users June 2024

users@lists.fedoraproject.org

73 participants
65 discussions

[Rawhide Test Week] DNF 5.2 2024-06-05 through 2024-06-11
by Sumantro Mukherjee 05 Jun '24

05 Jun '24

Hey Folks, Many of you by now know that in Fedora, we try to open up more opportunities to test upcoming features which are currently being developed. This time DNF team is working closely with Fedora QA to run the DNF 5.2 test week[0]. As a part of this test week, we will be specifically testing the system-upgrade feature. Previously, DNF would leverage DNF plug-ins to do system upgrade. This is now baked into DNF 5.2 and this test week will focus on testing that feature. Needless to say, we will also be testing the regular DNF features. You can always go ahead and submit the results here[1]. [0] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2024-06-05_Fedora_41_DNF_5.2 [1] https://testdays.fedoraproject.org/events/189 -- //sumantro Fedora QE TRIED AND PERSONALLY TESTED, ERGO TRUSTED

2 1

Skype rpms discontinued
by Paul Smith 04 Jun '24

04 Jun '24

Dear All, Recently, the linux rpm distribution of skype has been discontinued: https://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?332743-Updates-hang-on-skype&… Is there some alternative to using snap or web-skype https://snapcraft.io/install/skype/fedora ? Thanks in advance, Paul

4 4

Re: strange results of history command list
by AV 04 Jun '24

04 Jun '24

On Tue, 2024-06-04 at 16:26 +0000, Joe Wulf wrote: It truly depends on how the default management of bash history is set up in the virgin environment. Variables like HISTCONTROL, HISTIGNORE can play a part. The setting for 'shopt -s histappend' also matters. The BASH man page briefly explains them. R, -Joe /etc/profile only contains the, as far as I know, usual: if [ "$HISTCONTROL" = "ignorespace" ] ; then export HISTCONTROL=ignoreboth else export HISTCONTROL=ignoredups fi That does not seem to explain anything AV Sorry for replying directly. I forgot to check send to list

1 0

/boot too small
by Patrick Dupre 04 Jun '24

04 Jun '24

Hello, During an update, I get Error Summary ------------- Disk Requirements: At least 7MB more space needed on the /boot filesystem. How can I fix it without currently resizing /boot? Thank drwx------. 5 root root 4096 May 14 08:36 grub2 lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 45 Mar 7 13:24 symvers-6.7.7-100.fc38.x86_64.xz -> /lib /modules/6.7.7-100.fc38.x86_64/symvers.xz -rw-------. 1 root root 81850041 Mar 7 13:24 initramfs-6.7.7-100.fc38.x86_64.img -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 269378 Mar 1 01:00 config-6.7.7-100.fc38.x86_64 -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 8851783 Mar 1 01:00 System.map-6.7.7-100.fc38.x86_64 -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 14794568 Mar 1 01:00 vmlinuz-6.7.7-100.fc38.x86_64 lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 45 Feb 13 17:38 symvers-6.7.4-100.fc38.x86_64.xz -> /lib /modules/6.7.4-100.fc38.x86_64/symvers.xz -rw-------. 1 root root 81905180 Feb 13 17:37 initramfs-6.7.4-100.fc38.x86_64.img -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 269327 Feb 5 01:00 config-6.7.4-100.fc38.x86_64 -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 8850577 Feb 5 01:00 System.map-6.7.4-100.fc38.x86_64 -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 14806856 Feb 5 01:00 vmlinuz-6.7.4-100.fc38.x86_64 lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 46 Jan 25 13:39 symvers-6.6.13-100.fc38.x86_64.xz -> /li b/modules/6.6.13-100.fc38.x86_64/symvers.xz -rw-------. 1 root root 42503616 Jan 25 13:39 initramfs-6.6.13-100.fc38.x86_64.img -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 266375 Jan 20 01:00 config-6.6.13-100.fc38.x86_64 -rw-------. 1 root root 8786049 Jan 20 01:00 System.map-6.6.13-100.fc38.x86_64 -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 14676712 Jan 20 01:00 vmlinuz-6.6.13-100.fc38.x86_64 -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 147744 Jan 7 01:00 memtest86+x64.bin drwx------. 4 root root 4096 Jun 20 2023 efi drwxr-xr-x. 2 root root 4096 Jun 20 2023 extlinux -rw-------. 1 root root 103940590 Jul 21 2022 initramfs-0-rescue-c60d54440c4d444a9eb5a084a65edf40.img -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 11802352 Jul 21 2022 vmlinuz-0-rescue-c60d54440c4d444a9eb5a084a65edf40 drwxr-xr-x. 3 root root 4096 Jul 21 2022 loader drwx------. 2 root root 16384 Jul 21 2022 lost+found =========================================================================== Patrick DUPRÉ | | email: pdupre(a)gmx.com ===========================================================================

11 17

fstab
by Patrick Dupre 04 Jun '24

04 Jun '24

Hello, With ext4 filesystems, I used to set ext4 noauto,errors=remount-ro 1 2 in the fstab. With btrfs FS it does not like the option errors=remount-ro mount: /mnt/backup_2: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/sdc5, missing codepage or helper program, or other error. dmesg(1) may have more information after failed mount system call. btrfs: Unknown parameter 'errors' Is there another option? Thanks =========================================================================== Patrick DUPRÉ | | email: pdupre(a)gmx.com ===========================================================================

3 2

Installed Rawhide with btrfs; dnf system update to v40 has errors ; re-install from Live USB without affecting a non-root subvolume?
by Philip Rhoades 04 Jun '24

04 Jun '24

People, A while ago I was in a hurry to start using F40 (Sway) and installed Rawhide from a live usb to get started. Everything went pretty well and I had minimal problems up until after f40 was release. However now, when I tried to do a: dnf system upgrade download --releasever=40 I get a lot of errors - trying to do "dnf --erase" the problem rpms ends up making the problem worse. So, if I try to reinstall from the current f40 live usb - can I do that without touching the backup subvolume? ie: /dev/nvme0n1p3 btrfs 1,951,850,496 464,659,184 1,486,438,224 24% / /dev/nvme0n1p3 btrfs 1,951,850,496 464,659,184 1,486,438,224 24% /backup For decades I have just been using a separate partition for /home with ext[2|3|4] and this was conveniently not touched if I did a custom install to upgrade - I want to do something similar for this backup subvolume. Thanks, Phil. -- Philip Rhoades PO Box 896 Cowra NSW 2794 Australia E-mail: phil(a)pricom.com.au

3 3

strange results of history command list
by AV 04 Jun '24

04 Jun '24

This is on fedora 40, a fresh 'everything' network install. I always update/upgrade manually using 'sudo dnf --refresh upgrade'. To save typing I would scroll through the command history using the arrow keys. But 'sudo dnf --refresh upgrade' is no longer listed! All other commands I used are still listed, but not this one. Can somebody explain? AV

3 2

grub2-install
by Patrick Dupre 04 Jun '24

04 Jun '24

Hello, There is bug reported about grub2-install 2240994 for a while but no solution are proposed. grub2-install: error: This utility should not be used for EFI platforms because it does not support UEFI Secure Boot. If you really wish to proceed, invoke the --force option. Make sure Secure Boot is disabled before proceeding. =========================================================================== Patrick DUPRÉ | | email: pdupre(a)gmx.com ===========================================================================

6 9

No screen blanking after inactivity, Framework 16 laptop
by Sam Varshavchik 04 Jun '24

04 Jun '24

I installed the F40 XFCE Spin on a Framework 16 laptop. Display power management is enabled but the laptop display does not blank after the prescribed period of inactivity, whether the laptop is plugged in or on battery. I tried uninstalling xfce4-screensaver, this made no difference. Does anyone have display power management working on a Framework 16 laptop?

1 0

Please stop hijacking /etc/resolv.conf
by Sam Varshavchik 04 Jun '24

04 Jun '24

I updated from F39 to F40. I used to have: /etc/resolv.conf -> /run/NetworkManager/no-stub-resolv.conf Everything got messed up because the update hijacked this symlink again: lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 39 May 29 09:44 /etc/resolv.conf -> ../run/systemd/resolve/stub-resolv.conf I was confident that F39 did not have systemd-resolved installed, it must've been pulled into the update. I repeated the experiment on two other F39 systems today. I confirmed that neither one of them had systemd-resolved installed. F40 pulled it in, and the package's scriptlet clobbered /etc/resolv.conf It would be real nice if someone finally STOPed this repeated hijacking of /etc/resolv.conf, and breaking network connectivity, is this too much to ask? Although this was fairly simple to fix, this kind of behavior does not improve systemd's existing reputation.

9 23