anybody getting yum updates in the last 2 weeks??? _________________________________________________________________ See what people are saying about Windows Live. Check out featured posts. http://www.windowslive.com/connect?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_connect2_082008

1 0

Solved: Dell Vostro 1510: Problem w/ lan, wlan and audio - Fedora 9
by Dani 02 Sep '08

02 Sep '08

Greetings, The solution was simple, I just had to reinstall Fedora. This time I used the 64bit version, but I don't think that's what solved the problem. I thank you all for your kind feedbacks, Dani.

1 0

Ping KDE users
by Anne Wilson 02 Sep '08

02 Sep '08

I'm collecting some informal statistics to help the KDE usability group. Could you please email me off-list with replies to the following questions: In kickoff (the new-style menu), do you use The favorites tab The recently used tab Neither Both Not use kickoff at all Thanks for your help Anne

11 18

Re: Infrastructure report, 2008-08-22 UTC 1200
by David Both 01 Sep '08

01 Sep '08

Any information on the attack vector? Paul W. Frields wrote: > Last week we discovered that some Fedora servers were illegally > accessed. The intrusion into the servers was quickly discovered, and the > servers were taken offline. > > Security specialists and administrators have been working since then to > analyze the intrusion and the extent of the compromise as well as > reinstall Fedora systems. We are using the requisite outages as an > opportunity to do other upgrades for the sake of functionality as well > as security. Work is ongoing, so please be patient. Anyone with > pertinent information relating to this event is asked to contact > fedora-legal(a)redhat.com. > > One of the compromised Fedora servers was a system used for signing > Fedora packages. However, based on our efforts, we have high confidence > that the intruder was not able to capture the passphrase used to secure > the Fedora package signing key. Based on our review to date, the > passphrase was not used during the time of the intrusion on the system > and the passphrase is not stored on any of the Fedora servers. > > While there is no definitive evidence that the Fedora key has been > compromised, because Fedora packages are distributed via multiple > third-party mirrors and repositories, we have decided to convert to new > Fedora signing keys. This may require affirmative steps from every > Fedora system owner or administrator. We will widely and clearly > communicate any such steps to help users when available. > > Among our other analyses, we have also done numerous checks of the > Fedora package collection, and a significant amount of source > verification as well, and have found no discrepancies that would > indicate any loss of package integrity. These efforts have also not > resulted in the discovery of additional security vulnerabilities in > packages provided by Fedora. > > Our previous warnings against further package updates were based on an > abundance of caution, out of respect for our users. This is also why we > are proceeding with plans to change the Fedora package signing key. We > have already started planning and implementing other additional > safeguards for the future. At this time we are confident there is little > risk to Fedora users who wish to install or upgrade signed Fedora > packages. > > In connection with these events, Red Hat, Inc. detected an intrusion of > certain of its computer systems and has issued a communication to Red > Hat Enterprise Linux users which can be found at > http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2008-0855.html. This communication > states in part, "Last week Red Hat detected an intrusion on certain of > its computer systems and took immediate action. While the investigation > into the intrusion is on-going, our initial focus was to review and test > the distribution channel we use with our customers, Red Hat Network > (RHN) and its associated security measures. Based on these efforts, we > remain highly confident that our systems and processes prevented the > intrusion from compromising RHN or the content distributed via RHN and > accordingly believe that customers who keep their systems updated using > Red Hat Network are not at risk. We are issuing this alert primarily for > those who may obtain Red Hat binary packages via channels other than > those of official Red Hat subscribers." > > It is important to note that the effects of the intrusion on Fedora and > Red Hat are *not* the same. Accordingly, the Fedora package signing key > is not connected to, and is different from, the one used to sign Red Hat > Enterprise Linux packages. Furthermore, the Fedora package signing key > is also not connected to, and is different from, the one used to sign > community Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux (EPEL) packages. > > We will continue to keep the Fedora community notified of any updates. > > Thank you again for your patience. > > > -- ********************************************************* "I'd put my money on the sun and solar energy. What a source of power! I hope we don't have to wait until oil and coal run out before we tackle that." - Thomas Edison, in conversation with Henry Ford and Harvey Firestone, 1931 ********************************************************* David P. Both

4 3

New windows open in background
by Matt Morgan 01 Sep '08

01 Sep '08

My 18 month-old was playing with the computer for a while, and now new windows are opening in the background. This is on Fedora 9. I googled this and searched the list, but can't find any help. I'm not using the fancy new desktop stuff (compiz, desktop-effects, whatever we call it). Any suggestions? Thanks a lot, Matt

4 10

Jump to page: