users January 2010

users@lists.fedoraproject.org

399 participants
571 discussions

Re: Installation plays hardball
by R. G. Newbury 05 Jan '10

05 Jan '10

On Sat, 02 Jan 2010 20:10:37 +1030, Tim wrote >It makes almost no sense to use it on laptops, where you can only have > single drive (adding an outboard drive is quite impractical, you'd end > up with a box of bits all cabled together). And you face the > difficulty of finding recovery tools for LVM (I haven't seen any) for > any repair jobs, but there are widely written about tools for rescuing > data from ext3 partitions. >The only advantage I found for using LVM on my laptop was encryption. > I could have the encompassing LVM volume encrypted, and as many > partitions as I liked, and only have to unlock the outer container. > Using various ext3 partitions, I had to type in the password numerous > times to boot up the computer. > If you're the sort that uses one huge partition for everything (and > that does seem to be the recommendation, these days), *and* you never > intend to add a second drive, then LVM is pointless to you. ONE HUGE PARTITION? I'd like to know who is crazy enough to recommend that, because I would want to stay well away from him. That's *almost* as bad as win(spit!). I always set up my boxen with separate partitions for /boot, /home, /tmp, /var and /. And /var/lib/mysql is a symlink into /home/misc, as is /var/www/html. That way if /tmp or /var ever fill from error messages, it is simple to clean up and get running again. Also, with /home as a separate partition, it is dead simple to install again, or install a new version or distro without destroying all your data. Most installs seem to want to over-write /var too, even if/when you say 'Don't format', which is why /var/lib/mysql and /var/www/html are symlinked elsewhere. (You *DO* want to lose your Nolapro accounting setup and accounting data too in one swell foop?). On this desktop I also have a partition for /usr/local, for all my *own* programs and scripts. Geoff -- Please let me know if anything I say offends you. I may wish to offend you again in the future. Tux says: "Be regular. Eat cron flakes."

3 2

any fundamental difference between fedora and suse NFSv4?
by Robert P. J. Day 05 Jan '10

05 Jan '10

i'm currently reviewing a doc on suse linux enterprise 11, the section on NFS, but i don't have a SLES 11 machine in front of me. could anyone who uses both SLES 11 and fedora 12 comment on how indistinguishable the NFS setups are across those two distros? so far, i haven't seen a lot that's massively incompatible, and i wouldn't expect to. obviously, the fundamental files are going to be the same. rday -- ======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA Linux Consulting, Training and Kernel Pedantry. Web page: http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday ========================================================================

4 9

F12 installation ruins booting partition where Windows dual booting
by barry yu 05 Jan '10

05 Jan '10

This computer has Windows 7 and XP dual boot, the XP in first partition C:\ (Primary, active), Windows 7 in first of extended partition, prior to Fedora 12 installation I made an image of XP c:\ with True Image, then I started F12 installation and everything seamed going well, finally the F12 finished and to reboot, after the BIOS process and then the system got stuck: only the cursor blinking a top left, entire screen is black, and that's it, can't go any further. The entire hard drive was arranged like this: First partition is primary and active where XP resided, then the rest of drive is extended, first logical partition is Windows 7, 2nd logical is /boot for F12, then 3rd logical partition is f12 swap, 4th logical is F12 /. So I used the XP image file that I made before F12 installation and recovered the XP back into primary partition, then rebooted the system, this time the Grub is booting up and let me finish the last part of the F12 installation, the system finally dual boot with Windows. Can any one tell me what happened? Looks like the F12 installation had altered the original primary partition that even grub can't boot up from it.

1 0

How do I get SB X-FI sound card working on Fedora 12
by jnissley＠nissley.org 05 Jan '10

05 Jan '10

I am running Fedora 12 and am up to date on the updates. I have a Sound Blaster X-Fi Xtreme Audio sound card and can not seem to get it to work and from reading the mailing lists I could find the 6.31 kernel should have support for this card built in. uname information 2.6.31.9-174.fc12.x86_64 #1 SMP Mon Dec 21 05:33:33 UTC 2009 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux lspci pertinent infomation 04:00.0 Audio device: Creative Labs [SB X-Fi Xtreme Audio] CA0110-IBG The mixer GUI shows HD-Audio Generic. rpm -qa shows a wide range of alsa version and I was wondering if this could be part of the issue. # rpm -qa | grep alsa alsa-lib-devel-1.0.22-1.fc12.x86_64 alsa-oss-1.0.17-4.fc12.x86_64 alsa-utils-1.0.21-2.fc12.x86_64 alsa-tools-1.0.20-4.fc12.x86_64 alsamixergui-0.9.0-0.9.rc2.fc12.x86_64 alsa-lib-1.0.22-1.fc12.i686 alsa-oss-libs-1.0.17-4.fc12.x86_64 alsa-lib-1.0.22-1.fc12.x86_64 alsa-oss-devel-1.0.17-4.fc12.x86_64 Any help would be appreciated.

2 1

running *only* NFSv4 on f12 produces rpc.mountd error
by Robert P. J. Day 04 Jan '10

04 Jan '10

i'm currently still messing with various bits of NFS on f12, and i wanted to see if i could properly run *only* NFSv4 (that is, no support for any earlier version of NFS), so some questions. first, is there a short way to examine what versions are supported by a running nfsd? i'm *guessing* that i can see that via "rpcinfo -p": ... 100003 2 tcp 2049 nfs 100003 3 tcp 2049 nfs 100003 4 tcp 2049 nfs 100003 2 udp 2049 nfs 100003 3 udp 2049 nfs 100003 4 udp 2049 nfs ... is that what i'm being shown above? that i currently have support for versions 2, 3 and 4? is there no simpler way to query a running nfsd for that info? but here's where it gets trickier. from here (which i assume is relevant): http://www.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/5.4/html/Deployme… i'm told that, under NFSv4, there is no need for any of rpc.mountd, rpc.lockd or rpc.statd (as i read it, all this functionality has been moved into the kernel with NFSv4). so i can see how to disable support for all earlier versions of nfs in /etc/sysconfig/nfs: # # Define which protocol versions mountd # will advertise. The values are "no" or "yes" # with yes being the default #MOUNTD_NFS_V1="no" #MOUNTD_NFS_V2="no" #MOUNTD_NFS_V3="no" ... so i uncomment all those lines to (allegedly) disable all earlier version support and: # service nfs restart Shutting down NFS mountd: [ OK ] Shutting down NFS daemon: [ OK ] Shutting down NFS quotas: [ OK ] Shutting down NFS services: [ OK ] Starting NFS services: [ OK ] Starting NFS quotas: [ OK ] Starting NFS daemon: [ OK ] Starting NFS mountd: Usage: rpc.mountd [-F|--foreground] [-h|--help] [-v|--version] [-d kind|--debug kind] [-o num|--descriptors num] [-f exports-file|--exports-file=file] [-p|--port port] [-V version|--nfs-version version] [-N version|--no-nfs-version version] [-n|--no-tcp] [-H ha-callout-prog] [-s|--state-directory-path path] [-g|--manage-gids] [-t num|--num-threads=num] [FAILED] # ok, what just happened there? am i not allowed to do what i just tried? and if i explicitly try to run *only* NFSv4, why is rpc.mountd even being invoked? is there something else i need to be doing here? rday -- ======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA Linux Consulting, Training and Kernel Pedantry. Web page: http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday ========================================================================

3 2

I can't startup my Fedora 12
by 严晶涛 04 Jan '10

04 Jan '10

I have only install Fedora 12. My partition is /boot 200M LVM 290G LVM: fedora 20G other 10G opt 60G home 200G swap 3G fedora is Fedora 12's / opt is /opt home is /home All the filesystem is ext4 Then I want to install CentOS in other,I backup /boot and format /boot to ext3(because CentOS 5.4 doesn't support ext4) and copy backup to /boot Install CentOS to other,and format other to ext3. When I have installed CentOS,I can login CentOS,but when I choose Fedora 12,my system will stop in fsck,and I can't startup it...

2 4

Problems ripping DVDs I legally own to my media server
by thomas cameron 04 Jan '10

04 Jan '10

All - To make clear - I am only doing this with DVDs I legally own. I am not pirating, I am just trying to get all my DVDs onto a media server I am building instead of having them strewn all over the entertainment center. Specifically, I tried to rip Transformers 2 Revenge of the Fallen. It apparently has some new copy protection scheme where it reports that it is 80 gigs, and every method I tried to decrypt them under Linux failed. I wound up having to fire up my dusty old Windows box and use Ideal DVD Copy to rip them successfully (http://tinyurl.com/yg8269g) What, if anything, are you using to make legit backups of your newer, copy-protected DVDs under Linux? -- Thomas

8 10

Re: Best way to get minimal system
by Andre Robatino 04 Jan '10

04 Jan '10

If you do a text-based install (add "text" to the installer's kernel options, or automatic if you have less than the minimum RAM for a GUI install), you'll get an extremely stripped-down installation (less than 200 packages for F11) whether you want it or not - the text-based installer doesn't offer any package choices anymore.

3 6

default addresses in thunderbird
by Konstantin Svist 04 Jan '10

04 Jan '10

Ever since Thunderbird went to 3.0 (or just before that), I've had this problem: When composing a new email, I type in a part of the name of recipient and it auto-suggests the emails -- the problem is that the ALTERNATE emails are the first ones in the suggestion. I write an email to my boss, and Thunderbird suggests his pesonal email as the default. Anyone else see this or is it just me?

2 1

yum update question
by Paul Allen Newell 04 Jan '10

04 Jan '10

While doing a "yum update" after an install from DVD, I noticed that I got the following message (this is a "write it down and then retype into computer that has mail" so I might have a typo: [...] Installing: kernal-PAE-2.6.31.9-174.fc12.i686 W: Possible missing firmware ql8100_fw.bin for module qla2xxx.lo W: Possible missing firmware aic94xx-seq_fw.bin for module aic94xx.lo [...] The machine is old and I am prepared to understand that it might be getting "too old". But I can't figure out how I am decipher this message into something which lets me understand what f12 thinks is missing in my firmware. I checked my f11 install logs on another machine and do not see these warnings. IMHO, it would be nice if yum told me where to look to understand these messages, but MHO might be ignorant of something obvious, so I can't complain until I understand this warning. Thanks in advance, Paul

3 6

← Newer
1
...
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
...
58
Older →

Jump to page: