upgrade FC5
by Thufir
It seems impossible to upgrade FC5 without a clean install -- is that
essentially correct? If I did decide to stick with FC5, how, generally,
would I go about installing java or other rpm's? Manually downloading?
Can I connect up FC5 with:
http://livna-dl.reloumirrors.net/fedora/5/i386/
thanks,
Thufir
14 years, 2 months
Evolution and GPG signing?
by mike cloaked
I have a problem with Evolution email signing on send that I can't
solve. GPG signature on receive seems fine from mail that I have sent
from a Thunderbird client, and it has a GPG line with "Valid
signature".
For a long time now I have been using Thunderbird with the enigmail
extension to send and receive signed and/or encrypted mail - perfectly
successfully.
I decided to give Evolution a try - mostly it works, including syncing
caldav calendars nicely. I then set up GPG in the security section
and selected my key ID. Then I sent a test mail that was GPG signed.
In the Sent mail folder the outgoing mail in Evolution looks normal
and within Evolution it says that the mail was signed just fine (i.e.
Valid signature). However when this mail is received in Thunderbird
the top strip on the mail (within Thunderbird) is pink instead of
green, and the OpenPGP status says "Error - signature verification
failed; click on 'Details' button for more information " - clicking on
the details gives the Security Info as
"OpenPGP Security Info
Error - signature verification failed
gpg command line and output:
/usr/bin/gpg
gpg: Signature made Sun 21 Mar 2010 11:40:25 AM GMT using RSA key ID XXXXXX
gpg: BAD signature from "xxxxxxxxx (New rsa key) <mike(a)my-email-server.com>"
Has anyone else come across this behaviour and if so do you know what
it needed to make GPG signing behave normally?
Thanks
--
mike c
14 years, 2 months
firefox profile synchronized w. unison cannot save anything
by Vitorio Okio
I have 3 PCs running Hardy, Karmic, and Fedora 12, with Firefox on each
of them: v. 3.0.18 on Hardy and v. 3.5.8 on both Karmic and Fedora.
I created "shared" profile on each system and synchronize them using
Unison. Ubuntu 8.04 is a base system for synchronization.
The synchronization itself works just fine on all 3 systems. No problems
what's ever on either of Ubuntu's.
In Fedora however I'm having a problem. While using "shared" profile I
can save neither a web page nor a download (unless I use some of add-on'
as described below).
If either Save Page As... or Save Link As... menu items are selected the
requests are simply ignored with no response from FF. However using
Download Them All ad-on does the job. Equally Scrapbook add-on allows me
to save/capture pages.
The default profile works as expected.
I thought SELinux is on the way but disabling it (for a test sake) did
not changed things. All permissions in "shared" profile directory to me
look OK.
I'm new to Fedora and cannot figure it out myself, need you help, folks.
Thanks.
14 years, 2 months
Asus eeepc 1005PEB
by Will Walthall
Just purchased an asus 1005PEB and I can't get Emulated multitouch for
the touchpad to work. I compared my synclient -l to my ibm thinkpad
that has emulated multitouch and everything is setup correctly. It
also works on the base windows install. Don't really know where to go
from here, should I get in touch with the xorg dev crew and see if
this is fixed in a newer version of xorg?
I believe the 1005PEB is a very recent build, jan 2010, so I could
understand this bug being present.
14 years, 2 months
[OT] info about filesystem directly on disk device and not partition
by Gianluca Cecchi
Hello,
sorry for the off-topic.
Tipically when I work with LVM on Linux (RHEL/CentOS 5 and/or Fedora 11/12),
I create the physical volume directly on the whole disk.
Historically one created a partition on the disk, eventually big as the
whole disk and then marked it as 8e type (LVM), and then the PV on the
partition.
With recent kernels/LVM2 user tools it became safe/normal to create it
directly on disk device, and so I normally do.
What about same thing for ext3 filesystem?
So creating for example an ext3 filesystem directly on the /dev/sda device?
Does this imply any risk/problem?
Does it change anything if the underlying device is instead managed by
device-mapper-multipath, so for example the device name is
/dev/mapper/mpath1?
I ask because, used with creating PVs, VGs and LVs, today I had to create a
plain filesystem on mpath device and forgot to create a partition on it but
issued the mkfs command directly on it... and then mounted it... now I have
this doubt
Thanks in advance for any hints/ suggestions.
Gianluca
14 years, 2 months
Working composite on F12
by Ed Greshko
Hi,
Just putting up a new system. Fully updated F12. Running the nvidia
driver 195.36.15 and a GeForce GT 230.
I'm using KDE and when I go to "Display Settings" and try to enable
Desktop Effects it shows "Compositing is disabled".
Does anyone have a working xorg.conf and compositing enabled? Or any
hints? According to what I've been able to find, compositing will be
disabled if Xinerama is enabled...but I've disabled it....or so I think.
Mine is attached just in case.
Ed
# nvidia-settings: X configuration file generated by nvidia-settings
Section "ServerLayout"
Identifier "Layout0"
Screen 0 "Screen0" 0 0
InputDevice "Keyboard0" "CoreKeyboard"
InputDevice "Mouse0" "CorePointer"
Option "Xinerama" "0"
EndSection
Section "Files"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/default/Type1"
EndSection
Section "InputDevice"
# generated from default
Identifier "Mouse0"
Driver "mouse"
Option "Protocol" "auto"
Option "Device" "/dev/input/mice"
Option "Emulate3Buttons" "no"
Option "ZAxisMapping" "4 5"
EndSection
Section "InputDevice"
# generated from data in "/etc/sysconfig/keyboard"
Identifier "Keyboard0"
Driver "kbd"
Option "XkbLayout" "us"
Option "XkbModel" "pc105"
EndSection
Section "Monitor"
Identifier "Monitor0"
VendorName "Unknown"
ModelName "Samsung SyncMaster"
HorizSync 30.0 - 81.0
VertRefresh 56.0 - 60.0
Option "DPMS"
EndSection
Section "Device"
Identifier "Device0"
Driver "nvidia"
VendorName "NVIDIA Corporation"
BoardName "GeForce GT 230"
EndSection
Section "Screen"
Identifier "Screen0"
Device "Device0"
Monitor "Monitor0"
DefaultDepth 24
Option "TwinView" "0"
Option "metamodes" "nvidia-auto-select +0+0"
SubSection "Display"
Depth 24
EndSubSection
EndSection
Section "Extensions"
Option "Composite" "Enable"
Option "Xinerama" "0"
EndSection
14 years, 2 months
latest kernel boots to a blank screen
by Kevin Kempter
Hi all;
I've updated to the latest kernel and it boots to a blank screen, nvidia does
not start.
Here's what I have installed:
[/root]
root@Issac # rpm -qa | grep kernel | sort
abrt-addon-kerneloops-1.0.8-2.fc12.x86_64
kernel-2.6.31.12-174.2.19.fc12.x86_64
kernel-2.6.31.12-174.2.22.fc12.x86_64
kernel-2.6.32.9-70.fc12.x86_64
kernel-devel-2.6.31.12-174.2.19.fc12.x86_64
kernel-devel-2.6.31.12-174.2.22.fc12.x86_64
kernel-devel-2.6.32.9-70.fc12.x86_64
kernel-firmware-2.6.32.9-70.fc12.noarch
kernel-headers-2.6.32.9-70.fc12.x86_64
[/root]
root@Issac # rpm -qa | grep nvidia | sort
akmod-nvidia-190.53-3.fc12.x86_64
kmod-nvidia-190.53-3.fc12.x86_64
kmod-nvidia-2.6.31.12-174.2.19.fc12.x86_64-190.53-1.fc12.4.x86_64
kmod-nvidia-2.6.31.12-174.2.22.fc12.x86_64-190.53-3.fc12.x86_64
kmod-nvidia-2.6.32.9-70.fc12.x86_64-190.53-3.fc12.x86_64
nvidia-settings-1.0-3.4.fc12.x86_64
nvidia-xconfig-1.0-2.fc12.x86_64
xorg-x11-drv-nvidia-190.53-4.fc12.x86_64
xorg-x11-drv-nvidia-libs-190.53-4.fc12.x86_64
f I boot into the 2.6.31.12 kernel all is fine.
Any help, advice, thoughts?
Thanks in advance
14 years, 2 months
Sorbet on Fedora's future
by Marcel Rieux
For a while, I've been arguing with very knowledgeable people here
that there are way too many bugs in Fedora, bugs that either hinder a
pleasant user experience or plainly break systems to the point that
one wonders if he's not being hacked. And, for a non-geek like me, get
rid of them before new ones add to the heap, is just impossible.
Developers might not be aware of some bugs I'm experiencing because
they're manifestly hardware related(1), while some others can't have
escaped their attention(2).
(1) The only option available in my Gigabyte MA770T-UD3P's BIOS
offering only options for entering passwords, for exemple.
(2) For instance, "New File" entering the clipboard every time a new
file is created.
Some bugs reports, even filed by Red Hat employees, have been
outstanding for so long that most users certainly feel it's no use
filling reports and following the outcome... unless one wants to make
a full time job arguing with geeks on what is worthy bug and what is
not.
In Linux Weekly News, Mr Sorbet... err, make this Corbet, has written
a nonetheless delightful article on the matter of what is causing this
avalanche of bugs in so-called "stable" Fedora releases. To me, the
sorbet of the whole article pretty much freezes down to this:
"(...) the system which Fedora has in place for the review of proposed
updates - Bodhi - is often circumvented by updates which go straight
out to users. The testing and voting which is supposed to happen in
Bodhi is, in fact, not happening much of the time, and the quality of
the distribution is suffering as a result. So some Fedora developers
are looking for ways to beef up the system."
https://lwn.net/Articles/377389/
And rightly so, since not breaking stable releases is the most
fundamental Fedora rule, as expressed here in the Stable release
update vision:
"The update repositories for stable releases of the Fedora
distribution should provide our users with a consistent and high
quality stream of updates."
This, and more very important stuff, under "Vision Statement" at this URL:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Stable_release_updates_vision
If this is the Fedora's game, I'm wishing to play. Otherwise, I'll
move to Ubuntu or, as security is important to me, CentOS or
Scientific Linux, soon as RHEL 6 is released.
So, one might ask, what will the contribution of non-geeks to Fedora
be? Well, as I said, I have a problem with my mobo. I also can't get
sound through HDMI to my TV. A recent update has made playing DVDs
impossible... except with Kplayer! (not KMplayer) Etc.
So, if there was a place where I could report those bugs without
registering to 10,000 different bugzillas and dealing with
don't-give-a-shit geeks, I certainly would fill them and would be more
than interested in trying packages in update-testing to see if the fix
works. But I'm certainly not interested in enabling update-testing
just to see if new stuff i don't need works, and possibly break my
system.
If my problems do not concern Fedora/Red Hat developers directly, they
can address the bug to software developers upstream. If bugs take
years to be fixed, maybe they can suggest another software... or
desktop environment be used by default on Fedora. You know, Fedora/Red
Hat certainly has the clout to wake up developers. OTOH, if Red Hat
relies on disgruntled users to fill reports on bugs that never get
fixed, users won't be the only ones to suffer.
As for users/developers who feel more "adventurous", Rawhide does
provide enough of a stampede experience, I would think. That's the
rolling distribution that some are asking for, though, even in this
case. I wonder if it wouldn't be a good idea to permit new updates
only every Sunday. But I don't have a solid opinion on this.
Developers are better placed to make an informed decision on this
matter.
Then, as suggested by Matthew Garrett, before a package is moved from
Bohdi to update testing, it should receive the signatures, or "karma",
or whatever, of 3 developers. Developers know each other. If somebody
doesn't do a good job, nobody will want to sign for him. If somebody
always output a clean job, others will almost sign eyes closed.
Signatures put pressure on developers: they know that if their
software always has problems, nobody will sign for them.
Of course, certain projects are more obscure than others, their
software is not as common as, say, a word processor. But the same goes
for the kernel development and, as far as I know, everything bears 3
signatures.
What I wrote here might be in part ill founded. When you're not a
developer, you can't comment with insight. It's an outsider's view,
but a very clear fact remains: whether it's only a rant or a
fullfledged case study, users must be allowed to express their POV
freely and it should be taken into consideration.
Chasing users away with "Why don't you fill (no-use) bug reports?" or
"You don't like it? The code is there, modify it!", the way it is
typically done on Debian and Slackware groups, leads to disaster.
If flame wars wouldn't have been so common in the community, if user
needs had been better taken care of, Debian could have achieved what
Mark Shuttlewort did, which is build a community, the largest user
base in the Linux world. So that, if you speak to Windows users
contemplating a move to Linux, the first distro that comes to their
mind is Ubuntu. That's because it's pretty much the only distribution
the generalist press talks about.
Now, Shuttlweworth is planning to offer an iTune look-alike service
for his users. He's going to bring some money in to pay his
developers. It's not the financial clout that Google gives to
ChromeOS, but it's a move in the right direction.
It's very strange, but it seems that open-source developers like to
pay their bills just like anybody. As more and more major companies
are entering the "open-source market", Nokia and Intel, for example,
who's going to be left developing open-source for nothing in project
that more and more will look rather futile, compared to mainstream?
Because, believe it or not, open source is now becoming mainstream, As
I explained here:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/2010-March/368642.html
(Read from "As Wikipedia puts it". The rest is of no interest.)
Google is apt to turn competition into confetti.
Apple, which is certainly far from showing an open-source attitude(1),
makes billions with BSD-based OS X using "repackaged" standard
no-real-specs-available(2) hardware and still gains market share over
Microsoft.
(1) Please don't bring forward this nonsense about their contribution
to WebKit. WebKit was a fork from KHTML, a GPLed project. So the code
had to be opened. and whatever contribution Darwin makes to the open
source community pretty much amount to a drop of water in the sea.
(2) Try to get the specs of their mobos, for instance.
At 19 years old. Linux is certainly not a new kid on the block
anymore. How come, even with Ubuntu, it is still howering at around 1%
of the market share? How come all the brawlers who invade Linux
groups/forums/lists are still allowed to bash new users pretending
that market share is not important in order to be accepted in
standards definition, that they'll still be surfing the net with Lynx
ten years from now?
The benevolent dictator would not permit such nonsense to happen
repeatedly on this groups. Why does Red Hat, a company listed on the
NYSE, allow this? Do all the non Red Hat members on the Fedora board
agree with this?
Can't anybody notice that traditional little budget open-source is
right in the middle of the track where the large corporations'
open-source is riding full steam head? Brawlers -- and you know, it
might be two people with 5 email accounts -- ask that they'd be taken
at their face value as real Linux advocates, and they do provide a
useful technical hint once in a while, but who's interests, knowingly
or unknowingly, are they serving?
Anyways, that's more than enough on brawlers: some people might think
I have somethings against them :) Documentation, now.
When, I installed the NVIDIA drivers, I went, first place, to
fedorafaq.org. Since Fedora couldn't provide instructions on
installing proprietary drivers, it seemed like an appropriate place.
But the instructions didn't work. It took some time before I got to
rpmfusion, the provider of the kmod package. Still, though I asked the
maintainer to correct his instructions, the Fedorafaq page is still
unchanged.
How come anybody is allowed to use the Fedora's name to give wrong advice?
Now, I want to remove the kmod-nvidia driver and there's no
instructions on how to remove it, either at rpmfusion or
fedoraproject. (I suppose removing proprietary software is not against
the law!) Just as for installing, you receive different advice all
over the place but, if the process can't be automated, how come there
is no offical information on such a fundamental matter?
Anyways, I could go on like this for hours. If Fedora stagnates behind
Ubuntu for a total Linux market share of ~1% -- servers excluded, of
course -- it's not because God cursed Fedora, it's because there are
HUGE administrative problems. The project lacks direction, a
benevolent dictator (or an enlightened triumvirate?), somebody that
could be pointed at if everything turns to a mess like now.
All along this summary, I've been comparing Fedora and Ubuntu, but
both are in a very different situations. Ubuntu is based on the latest
version of Debian, which is already very stable. Then, some packages
from testing are added and tested. If some bugs in unstable are
related to hardware architectures that are not supported by Ubuntu,
the package might also be added.
Though, due to the wide variety of PC hardware, all kind of problems
pop up after an Ubuntu release, after, say, 8 months, inexperienced
users can feel confident that adopting the past release -- a new one
coming out every 6 months -- will be fairly trouble free. Every
release being maintained for 18 months, the user can, 10 months later,
choose the new release, the last or the second last. And it seems
Canonical can come up with fairly stable server releases this way.
With 13 month releases, Fedora users have to upgrade much sooner. And
the latest version being based on the previous version of Fedora
instead of Debian, some question the validity of the whole process.
Here's what Corbet writes about this;
"Fedora does indeed not hold back on updates; a quick look in the LWN
mailbox turns up over 600 package updates for the Fedora 11 release -
in just the last month. This is a release which is scheduled for
end-of-life in a few months. Many of these updates involve significant
changes, and others have been deemed "worthless". Regardless of worth,
there can be no doubt that all these updates represent a significant
degree of churn in a distribution which is in the latter part of its
short life. It is difficult to avoid breaking things when things are
changing at that rate."
So, when I hear some suggesting that Fedora moves to a rolling stable
release, this sounds to me like a recipe for disaster. Of course,
stricter control on updates is often suggested, but getting to a
non-rolling stable release certainly seems like an inescapable first
step.
IMO, Fedora releases will have to become much more stable and urgency
to get more market share will have to be established as a clear
priority. Very F-A-S-T. The Stable release update vision should be
followed "à la lettre".
P.s.: Many thanks to Jonathan Corbet for providing me with insight on
Fedora's release process.
To all: Brawlers might find my answers have a sarcastic tone... if I
give any at all.
14 years, 2 months
libgpod from rawhide repo to manage iPod on F12?
by Gianluca Cecchi
Hello,
on my F12 x86_64 I have libgpod at level libgpod-0.7.2-8.fc12.x86_64 (as
from offical repo)
it seems from http://www.libimobiledevice.org/ that to manage iPod 3G/GS I
need >= 0.7.90
running the command
# yum update --enablerepo rawhide libgpod
I get
--> Running transaction check
---> Package libgpod.x86_64 0:0.7.91-2.fc14 set to be updated
--> Processing Dependency: libimobiledevice.so.1()(64bit) for package:
libgpod-0.7.91-2.fc14.x86_64
--> Running transaction check
---> Package libimobiledevice.x86_64 0:1.0.0-1.fc14 set to be updated
--> Finished Dependency Resolution
Dependencies Resolved
================================================================================
Package Arch Version Repository
Size
================================================================================
Updating:
libgpod x86_64 0.7.91-2.fc14 rawhide
275 k
Updating for dependencies:
libimobiledevice x86_64 1.0.0-1.fc14 rawhide
70 k
Transaction Summary
================================================================================
Install 0 Package(s)
Upgrade 2 Package(s)
Apart from the general risk to enable rawhide pakages on stable releases,
what degree of risk/dependencies I have in this case?
Anyone already using?
Can it be safer to take src.rpm from rawhide for libgpod and
libimobiledevice and compile on F12 (if it will compile)?
Thanks,
Gianluca
14 years, 2 months
FC12+selinux+dump/restore
by Terry Horsnell
Hi all,
I'm using the Live version of FC12 to produce a bootable clone of an idle FC12
system to a USB stick. One step involves using 'dump' to dump the contents of the
idle root fiesystem and piping the result to 'restore', to build the stick
copy of root. This all basically works, except that restore moans about a bunch
of files during the restoration process with things like:
/var/cache/fontconfig/xxxxx: EA set.security.selinux.system_u:object_r:fonts_cache_t:s0 failed: Invalid argument
The disk-based system originally had selinux disabled, and when I tried the dump
of that, I got thousands of restore errors. I then booted up the disk-based system,
set selinux to permissive and let it relabel the files. After that, restore only
produced the current bunch of errors. selinux on the live system runs in enforcing/targeted,
but the problem still occurs if I set it to permissive/targeted (by editing /etc/selinux/config
as there is no option for this in the Administration menu on the live system)
Any ideas anyone?
Cheers,
Terry
14 years, 2 months
