Re: System completely unstable after migrating to thin pools

2020-11-28 Thread Patrick O'Callaghan 
On Sat, 2020-11-28 at 11:22 +0530, Sreyan Chakravarty wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 1:58 AM Samuel Sieb  wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Then I suggest backing up whatever you need to save and doing a
> > reinstall.  There is a thin LV option you can select in the installer,
> > although I think btrfs is probably the better option going forward.
> > 
> 
> Is BTRFS stable ?
> 
> I thought that was still experimental.

BTRFS is the default system for new installations of F33. It has been
available as an option for quite a few years now, so I'd say it's safe
to regard it as stable.

poc
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Dragora bollixed?

2020-11-28 Thread Beartooth 

I'm running F33 Mate, but I think I was also seeing the problem I'm 
asking about under at least F32, and maybe also earlier.

Dragora has two icons that I can put on a panel. One of them is 
supposed to be an updater. It works, afaict.

The other seems intended to do what it used to: permit me to 
slice and dice lists of apps, and to install or remove them. On any new 
install I used to use it heavily, eliminating apps I knew I'd never use, 
and adding ones not present by default that I do use.

Both icons do only the check for updates. Have I damaged 
something? Or is the exhaustive form deprecated?? If so, is there a 
replacement?

-- 
Beartooth Staffwright, Not Quite Clueless Power User
Remember I know little (precious little!) of where up is.
 
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Dragora bollixed?

2020-11-28 Thread Ed Greshko 

On 29/11/2020 05:10, Beartooth wrote:

 I'm running F33 Mate, but I think I was also seeing the problem I'm
asking about under at least F32, and maybe also earlier.

 Dragora has two icons that I can put on a panel. One of them is
supposed to be an updater. It works, afaict.

The other seems intended to do what it used to: permit me to
slice and dice lists of apps, and to install or remove them. On any new
install I used to use it heavily, eliminating apps I knew I'd never use,
and adding ones not present by default that I do use.

Both icons do only the check for updates. Have I damaged
something? Or is the exhaustive form deprecated?? If so, is there a
replacement?


The desktop files

/usr/share/applications/org.mageia.dnfdragora-updater.desktop
/usr/share/applications/org.mageia.dnfdragora.desktop

both define the same Icon

Icon=dnfdragora

Sounds like you have 2 copies of
/usr/share/applications/org.mageia.dnfdragora-updater.desktop

on your panel.

---
The key to getting good answers is to ask good questions.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: System completely unstable after migrating to thin pools

2020-11-28 Thread Chris Murphy 
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 10:54 PM Sreyan Chakravarty  wrote:

> Where exactly are you getting this from ?
>
> I have been using swap on LVM thin volume pretty much up around always, 
> excluding this crash.

It's possibly stale information, back from when the installer first
added support for LVM thinp. I forget if it was someone on the
installer or LVM team, but I can't find any reference. The installer,
to this day, creates swap on a conventional "thick" provisioned LV,
even when choosing the LVM thinp layout.

-- 
Chris Murphy
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Dragora bollixed?

2020-11-28 Thread Ed Greshko 

On 29/11/2020 07:37, Ed Greshko wrote:

On 29/11/2020 05:10, Beartooth wrote:

 I'm running F33 Mate, but I think I was also seeing the problem I'm
asking about under at least F32, and maybe also earlier.

 Dragora has two icons that I can put on a panel. One of them is
supposed to be an updater. It works, afaict.

The other seems intended to do what it used to: permit me to
slice and dice lists of apps, and to install or remove them. On any new
install I used to use it heavily, eliminating apps I knew I'd never use,
and adding ones not present by default that I do use.

Both icons do only the check for updates. Have I damaged
something? Or is the exhaustive form deprecated?? If so, is there a
replacement?


The desktop files

/usr/share/applications/org.mageia.dnfdragora-updater.desktop
/usr/share/applications/org.mageia.dnfdragora.desktop

both define the same Icon

Icon=dnfdragora

Sounds like you have 2 copies of
/usr/share/applications/org.mageia.dnfdragora-updater.desktop

on your panel.




Oh, on further thought, I think I may have confused dnfdragora with the KDE's 
plasma-discover.

When it comes to dnfdragora, doesn't the drop-down with the selection of "To Update", 
"All", "installed",
"Not Installed" provide helpful information?

---
The key to getting good answers is to ask good questions.

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Lost the UEFI boot info that my BIOS shows

2020-11-28 Thread Fulko Hew 
Something went wonkers with my system, and although I could try to reboot
it would get so far and then fall back into some kind of maintenance mode.

Rather than fight it at the time, I thought it was a good time
to ensure I have a good backup of my home filesystem.
So I booted a Live USB stick and performed my backup.

Now I wanted to go back and try to diagnose/fix my root filesystem issue.

Sadly, my BIOS no longer knows about the bootable entity on the HD,
and only shows me the Flash drive (even if it's not plugged in).

Any idea what happened to my HD boot info in my BIOS, or how to restore it?
PS. It is a Dell laptop.

TIA
Fulko
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Lost the UEFI boot info that my BIOS shows

2020-11-28 Thread Jorge Fábregas 
On 11/28/20 9:27 PM, Fulko Hew wrote:
> Any idea what happened to my HD boot info in my BIOS, or how to restore it?
> PS. It is a Dell laptop.

Hi,

I'm assuming you're booting off a UEFI-based system and that you lost
the menu entry stored in NVRAM corresponding to "Fedora".

You can recover your boot menu entry by searching some of the logs that
Anaconda creates during installation.  Try booting once again with the
USB stick; mount your root filesystem say in /mnt and try this:

grep efibootmgr /mnt/var/log/anaconda/storage.log

There you'll see the command that was used by Anaconda to "register" the
boot menu entry.  Something like this:

efibootmgr -c -w -L Fedora -d ...

Run that same command until the end (...shimx64.efi) Confirm the entry
was created by simply typing efibootmgr.

Let us know if that works.

-- 
Jorge
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Lost the UEFI boot info that my BIOS shows

2020-11-28 Thread Fulko Hew 
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 9:17 PM Jorge Fábregas 
wrote:

> On 11/28/20 9:27 PM, Fulko Hew wrote:
> > Any idea what happened to my HD boot info in my BIOS, or how to restore
> it?
> > PS. It is a Dell laptop.
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm assuming you're booting off a UEFI-based system and that you lost
> the menu entry stored in NVRAM corresponding to "Fedora".
>
> You can recover your boot menu entry by searching some of the logs that
> Anaconda creates during installation.  Try booting once again with the
> USB stick; mount your root filesystem say in /mnt and try this:
>
> grep efibootmgr /mnt/var/log/anaconda/storage.log
>
> There you'll see the command that was used by Anaconda to "register" the
> boot menu entry.  Something like this:
>
> efibootmgr -c -w -L Fedora -d ...
>
> Run that same command until the end (...shimx64.efi) Confirm the entry
> was created by simply typing efibootmgr.
>
> Let us know if that works.
>

What I forgot to say, was that this is a F26 system,
so I can't find an efibootmgr string.
What I can see is  stuff related to my /dev/sda
and then there's blocks of info for what I assume are the 3 parts of the
LVM (swap/root/home)

Here is a subset of the info that might be relevant:
I hope you can help from that.


'DEVNAME': '/dev/sda1',
'DEVPATH':
'/devices/pci:00/:00:17.0/ata1/host0/target0:0:0/0:0:0:0/block/sda/sda1',
'ID_FS_TYPE': 'vfat',
'ID_PART_ENTRY_NAME': 'EFI\\x20System\\x20Partition',
'ID_PART_ENTRY_NUMBER': '1',
'ID_PART_ENTRY_OFFSET': '2048',
'ID_PART_ENTRY_SCHEME': 'gpt',
'ID_PART_ENTRY_SIZE': '409600',
'ID_PART_ENTRY_TYPE': 'c12a7328-f81f-11d2-ba4b-00a0c93ec93b',
'ID_PART_ENTRY_UUID': 'bf2ce45d-8dc0-4e11-869e-ec2e3e747ed3',
'ID_PART_TABLE_TYPE': 'gpt',
'ID_PART_TABLE_UUID': '1b5b5ada-1a00-40dc-b1b7-7b81b9a71ff1',
... ...
'DEVNAME': '/dev/sda2',
'DEVPATH':
'/devices/pci:00/:00:17.0/ata1/host0/target0:0:0/0:0:0:0/block/sda/sda2',
'ID_FS_TYPE': 'ext4',
'ID_PART_ENTRY_NUMBER': '2',
'ID_PART_ENTRY_OFFSET': '411648',
'ID_PART_ENTRY_SCHEME': 'gpt',
'ID_PART_ENTRY_SIZE': '2097152',
'ID_PART_ENTRY_TYPE': '0fc63daf-8483-4772-8e79-3d69d8477de4',
'ID_PART_ENTRY_UUID': 'ca703b41-ac34-4789-bafd-e271e75d8059',
'ID_PART_TABLE_TYPE': 'gpt',
'ID_PART_TABLE_UUID': '1b5b5ada-1a00-40dc-b1b7-7b81b9a71ff1',
... ...
'DEVNAME': '/dev/sda3',
'DEVPATH':
'/devices/pci:00/:00:17.0/ata1/host0/target0:0:0/0:0:0:0/block/sda/sda3',
'ID_FS_TYPE': 'LVM2_member',
'ID_PART_ENTRY_NUMBER': '3',
'ID_PART_ENTRY_OFFSET': '2508800',
'ID_PART_ENTRY_SCHEME': 'gpt',
'ID_PART_ENTRY_SIZE': '1951014912',
'ID_PART_ENTRY_TYPE': 'e6d6d379-f507-44c2-a23c-238f2a3df928',
'ID_PART_ENTRY_UUID': '3ccfd417-c48d-4da5-8331-0173bdfa69bb',

... ...

'DEVNAME': '/dev/dm-2',
'DEVPATH': '/devices/virtual/block/dm-2',
'DEVTYPE': 'disk',
'DM_LV_NAME': 'root',
'DM_NAME': 'fedora-root',
'DM_SUSPENDED': '0',
'DM_UDEV_DISABLE_LIBRARY_FALLBACK_FLAG': '1',
'DM_UDEV_PRIMARY_SOURCE_FLAG': '1',
'DM_UDEV_RULES_VSN': '2',
'DM_UUID':
'LVM-v2fFj1Ob1FIZuvu5p2fcwW0OpTvMFjIu1lLKb3fHh7HYDGOHsGjpdd3etvhkC0tB',
'DM_VG_NAME': 'fedora',
'ID_FS_TYPE': 'ext4',
'ID_FS_USAGE': 'filesystem',
'ID_FS_UUID': 'df83e189-28a4-48b5-8698-5186488762af',
'ID_FS_UUID_ENC': 'df83e189-28a4-48b5-8698-5186488762af',
...
'DEVNAME': '/dev/dm-0',
'DEVPATH': '/devices/virtual/block/dm-0',
'DEVTYPE': 'disk',
'DM_LV_NAME': 'swap',
'DM_NAME': 'fedora-swap',
'DM_SUSPENDED': '0',
'DM_UDEV_DISABLE_LIBRARY_FALLBACK_FLAG': '1',
'DM_UDEV_PRIMARY_SOURCE_FLAG': '1',
'DM_UDEV_RULES_VSN': '2',
'DM_UUID':
'LVM-v2fFj1Ob1FIZuvu5p2fcwW0OpTvMFjIucSSOD0uMeZfChKs7HPKgmMzsreNODrQq',
'DM_VG_NAME': 'fedora',
'ID_FS_TYPE': 'swap',
'ID_FS_USAGE': 'other',
'ID_FS_UUID': '167fcfbd-301a-44f4-ba86-af607172c697',
'ID_FS_UUID_ENC': '167fcfbd-301a-44f4-ba86-af607172c697',
...
'DEVNAME': '/dev/dm-1',
'DEVPATH': '/devices/virtual/block/dm-1',
'DEVTYPE': 'disk',
'DM_LV_NAME': 'home',
'DM_NAME': 'fedora-home',
'DM_SUSPENDED': '0',
'DM_UDEV_DISABLE_LIBRARY_FALLBACK_FLAG': '1',
'DM_UDEV_PRIMARY_SOURCE_FLAG': '1',
'DM_UDEV_RULES_VSN': '2',
'DM_UUID':
'LVM-v2fFj1Ob1FIZuvu5p2fcwW0OpTvMFjIuM6kbLfPnz6pobtNe2BkEem2TDzIx7Xja',
'DM_VG_NAME': 'fedora',
'ID_FS_TYPE': 'ext4',
'ID_FS_USAGE': 'filesystem',
'ID_FS_UUID': '2f129af2-8a27-47c0-bab0-4be01c158f10',
'ID_FS_UUID_ENC': '2f129af2-8a27-47c0-bab0-4be01c158f10',
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: System completely unstable after migrating to thin pools

2020-11-28 Thread Samuel Sieb 

On 11/28/20 4:13 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:

On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 10:54 PM Sreyan Chakravarty  wrote:


Where exactly are you getting this from ?

I have been using swap on LVM thin volume pretty much up around always, 
excluding this crash.


It's possibly stale information, back from when the installer first
added support for LVM thinp. I forget if it was someone on the
installer or LVM team, but I can't find any reference. The installer,
to this day, creates swap on a conventional "thick" provisioned LV,
even when choosing the LVM thinp layout.


I don't see why it would be any different on a thin LV as long as the 
swap file is fully provisioned.  It's still just a fixed set of blocks 
on the hard drive.

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: F32 --> F33 upgrade fails .

2020-11-28 Thread Samuel Sieb 

On 11/26/20 3:09 AM, Kostas Sfakiotakis wrote:
Upon trying to download the files in order to be able to upgrade from 
F32 to F33 i get the following errors


Error:
  Problem 1: package openssh-ldap-8.3p1-3.fc32.x86_64 requires openssh = 
8.3p1-3.fc32, but none of the providers can be installed
   - openssh-8.3p1-3.fc32.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade 
repository

   - problem with installed package openssh-ldap-8.3p1-3.fc32.x86_64
  Problem 2: package tomahawk-0.8.4-23.fc31.x86_64 requires 
libboost_filesystem.so.1.69.0()(64bit), but none of the providers can be 
installed
   - boost-filesystem-1.69.0-18.fc32.x86_64 does not belong to a 
distupgrade repository

   - problem with installed package tomahawk-0.8.4-23.fc31.x86_64
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)

The thing is that even if i try to use the --skip-broken option the 
download of the files will not begin either .  Now apart from deleting 
the offending


packages , trying the upgrade and then reinstalling them is there 
anything else that i can try ???


I see from later emails that you have resolved this, but in future, the 
better option is to use "--allowerasing".  That will delete the 
problematic packages.  Just always check the list of packages to be 
removed to make sure nothing went wrong.

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: System completely unstable after migrating to thin pools

2020-11-28 Thread Sreyan Chakravarty 
On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 5:43 AM Chris Murphy 
wrote:

>
> It's possibly stale information, back from when the installer first
> added support for LVM thinp. I forget if it was someone on the
> installer or LVM team, but I can't find any reference. The installer,
> to this day, creates swap on a conventional "thick" provisioned LV,
> even when choosing the LVM thinp layout.
>
> --
> Chris Murphy
>

Well I was using a swap file without any hiccups.

-- 
Regards,
Sreyan Chakravarty
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: System completely unstable after migrating to thin pools

2020-11-28 Thread Sreyan Chakravarty 
On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 10:55 AM Samuel Sieb  wrote:

>
> I don't see why it would be any different on a thin LV as long as the
> swap file is fully provisioned.  It's still just a fixed set of blocks
> on the hard drive.
>

I need some advice.

I have checked the filesystem with e2fsck, and it reports that it's ok.

So if I do take a partclone backup now, then will there be any issues when
I restore the backup ?

I mean, what chance is there of the backup being corrupted ?

-- 
Regards,
Sreyan Chakravarty
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Dragora bollixed?

2020-11-28 Thread Stephen Morris 

On 29/11/20 12:26 pm, Ed Greshko wrote:

On 29/11/2020 07:37, Ed Greshko wrote:

On 29/11/2020 05:10, Beartooth wrote:
 I'm running F33 Mate, but I think I was also seeing the 
problem I'm

asking about under at least F32, and maybe also earlier.

 Dragora has two icons that I can put on a panel. One of 
them is

supposed to be an updater. It works, afaict.

The other seems intended to do what it used to: permit me to
slice and dice lists of apps, and to install or remove them. On any new
install I used to use it heavily, eliminating apps I knew I'd never 
use,

and adding ones not present by default that I do use.

Both icons do only the check for updates. Have I damaged
something? Or is the exhaustive form deprecated?? If so, is there a
replacement?


The desktop files

/usr/share/applications/org.mageia.dnfdragora-updater.desktop
/usr/share/applications/org.mageia.dnfdragora.desktop

both define the same Icon

Icon=dnfdragora

Sounds like you have 2 copies of
/usr/share/applications/org.mageia.dnfdragora-updater.desktop

on your panel.




Oh, on further thought, I think I may have confused dnfdragora with 
the KDE's plasma-discover.


When it comes to dnfdragora, doesn't the drop-down with the selection 
of "To Update", "All", "installed",

"Not Installed" provide helpful information?
I have dnfdragora installed and I only have one icon for it which in KDE 
is under Administration, and that icon runs the application that allows 
slicing and dicing packages, and allows putting on all or a selection of 
updates from the display as a result of selecting "To Updates" from the 
drop down menu. This is no different to what I had in previous versions 
of Fedora. I don't have a kicker entry for dnfdragora-updates, and I 
don't believe I had that in previous versions of Fedora either.


regards,
Steve


---
The key to getting good answers is to ask good questions.

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/

List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: System completely unstable after migrating to thin pools

2020-11-28 Thread Samuel Sieb 

On 11/28/20 10:57 PM, Sreyan Chakravarty wrote:
On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 10:55 AM Samuel Sieb > wrote:



I don't see why it would be any different on a thin LV as long as the
swap file is fully provisioned.  It's still just a fixed set of blocks
on the hard drive.

I need some advice.

I have checked the filesystem with e2fsck, and it reports that it's ok.

So if I do take a partclone backup now, then will there be any issues 
when I restore the backup ?


I mean, what chance is there of the backup being corrupted ?


Pretty low.  If e2fsk is happy with it, then it should be good. 
Although that doesn't verify that the file data is all there, so there 
is still potential for hitting an I/O error somewhere during the 
process.  But trying won't hurt anything.

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Dragora bollixed?

2020-11-28 Thread Ed Greshko 

On 29/11/2020 14:58, Stephen Morris wrote:

On 29/11/20 12:26 pm, Ed Greshko wrote:

On 29/11/2020 07:37, Ed Greshko wrote:

On 29/11/2020 05:10, Beartooth wrote:

 I'm running F33 Mate, but I think I was also seeing the problem I'm
asking about under at least F32, and maybe also earlier.

 Dragora has two icons that I can put on a panel. One of them is
supposed to be an updater. It works, afaict.

The other seems intended to do what it used to: permit me to
slice and dice lists of apps, and to install or remove them. On any new
install I used to use it heavily, eliminating apps I knew I'd never use,
and adding ones not present by default that I do use.

Both icons do only the check for updates. Have I damaged
something? Or is the exhaustive form deprecated?? If so, is there a
replacement?


The desktop files

/usr/share/applications/org.mageia.dnfdragora-updater.desktop
/usr/share/applications/org.mageia.dnfdragora.desktop

both define the same Icon

Icon=dnfdragora

Sounds like you have 2 copies of
/usr/share/applications/org.mageia.dnfdragora-updater.desktop

on your panel.




Oh, on further thought, I think I may have confused dnfdragora with the KDE's 
plasma-discover.

When it comes to dnfdragora, doesn't the drop-down with the selection of "To Update", 
"All", "installed",
"Not Installed" provide helpful information?

I have dnfdragora installed and I only have one icon for it which in KDE is under 
Administration, and that icon runs the application that allows slicing and dicing 
packages, and allows putting on all or a selection of updates from the display as a 
result of selecting "To Updates" from the drop down menu. This is no different 
to what I had in previous versions of Fedora. I don't have a kicker entry for 
dnfdragora-updates, and I don't believe I had that in previous versions of Fedora either.



I don't believe dnfdragora-updater is installed by default.

It installs a /etc/xdg/autostart/org.mageia.dnfdragora-updater.desktop which 
will put an item in
your panel and inform you when updates are available.

---
The key to getting good answers is to ask good questions.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: System completely unstable after migrating to thin pools

2020-11-28 Thread Sreyan Chakravarty 
On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 12:37 PM Samuel Sieb  wrote:

>
>
> Pretty low.  If e2fsk is happy with it, then it should be good.
> Although that doesn't verify that the file data is all there, so there
> is still potential for hitting an I/O error somewhere during the
> process.  But trying won't hurt anything.
>

I have already lost some data, namely my wallpapers.

-- 
Regards,
Sreyan Chakravarty
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org