Do we know yet whether those of us on F18 (lots of us, if my
impression is accurate) who want to move up to F20 but prefer to avoid a
fresh install with all its restorations from backups -- whether we'll be
better off running fedup twice, or upgrading with a medium?
Beartooth Staffwright, Neo-Redneck Not Quite Clueless Power User
Remember I have precious (very precious!) little idea where up is.
On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 9:30 PM, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203(a)freenet.de> wrote:
> Check this how this list's archive:
> You can clearly see the breakage you are causing: All of your postings start
> a new thread, i.e. replies of yours do not appear in the thread you are
> replying to.
Well thanks for posting this link. As a home user, I really don't know
why is this happening...! I am myself amazed. What is the remedy then?
(Just uses browser to send mails). Is it a browser's bug?
Adding "test" to the end of the subject line.
On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 9:29 PM, Ed Greshko <Ed.Greshko(a)greshko.com> wrote:
> On 11/30/13 10:12, Joe Eff wrote:
> > On 11/29/2013 04:14 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
> >> It would be overly complex for google to have to determine if you've
> actually did change the subject line to then decide if it should remove the
> References: header.
> > How hard can it be to compare the new Subject to a copy of the old one
> and not change other headers if they're identical?
> If one adds a few "!" to indicate emphasis has the meaning changed? If
> one changes a word from "their" to "there" to correct a typo has the
> meaning changed? Technically, yes. But practically?
> Anyway, this is well beyond the scope of this list. So, have fun taking
> this debate on to wherever it leads.
> Getting tired of non-Fedora discussions and self-serving posts
> users mailing list
> To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
> Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
> Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
On my Fedora 19 i686 I see weird thing - when killing processes (by
killall -9 kactivitymanagerd
killall -9 gam_server
killall -9 kded4
killall -9 systemd
killall -9 atril
or with PID:
kill -9 1 1322 10612 10619
), then processes stay running - they are not zombies (for PID=1 be
zombie perhaps does not make sense), but eat CPU, occupy memory etc.
I cannot say this behavior is always (I'm killing processes only when
I need it), but I saw this several times, with last Fedora distros.
It is bad glibc signal() implementation or what else?
Regards, Franta Hanzlik
(been a while since i've used fedora extensively, am now switching
back so first few questions might be on the simple side.)
first, during an f19 install, i chose to do an LVM install and
explicitly selected a small number of logical volumes to create but i
wanted the single volume group itself to encompass the entire
remaining 300G of the hard drive, so i could later just "lvcreate"
more logical volumes in the free space in that volume group.
instead, while i *thought* i had specified that i wanted the volume
group to max out on the hard drive, it was created only large enough
to hold the fixed-size logical volumes i selected. so at this point, i
would have to create another PV for the rest of the hard drive, and
extend the volume group to encompass that. what should i have selected
during install to specify that i wanted the volume group to consist of
a single PV that took up the entire remaining part of the hard drive?
and, second, once the system was running, i checked out the alleged
kickstart file that was created that would represent the installation,
and for the disk layout, all i saw was the directive:
i was expecting to see a more detailed breakdown of the way i defined
my logical volumes -- is that not included in the auto-generated
Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
On 28 November 2013 09:29, Tim <ignored_mailbox(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> Allegedly, on or about 28 November 2013, Roger sent:
>> I haven't been following this discussion thread closely of late but
>> would like to understand how and what emails, clients, headers, gmail
>> and faults or not with browsers has to do with "Why some say "rpm
>> hell". I seem to have missed a step.
> The thread diverged, and nobody changed the subject line. I think it
> just petered out with an explanation of what "RPM hell" was, and how
> it's not unique to RPM.
> If your mail client does threading, you could collapse this thread, and
> walk back up its heritage until it split off. And you could follow just
> the original thread, keeping this tangent hidden out of the way.
> You can't do that when someone stuffs up the threading headers. All the
> replies just get thrown in a mess on the floor.
> I can't think how the problem poster is doing this, other than by being
> deliberately annoying.
Deliberate or not, it was at least interesting. If using a separate
client it can be quite easy, but that normally leaves a more apparent
signature in the header showing it's been received by smtp or similar.
The problem is that however it's done this is apparently accomplished
in just the gmail web interface. (You could also I suppose, if really
trolling, compose each reply as a new mail, cutting and pasting,
hadn't really considered that possibility.)
It turns out if you use the 'edit subject' option gmail drops the
references and in-reply-to (even if you don't actually edit the
subject). Arguably this is exactly what you don't want to happen,
since you can't edit a subject to indicate something like 'solved' or
the that topic has drifted. Anyway, apologies, I've tried it in this
email to demonstrate. There may be other ways to accomplish it.
If AP is doing this unintentionally then you can avoid it by using the
'pop-out' option to get an pop-out window rather than edit subject
which gets the pop-out but also breaks references.
On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 5:42 PM, Michael Schwendt <mschwendt(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> So, you've got some homework to do. Figure out in which unusual way you
> reply to messages from this mailing-list so that the "References:" and
> "In-Reply-To:" headers are missing in your mails. At Google Mail, prefer
> the Reply button, don't edit the subject.
Sure, but I really just use Reply button. I never changed the subject
but still that happened...is something amazing...Sitll I would do what
you say with more caution. Ok.