subscribed
-- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Networking problem
On Sat, 2011-05-21 at 16:19 -0700, JD wrote: > On 05/21/11 14:15, Joe Zeff wrote: > > On 05/21/2011 02:00 PM, JD wrote: > >> I can configure sendmail to run with some specific smarthost. > >> That is my main problem. > >> It is that I have no domain name nor a public mx record, > >> and even if I did, I would have to deal with all the spam :) > > So get yourself a domain name; it's not that expensive. Then, go to > > http://www.everydns.net/ and set up dynamic DNS. Once you have that, > > tell your box to listen on Port 587 and use smtpauth. It's not exactly > > rocket science, you know. > > Nah... > Let google deal with the spam. You can have your own domain, have Google handle it for free (Google Apps) and use fetchmail to d/l the mail on a regular basis (like every 2 minutes) to your own mail server and then not have to worry about port 25 blocks or spam. Craig -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: bios update
On Sat, 2011-05-21 at 21:25 -0500, Matt Domsch wrote: > On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:55:24AM -0300, Sebastian wrote: > >Apologies*if this has been discussed, I couldn't find it. > >I have a single boot FC14 system on a*Dell precision M6500 precision > >notebook and*wish to update the BIOS. > >I go to the Dell download site, and for my machine select the closest > >match to my operating system: RH Enterprise Linux 5. > >This gives me the only option to download an EXE file: "M6500A06.EXE" > >Is it possible to update my bios with this file given my current > >installation? > >I have*windows Virtual Box under FC14,*or, > >Do I need to delete my*installation, install windows and reinstall? > >As I really don't want to do this, a final option to consider: could I > >install windows via a USB drive (so as to not destroy my current*system) > >and then install bios?* > > http://linux.dell.com/wiki/index.php/Repository/firmware > > describes how to do this for many (but not all) Dell systems. The > firmware repository on linux.dell.com carries firmware payloads for > >300 different system types. firmware-addon-dell and firmware-tools > packages are included in Fedora and EPEL, so you only need the > firmware payload RPM from the firmware repository then. and it shouldn't go without mention that Matt is not only a board member of Fedora but also has spearheaded tremendous Linux support at Dell which provides tools such as these to make life easier for Linux users for which I am very grateful. Craig -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: bios update
On 5/22/11 5:51 AM, Craig White wrote: > and it shouldn't go without mention that Matt is not only a board member > of Fedora but also has spearheaded tremendous Linux support at Dell > which provides tools such as these to make life easier for Linux users > for which I am very grateful. > > Craig > > +1. We need more advocates like Matt. [Sidebar] Is it still possible to purchase a Dell computer with Linux pre-installed? James McKenzie -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: bios update
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 05:51:20AM -0700, Craig White wrote: > On Sat, 2011-05-21 at 21:25 -0500, Matt Domsch wrote: > > On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:55:24AM -0300, Sebastian wrote: > > >Apologies*if this has been discussed, I couldn't find it. > > >I have a single boot FC14 system on a*Dell precision M6500 precision > > >notebook and*wish to update the BIOS. > > >I go to the Dell download site, and for my machine select the closest > > >match to my operating system: RH Enterprise Linux 5. > > >This gives me the only option to download an EXE file: "M6500A06.EXE" > > >Is it possible to update my bios with this file given my current > > >installation? > > >I have*windows Virtual Box under FC14,*or, > > >Do I need to delete my*installation, install windows and reinstall? > > >As I really don't want to do this, a final option to consider: could I > > >install windows via a USB drive (so as to not destroy my > > > current*system) > > >and then install bios?* > > > > http://linux.dell.com/wiki/index.php/Repository/firmware > > > > describes how to do this for many (but not all) Dell systems. The > > firmware repository on linux.dell.com carries firmware payloads for > > >300 different system types. firmware-addon-dell and firmware-tools > > packages are included in Fedora and EPEL, so you only need the > > firmware payload RPM from the firmware repository then. > > and it shouldn't go without mention that Matt is not only a board member > of Fedora but also has spearheaded tremendous Linux support at Dell > which provides tools such as these to make life easier for Linux users > for which I am very grateful. Former board member (I chose not to stand for re-election in December 2010 due to other commitments, and a strong desire to see others step into that leadership role after my 5 year tenure), but thanks for the votes of confidence! -- Matt Domsch Technology Strategist Dell | Office of the CTO -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: bios update
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 06:21:29AM -0700, James McKenzie wrote: > On 5/22/11 5:51 AM, Craig White wrote: > > and it shouldn't go without mention that Matt is not only a board member > > of Fedora but also has spearheaded tremendous Linux support at Dell > > which provides tools such as these to make life easier for Linux users > > for which I am very grateful. > > > > Craig > > > > > +1. We need more advocates like Matt. Thanks! > [Sidebar] > > Is it still possible to purchase a Dell computer with Linux pre-installed? Yes. All PowerEdge servers and Precision workstations are available with Linux pre-installed, as has been the case for 12+ years. http://dell.com/ubuntu currently lists two notebooks offered in the United States. Other countries may have more or fewer depending on regional sales requirements. Thanks, Matt -- Matt Domsch Technology Strategist Dell | Office of the CTO -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Analog video capture
On Sat, 2011-05-21 at 13:45 -0300, Fernando Cassia wrote: > I second what someone else said on this thread, you want a digitizer > card with a hardware mpeg2 encoder (there´s some with mpeg4, too, but > mpeg2 is good enough). That saves CPU cyclles and you end up with a > .mpg file with a decent size rather than several gigabytes of > uncompressed video. It's also a good idea to get something that captures sound and pictures all in one, rather than having to use your separate sound card. That way, you're far more likely to capture video with the sound in synchronisation with the picture. Loss of sound sync is an annoying problem, that gets progressively worse with longer captures. And it's a right nuisance playing squeeze and stretch games with your sound track trying to counteract it. -- [tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r 2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686 Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Protected WLAN
On Sat, 2011-05-21 at 20:48 -0500, Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote: > I like defense in depth - you have to crack the first layer before > you find out about the second layer. This may even give me time to > fix the first layer, depending on how long cracking the second layer > takes. And therein lay a problem: Some people assume that cracking through one layer will take time, and they'll notice it and be able to respond, or it'll take too long and the miscreant will abort. The reality is that it may take no time, and you may never notice. Any time I see someone saying they turned off their firewall to get something working, I cringe. They seem to expect that they'll be fine doing that, yet were absolutely sure that they needed it on the rest of the time. You can get a random attack at any time, and some ISPs will tell you that they can see continuous sweeps of their IP addresses probing for something to play with. It took all of four seconds for a friend of mine to get hacked when he first logged on with WindowsXP (via a USB ADSL modem, where there's virtually nothing between modem and computer system). And what got him (I can't recall any more, it was years ago) couldn't be removed by his anti-virus software, so he had to reformat and re-install. Around an hour or so later, he reconnected, and got hacked again in just a few seconds. I laughed so hard it hurt. > Actually, the first layer of defense is ... After that, it gets easy - > you have access to the Internet, and a couple of my printers. Or you > can go to work on cracking the security of the machines on the > network. When my friend first got a laptop he took me out wardriving. It was surprising how many unsecured networks were around. And, now, you have people with wireless printers that can be directly accessed. It did amuse us that it would be possible to print something on their printer, and they'd never know how or why it printed what it did. -- [tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r 2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686 Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: subscribed
On 05/02/11 08:49, Olaf Damerow wrote: > Fix the date on your computer. It is 20 days behind. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Protected WLAN
Mikkel L. Ellertson: >> They do not usually guess. The use a program that monitors the >> traffic, and captures the MAC address of any system that connects to >> the router. They then use one of these to connect. JD: > So, the initial connection request goes in the clear! > Now that's security!! :) It has to work that way. You connect a route, then encrypt traffic that will go through it. The connection setup isn't doing anything that gives away secrets, it's just connecting two things together. And as far as how long does it take. Well, on a network that may have 50 megabit per second speed, sending out numerous relatively smaller packets (all with networking headers) hundreds or thousands of times per second, how long do you think it would take to see data *about* the connections? Blink, and you'll miss it. I'm still waiting to hear news, though, about some hacker getting into someone's home garden management system. Eventually it's got to happen, with someone thinking they've cracked getting free internet, and all they can do is turn the fishpond fountain on and off. ;-) -- [tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r 2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686 Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: subscribed
On 05/22/2011 09:09 AM, JD wrote: > On 05/02/11 08:49, Olaf Damerow wrote: >> > Fix the date on your computer. > It is 20 days behind. Maybe the message took 20 days to get to the list. I have seen stranger things happen. Mike -- Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with Ketchup! -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Gnome 3, Fedora 14 on Netbook
Hello All, This is my first time posting to the list so just in case I missed a few rules I will get it right my second time around. I would like to know if anyone is currently running Fedora 14 and Gnome 3 on a netbook, if so does it run well? I tried to do an install via the repo but it appears after the install I still have version 2.3. Regards, Infolookup http://infolookup.securegossip.com www.twitter.com/infolookup -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Protected WLAN
Tim: (regarding access points buried in the basement) >> Though you're only going by the ordinary antenna in your gear. A >> better antenna may be more than enough to still work with a muffled >> signal. So this isn't a trick that you want to rely on. Mikkel L. Ellertson: > Not a trick you want to rely on, but one that may add a bit more > protection. Remember, the access point still has to be able to > receive your signal, and make it out. With the access point below > ground level, it rends to frustrate most attackers. Add a > directional antenna to the router, and it frustrates them more. > While I am not relying on it for security, only 2 houses can get > line-of-site with my router with the standard antenna. And only from > the second story on the side closest to my place. While it may help with a home network, and stopping the hopeless next door hacker. You wouldn't want to try that with a network that really needs protecting. All a hacker would have to do would be plant another access point between them and you, somewhere that bridged the two together. I'm still surprised WLAN works as well as it does, considering how you may be in a densely populated area, with lots of different wireless devices all trying to use the same few channels. I work in video production, walkie talkies and wireless microphones are enough of a headache in that regard. Only a couple of years ago we made everyone in a *nearby* restaurant stand up for the national anthem sung over a wireless microphone, from our sporting event a couple of hundred metres away. They were told to stand, and they did, not really knowing why, looking all around them trying to figure it out. A few minutes later someone came over in a hurry to sort out changing channels. Previously, we'd never had our wireless systems on at the same time. -- [tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r 2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686 Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
help
From: users-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: users Digest, Vol 87, Issue 30 To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 12:00:18 + Send users mailing list submissions to users@lists.fedoraproject.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to users-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org You can reach the person managing the list at users-ow...@lists.fedoraproject.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of users digest..." --Forwarded Message Attachment-- From: a...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 12:49:12 +0100 Subject: Re: Best FOSS alternative for skype? Microsoft is an advertising company so it'll be able to make very good use of that data to manage and target adverts better. It's not really down to "FOSS alternatives". There are *standards* for voice over IP. I guess Skype fits MS well in that its a proprietary non-standard 8) Alan -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Using ndiswrapper
On Sun, 2011-05-22 at 02:17 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote: > In fact, I'm not sure what "firmware" is. > Is there a standard definition of firmware? Is there a standard definition of anything in computing? ;-) It's partway between hardware and software. Generally speaking, it's the upgradeable programming that you can install into small hardware appliances (computer BIOS, modems, DVD players, digital television equipment, etc.). Usually, it refers to reprogramming an EEPROM with a non-volatilely stored program (once installed, it remains stored unless deliberately overwritten). Though, some devices might use volatile memory, and require firmware uploading each time they're powered on. I seem to recall that some network cards work that way, and their driver does that each bootup. With some devices, the firmware may be their entire operating code. For other devices, they have some basic programming in permanent ROM, and some additional program code is upgradable firmware. e.g. You may have a BIOS which has ROM code to being booting or begin installing firmware. But the firmware actually handles everything else. Or a worse example; the entire coding is firmware, and if upgrading the firmware fails at a critical moment, you don't have any way to try again. You'd need to rip out the EEPROM, and fix things externally. -- [tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r 2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686 Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Protected WLAN
On 05/22/11 07:14, Tim wrote: > Mikkel L. Ellertson: >>> They do not usually guess. The use a program that monitors the >>> traffic, and captures the MAC address of any system that connects to >>> the router. They then use one of these to connect. > JD: >> So, the initial connection request goes in the clear! >> Now that's security!! :) > It has to work that way. You connect a route, then encrypt traffic that > will go through it. The connection setup isn't doing anything that > gives away secrets, it's just connecting two things together. > I was referring to the use of MAC filtering which is soundly defeated by the transmission of the MAC in the clear. So, MAC filtering is absolutely useless as a security measure. If I turn off my machine, the hacker has my MAC, and will have 1 less thing to worry about getting. My reliance is then totally on wpa2-psk/aes and a well chosen 63 byte pass-phrase. > And as far as how long does it take. Well, on a network that may have > 50 megabit per second speed, sending out numerous relatively smaller > packets (all with networking headers) hundreds or thousands of times per > second, how long do you think it would take to see data *about* the > connections? > > Blink, and you'll miss it. Not with modern day scanners which capture packets continuously. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: security in firefox4
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 07:19, Tim wrote: >> Is that for your entire network, or just one computer? If it's just >> for the one machine, you might find it easier to maintain a simple >> hosts file. > > You might want to read my first paragraph, again... > > Though, even for just one computer, it offers something that can't be > done with the hosts file: Wildcarding. > > If I wanted to blacklist an entire domain, and all of its subdomains, I > can't do that in the hosts file, I have to list each FQDN that I want to > block. > I see. Nice. > It also offers something else. With the hosts file, you can only > associate a different IP with the domain name (than the real IP). With > my solution you can offer a "no answer," essentially an "it does not > exist" response. Which is a faster kill, avoiding any waiting for > responses. And doesn't cause problems when you do have a webserver > running on the localhost. > Clever, especially as I do have a server on localhost. Thanks. -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Gnome 3, Fedora 14 on Netbook
On 05/22/2011 07:23 AM, Sherwyn wrote: > I would like to know if anyone is currently running Fedora 14 and Gnome 3 on > a netbook, if so does it run well? I tried to do an install via the repo but > it appears after the install I still have version 2.3. Did you log out and back in again before checking to see what version you're running? -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: help
On 05/22/2011 07:33 AM, Gez Beehan wrote: > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of users digest..." Changing it to "help" is better? -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Gnome 3, Fedora 14 on Netbook
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 02:23:32PM +, Sherwyn wrote: > Hello All, > > This is my first time posting to the list so just in case I missed a few > rules I will get it right my second time around. > > I would like to know if anyone is currently running Fedora 14 and Gnome 3 on > a netbook, if so does it run well? I tried to do an install via the repo but > it appears after the install I still have version 2.3. I'm running F14 on my Asus 901. It runs fairly well, though it is definitely NOT snappy. partly due to the slow Atom processor, and partly due to the painfully slow SSD devices Asus used in that model. But it works well enough. You seem to be expecting Fedora 14 to come with Gnome 3, but AFAIK you don't get Gnome 3 until F15. -- Fred Smith -- fre...@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us - The eyes of the Lord are everywhere, keeping watch on the wicked and the good. - Proverbs 15:3 (niv) - -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Gnome 3, Fedora 14 on Netbook
On 05/22/2011 07:53 PM, Sherwyn wrote: > Hello All, > > This is my first time posting to the list so just in case I missed a few > rules I will get it right my second time around. > > I would like to know if anyone is currently running Fedora 14 and Gnome 3 on > a netbook, if so does it run well? I tried to do an install via the repo but > it appears after the install I still have version 2.3. GNOME 3 is not going to be available as a update for Fedora 14. Fedora's update policy favors only bug fixes and security fixes and not major new versions of key components http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy Rahul -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: F13+: Has anyone been able to get jackd to run with pulseaudio?
On 05/21/2011 09:20 PM, JD wrote: > On 05/21/11 19:44, Daniel B. Thurman wrote: >> On 05/21/2011 04:20 PM, JD wrote: >>> On 05/21/11 15:03, Daniel B. Thurman wrote: I searched everywhere on the Internet and found lots of people complaining that PCM could not be opened, thus terminating jackd. Here is what I an getting from starting jackd via qjackctl: $ jackd -d alsa jackd 0.118.0 Copyright 2001-2009 Paul Davis, Stephane Letz, Jack O'Quinn, Torben Hohn and others. jackd comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY This is free software, and you are welcome to redistribute it under certain conditions; see the file COPYING for details Memory locking is unlimited - this is dangerous. You should probably alter the line: @audio - memlockunlimited in your /etc/limits.conf to read: @audio - memlock1540245 JACK compiled with System V SHM support. loading driver .. creating alsa driver ... hw:0|hw:0|1024|2|48000|0|0|nomon|swmeter|-|32bit control device hw:0 ALSA: Cannot open PCM device alsa_pcm for playback. Falling back to capture-only mode configuring for 48000Hz, period = 1024 frames (21.3 ms), buffer = 2 periods ALSA: final selected sample format for capture: 16bit little-endian ALSA: use 2 periods for capture impossible sample width (1) discovered! I have tried everything, including the kitchen sink and cannot seem to get jackd running. >>> I had tried some months ago. >>> I gave up because it ended up screwing up my audio >>> so I could no longer get sound out. >>> >> The hard part is finding a site that tells you step-by-step >> what exactly needs to be done. I had to cobble bits >> and pieces together from different Internet postings to get >> it to work, as many are for older versions of jack and/or >> pulseaudio and for different distros - so I used Ubuntu/Fedora >> distros to assemble it specifically for F13. >> >>> From memory, I recall: >> 1) yum install pulseaudio-module-jack alsa-plugins-jack >> jack-audio-connection-kit >> 2) Add the user to audio, jackuser, pulse, pulse-access >> 3) echo "autospawn = no"> ~/.pulse/client.conf >> 4) cp /etc/pulse/default.pa ~/.pulse/pulsejack.pa >> Edit and add after the below commented out line: >> #load-module module-pipe-sink >> load-module module-jack-source >> load-module module-jack-sink >> 5) reboot >> >> Sorry that I cannot locate the specific links where >> I found all of the pieces... >> >> But once the basic configuration is done for both >> jack and pulse audio, then one can proceed to use >> qjackctl tool. >> >> See: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/HowToJACKConfiguration >> >> I found that jack has to be "tuned" to make sure >> that there is the proper latency settings (mine is >> @ ~25ms, and you can easily do this with the jack >> tool: qjackctl and keeping an eye on minimizing >> the Xruns, which determines the "optimal" latency >> setting for your system. >> >> I have tried Hydrogen, MuseScore, Rosegarden and >> these seem to work well. For fun. I had Amarok >> running and at the same time Hydrogen Jazz drums >> running and it was odd, but interesting. >> >> Some notes: >> 1) Be careful not to checkbox the qjackctl->Misc:"Start >> jack audioserver on application startup" as it hung >> qjackctl and jackd. If that happens, then you have >> to blow away: ~/.config/rncbc.org/QjackCtl.conf >> file and start all over with the proper settings. >> I could not locate the auto??? entry in this file. >> >> 2) Make SURE you get the correct qjackctl->Settings:Interface >> value for your audio hardware or you get: 'Cannot find PCM..." >> cryptic error. >> >> I hope I got it all here (crossing fingers) >> > My audio is a cheapo > 00:02.7 Multimedia audio controller: Silicon Integrated Systems [SiS] > AC'97 Sound Controller (rev a0) > Not sure if it is supported, and wondering if that is the reason why it > had not worked for me the first time. Perhaps, but one won't know until one has checked it out for oneself, right? I had a difficult time trying to figure out what the audio device ought to be via lsXXX commands, but it did not reveal anything to me, and yet, the qjackctl Interface gives a drop-down list of choices: such as: (default), hw:0, plughw:0, /dev/audio, and /dev/dsp. But I note that there are sub-values such as hw:X,Y, but I did not have to deal with this, as explained below, but also keep in mind that it may be possible that all the "clues" in this drop-down list is not restricted to this list, but I do not know. So, I played around with: hw:0 and check to see 'what happens if I changed the hw:0 value "hw:1"' and lo! it worked! So it was luck in this case. Maybe others could chime in and tell us how to discover what the audio device ought to be, as derived through the use of lsXXX or some other
Re: help
On Sun, 2011-05-22 at 10:32 -0700, Joe Zeff wrote: > On 05/22/2011 07:33 AM, Gez Beehan wrote: > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > > than "Re: Contents of users digest..." > > Changing it to "help" is better? Is this in reply to a private message? poc -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: help
On 05/22/2011 01:12 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > On Sun, 2011-05-22 at 10:32 -0700, Joe Zeff wrote: >> On 05/22/2011 07:33 AM, Gez Beehan wrote: >>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >>> than "Re: Contents of users digest..." >> >> Changing it to "help" is better? > > Is this in reply to a private message? > The original message I saw might have been, but the one I replied to was sent to the list. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: F13+: Has anyone been able to get jackd to run with pulseaudio?
On 05/23/2011 05:54 AM, Daniel B. Thurman wrote: > Maybe others could chime in and tell us how to discover > what the audio device ought to be, as derived through the > use of lsXXX or some other command. I tried 'Hardware > Lister' but no dice. > Chritopher Antill has provided Fedora with some really useful here: /usr/share/doc/jack-audio-connection-kit-1.9.7/README.Fedora and here: http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/14/pdf/Musicians_Guide/Fedora-14-Musicians_Guide-en-US.pdf Specifically do cat /proc/asound/cards 0 [XFi]: SB-XFi - Creative X-Fi Creative X-Fi 20K1 SB073x 1 [U25]: USB-Audio - USB Axiom 25 M-Audio USB Axiom 25 at usb-:00:13.5-2.1, full speed And use the name in brackets in place of the card number ie in this case hw:XFi regards Brendan -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Gnome 3, Fedora 14 on Netbook
On Sun, 22 May 2011 14:23:32 + "Sherwyn" wrote: > Hello All, > > This is my first time posting to the list so just in case I missed a > few rules I will get it right my second time around. Looks good to me with one exception: Under most circumstances, there is no need to put your address in the Reply-To section. > I would like to know if anyone is currently running Fedora 14 and > Gnome 3 on a netbook, if so does it run well? I tried to do an > install via the repo but it appears after the install I still have > version 2.3. > My understanding is that Gnome 3.0 requires more graphics power than previously was the case and, if your current setup doesn't meet the new requirement, you will get a weakened version of the older Gnome. Since Fedora 15 will be available this coming Tuesday, grab a copy of the live Desktop (Gnome) and see what happens. -- cmg -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Gnome 3, Fedora 14 on Netbook
I did logout and back in but still old version. Thank you all for your assistance, I guess if my netbook does not meet the requirement I will stick with the old version. --Original Message-- From: Carroll Grigsby To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Cc: infoloo...@gmail.com Subject: Re: Gnome 3, Fedora 14 on Netbook Sent: May 22, 2011 5:25 PM On Sun, 22 May 2011 14:23:32 + "Sherwyn" wrote: > Hello All, > > This is my first time posting to the list so just in case I missed a > few rules I will get it right my second time around. Looks good to me with one exception: Under most circumstances, there is no need to put your address in the Reply-To section. > I would like to know if anyone is currently running Fedora 14 and > Gnome 3 on a netbook, if so does it run well? I tried to do an > install via the repo but it appears after the install I still have > version 2.3. > My understanding is that Gnome 3.0 requires more graphics power than previously was the case and, if your current setup doesn't meet the new requirement, you will get a weakened version of the older Gnome. Since Fedora 15 will be available this coming Tuesday, grab a copy of the live Desktop (Gnome) and see what happens. -- cmg Infolookup http://infolookup.securegossip.com www.twitter.com/infolookup -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Gnome 3, Fedora 14 on Netbook
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 10:44:01PM +, Sherwyn wrote: > I did logout and back in but still old version. Thank you all for your > assistance, I guess if my netbook does not meet the requirement I will stick > with the old version. I'd say it depends on which netbook you have, i.e., what video chipset it uses. Some of the Intel chips used in netbooks (e.g., the one used in the early Asus eeepc line such as the 901 I have) provide some LITTLE bit of 3d accel functionality. Not very much, but enough that some lightweight openGL programs benefit from it. GLXgears, desktop effects. It may well be that it's enough to handle the 3d accel requirements of Gnome 3. You could certainly try a F15 (or pre-release) LIVE CD on it and see what happens. Make sure you let it boot from cd, NOT install on your system until you're sure you really want to do that. -- Fred Smith -- fre...@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us - "For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart." Hebrews 4:12 (niv) -- -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Protected WLAN
On Sun, 2011-05-22 at 08:40 -0700, JD wrote: > I was referring to the use of MAC filtering which is > soundly defeated by the transmission of the MAC > in the clear. So, MAC filtering is absolutely useless > as a security measure. > If I turn off my machine, the hacker has my MAC, and > will have 1 less thing to worry about getting. > > My reliance is then totally on wpa2-psk/aes and a > well chosen 63 byte pass-phrase. Yay! He's got it... You do realise what the MAC is for? It's the name of that particular hardware interface, it's address, it's location... So that when data goes out on the wire, that's where it's intended for. As far as network switches and routers go, it's the way of saying data for IP 192.168.1.whatever goes to/through MAC xx:yy:zz:etc. It's the MAC it's using. It's a vital part of basic networking, whether encrypted or not, it can't be hidden from view. Filtering using it can only ever be slightly effective. Likewise with filtering by IP. Both are readily seen on a network, even if the data can't be read. And both are easily changed. Encryption, on the other hand, involves co-relating pseudo-random keys on both half of the connection. Where the key is a computation against a pass-phrase, and requires both sides to use the same pass phrase, and maths. A third party is going to have one hell of a time trying to fake their way into that, unless the encryption scheme is crap (e.g. WEP and WPA are useless). Usually, well encrypted connections are hacked by: Guessing stupidly chosen passwords or stealing them (copying written notes, implanting trojans, asking someone to login to something and hoping they'll use the same password). The latter being dead easy. Lots of people use the same password for everything. And how often do you see some website that asks you to login using your Hotmail address and password? And people do, without giving any thought about it. -- [tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r 2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686 Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Protected WLAN
On 05/22/11 16:00, Tim wrote: > Yay! He's got it... > > You do realise what the MAC is for? It's the name of that particular > hardware interface, it's address, it's location... So that when data > goes out on the wire, that's where it's intended for. > > As far as network switches and routers go, it's the way of saying data > for IP 192.168.1.whatever goes to/through MAC xx:yy:zz:etc. It's the > MAC it's using. > > It's a vital part of basic networking, whether encrypted or not, it > can't be hidden from view. > > Filtering using it can only ever be slightly effective. Likewise with > filtering by IP. Both are readily seen on a network, even if the data > can't be read. And both are easily changed. > > Encryption, on the other hand, involves co-relating pseudo-random keys > on both half of the connection. Where the key is a computation against > a pass-phrase, and requires both sides to use the same pass phrase, and > maths. A third party is going to have one hell of a time trying to fake > their way into that, unless the encryption scheme is crap (e.g. WEP and > WPA are useless). > > Usually, well encrypted connections are hacked by: Guessing stupidly > chosen passwords or stealing them (copying written notes, implanting > trojans, asking someone to login to something and hoping they'll use the > same password). The latter being dead easy. Lots of people use the > same password for everything. And how often do you see some website > that asks you to login using your Hotmail address and password? And > people do, without giving any thought about it. > Is there a tool or set of procedures that can identify the source of an attack before it succeeds? It seems to me that the net is really at the mercy of the wireless router/gateway. If it does not have/provide a mechanism to send and alert to a daemon on a specific machine about attempted break-ins (such as repeated attempts of guessing the passphrase from some specific IP address), we will never know of these attempts 'til much later, or much too late. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Protected WLAN
On 5/22/11 4:00 PM, Tim wrote: > On Sun, 2011-05-22 at 08:40 -0700, JD wrote: > Usually, well encrypted connections are hacked by: Guessing stupidly > chosen passwords or stealing them (copying written notes, implanting > trojans, asking someone to login to something and hoping they'll use the > same password). The latter being dead easy. Lots of people use the > same password for everything. And how often do you see some website > that asks you to login using your Hotmail address and password? And > people do, without giving any thought about it. > They are ID10Ts and ripe for the phishing And they wonder what happened when their bank accounts are drained dry. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Protected WLAN
On Sun, 2011-05-22 at 16:43 -0700, JD wrote: > Is there a tool or set of procedures that can identify > the source of an attack before it succeeds? It it only takes milliseconds to break in, what are you going to be able to do about it? (If you're meaning for the device to tell YOU that it's under attack, for you to take some action to prevent it.) But seriously, if an attack on a wireless access point was to be made by trying out one password after another, that's an easy thing for software to detect and take some action against. The trouble is that one possible reaction is to cause a denial of service to more than just the attacker. At least with wired networking, it's technically feasible that a really fancy router could cut off one port from traffic. Unlike wireless which has one connection, shared between everybody. Protective measures such as filtering by IP or MAC have all the problems previously discussed in securing WLAN. Plus the problem if the attacker has cloned your IP or MAC, such a method would shut you out as well. Likewise, it's technically feasible, and desirable, to detect port scans in progress (e.g. a remote IP is trying out connections to a variety of your ports). Again the dilemma of what to do about it... Block the IP? What if they'd cloned one of yours? Or, they could simply try connecting from a different, unblocked, IP. > It seems to me that the net is really at the mercy of > the wireless router/gateway. If it does not have/provide > a mechanism to send and alert to a daemon on a specific > machine about attempted break-ins (such as repeated > attempts of guessing the passphrase from some specific > IP address), we will never know of these attempts 'til > much later, or much too late. As I outlined at the start, there's not much point in ringing alarm bells about a break in. It's too late, by then. If you're going to take active measures against hacks, the wireless device has to do it itself. Not make an alarm, but repel the attack. I minimise the chance of (some) problems by setting my wireless access point so that configuration cannot be done over the wireless connections, a computer has to by physically plugged into it. And the configuration password is different to the connection password. You can minimise other issues, by using an access point that doesn't allow one wireless connection to talk to another wireless connection, so direct machine to machine probing isn't possible. Though, if they can connect to your access point, they can still do whatever they're able to, to the wired side of the access point. And you may have the need for wireless devices to talk amongst themselves (peer to peer software, Samba, NFS, et cetera). Personally, I wouldn't use wireless unless it was absolutely needed. That includes not using it *merely* because it's more convenient than wired. Not only are their security concerns, there's throughput issues, as well. It's slower than wired ethernet. Plus it's like using a hub versus a switch, everything has to take turns to communicate. It's not possible for some terminals to simultaneously communicate between themselves, while some other terminals simultaneously communicate with other things. You go into a school, for instance, and find that their wireless network is bogged down to being nearly unusable, because there's several laptops all trying to use it at the same time. -- [tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r 2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686 Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
F15B: Wireless Unavailable
I recently bought a new Dell XPS 15R laptop and installed Fedora 15 Beta on it. I have been having trouble getting the wireless adapter to work. After downloading and installing the latest Intel Wireless WiFi driver/firmware iwlwifi-6000g2b from www.intellinuxwireless.org, the wireless adapter worked until the system was rebooted a second time. Now all I get is that wireless is unavailable though the mac address of the adapter is listed in the network configuration dialog. My system is running Fedora 15 beta, 64-bit, with an Intel Centrino Advanced-N 6230 wireless adapter. As far as I can tell, the iwlagn driver is loading successfully as shown by a section of dmesg shown below. Section of Dmesg: [ 15.431294] *iwlagn: Intel(R) Wireless WiFi Link AGN driver for Linux, in-tree:d* [ 15.431297] iwlagn: Copyright(c) 2003-2010 Intel Corporation [ 15.431414] iwlagn :03:00.0: PCI INT A -> GSI 17 (level, low) -> IRQ 17 [ 15.431470] iwlagn :03:00.0: setting latency timer to 64 [ 15.431598] *iwlagn :03:00.0: Detected Intel(R) Centrino(R) Advanced-N 6230 AGN, REV=0xB0* [ 15.448529] iwlagn :03:00.0: device EEPROM VER=0x716, CALIB=0x6 [ 15.448532] iwlagn :03:00.0: Device SKU: 0Xb [ 15.448534] iwlagn :03:00.0: Valid Tx ant: 0X3, Valid Rx ant: 0X3 [ 15.448565] iwlagn :03:00.0: Tunable channels: 13 802.11bg, 24 802.11a channels [ 15.448927] iwlagn :03:00.0: irq 49 for MSI/MSI-X . . . [ 15.833594] *iwlagn :03:00.0: loaded firmware version 17.168.5.2 build 35905* This appears to be a common problem but I have not seen any solutions for it posted anywhere. Any suggestions, comments, feedback will be welcome. -- Steven F. LeBrun * Dell XPS 15R o 64 bit o 8 GB o Intell Core i5-2410M CPU o Intel Centrino Advanced-N 6230 o Intel Sandybridge Mobile * Fedora 15 Beta o Gnome 3 -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Protected WLAN
On 05/22/11 18:15, Tim wrote: > On Sun, 2011-05-22 at 16:43 -0700, JD wrote: >> Is there a tool or set of procedures that can identify >> the source of an attack before it succeeds? > It it only takes milliseconds to break in, what are you going to be able > to do about it? (If you're meaning for the device to tell YOU that it's > under attack, for you to take some action to prevent it.) > > But seriously, if an attack on a wireless access point was to be made by > trying out one password after another, that's an easy thing for software > to detect and take some action against. The trouble is that one > possible reaction is to cause a denial of service to more than just the > attacker. > > At least with wired networking, it's technically feasible that a really > fancy router could cut off one port from traffic. Unlike wireless which > has one connection, shared between everybody. > > Protective measures such as filtering by IP or MAC have all the problems > previously discussed in securing WLAN. Plus the problem if the attacker > has cloned your IP or MAC, such a method would shut you out as well. > > Likewise, it's technically feasible, and desirable, to detect port scans > in progress (e.g. a remote IP is trying out connections to a variety of > your ports). Again the dilemma of what to do about it... Block the IP? > What if they'd cloned one of yours? Or, they could simply try > connecting from a different, unblocked, IP. > >> It seems to me that the net is really at the mercy of >> the wireless router/gateway. If it does not have/provide >> a mechanism to send and alert to a daemon on a specific >> machine about attempted break-ins (such as repeated >> attempts of guessing the passphrase from some specific >> IP address), we will never know of these attempts 'til >> much later, or much too late. > As I outlined at the start, there's not much point in ringing alarm > bells about a break in. It's too late, by then. If you're going to > take active measures against hacks, the wireless device has to do it > itself. Not make an alarm, but repel the attack. Yes there is. The router could be programmed to ring an alarm if there are say 3 or 4 repeated attempts at associating with it, and at each attempt, the wrong passphrase was used. Another thing that would be helpful is for the router to temporarily blacklist the mac address at the expense of blocking out an existing legitimate user until the problem can be resolved. For our home, it is not an unacceptable defense mechanism. > I minimise the chance of (some) problems by setting my wireless access > point so that configuration cannot be done over the wireless > connections, a computer has to by physically plugged into it. And the > configuration password is different to the connection password. > > You can minimise other issues, by using an access point that doesn't > allow one wireless connection to talk to another wireless connection, so The router in use here has no such setting :( Access point does have a setting to disable admin access from the public network, which is already employed. > direct machine to machine probing isn't possible. Though, if they can > connect to your access point, they can still do whatever they're able > to, to the wired side of the access point. Well, you mean if they can succeed in breaking the wpa-psk/aes scheme? That I think is something I am not going to worry about because it has not been done yet by anyone (except the nsa of course). > And you may have the need > for wireless devices to talk amongst themselves (peer to peer software, > Samba, NFS, et cetera). Yes. > Personally, I wouldn't use wireless unless it was absolutely needed. > That includes not using it *merely* because it's more convenient than > wired. Not an option as this house is not wired for ethernet ports in every room. > Not only are their security concerns, there's throughput issues, as > well. It's slower than wired ethernet. Plus it's like using a hub > versus a switch, everything has to take turns to communicate. It's not > possible for some terminals to simultaneously communicate between > themselves, while some other terminals simultaneously communicate with > other things. Throughput is more of an issue for people with more demanding requirements than myself. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: F15B: Wireless Unavailable
On 5/22/11 7:01 PM, Steven F. LeBrun wrote: > I recently bought a new Dell XPS 15R laptop and installed Fedora 15 > Beta on it. I have been having trouble getting the wireless adapter > to work. > > After downloading and installing the latest Intel Wireless WiFi > driver/firmware iwlwifi-6000g2b from www.intellinuxwireless.org, the > wireless adapter worked until the system was rebooted a second time. > Now all I get is that wireless is unavailable though the mac address > of the adapter is listed in the network configuration dialog. This needs to go to the testing list. They need to know about this problem and this is not the place to advise them of it. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: How to improve font smoothing in Fedora 14
i am very unsatisfied with the font smoothing in Fedora. I tried different methods and patches but no results. Anybody suggest me do this from scratch so i will able configure this propery. GNOME method sucks On 5/23/11, users-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org wrote: > Send users mailing list submissions to > users@lists.fedoraproject.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > users-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > users-ow...@lists.fedoraproject.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of users digest..." > -- Satyendra Singh Get Ready, I am Here -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Intel HD 3000?
On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 4:19 PM, Ian Pilcher wrote: > Try > > http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/packages/xorg-x11-drv-intel/2.15.0/3.fc15/x86_64/xorg-x11-drv-intel-2.15.0-3.fc15.x86_64.rpm > That package works well - no black screen. I tried to replicate your issues, but it was as solid as a rock... -c -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
