On 10/08/2011 12:55 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> Is there any reason to use TrueCrypt, over the whole disk encryption
> that Fedora already provides? LUKS "just works" afaict ...
Does it? It is not easily accessible for a regular end user and is not
cross platform.
Rahul
--
devel mailing l
On 10/07/2011 09:25 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 02:51:26PM -0400, Tom Callaway wrote:
>> On 10/06/2011 04:54 PM, Richard Shaw wrote:
>>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 3:28 PM, T.C. Hollingsworth
>>> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 4:54 AM, Richard Shaw wrote:
> If I re
On 10/07/2011 12:19 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
> I don't doubt it's btrfs, but bootchart will tell me which one of our
> kernel threads is running so I can tell_what_ in btrfs is taking it's
> sweet time. Thanks,
Here you go:
http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll20/daumas/bootchart.png
It looks lik
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=741744
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=526957&action=edit
--
389-devel mailing list
389-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-devel
Hi Aron,
Johann proposed to check for /etc/xinetd.d/tftp - please try it.
What about xinetd? Is xinetd really running? You should find something
similar in /var/log/messages:
Oct 7 21:54:51 xinetd[12970]: xinetd Version 2.3.14 started
with libwrap loadavg labeled-networking options compiled in.
Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Oct 7, 2011, at 8:21 AM, Till Maas wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 07:53:25AM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
>>
>>> Might have gone quicker if you pull via git:// and then only push
>>> via ssh:// reducing your ssh handshakes by half.
>>
>> How do you ensure the integrity o
On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 02:51:26PM -0400, Tom Callaway wrote:
> On 10/06/2011 04:54 PM, Richard Shaw wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 3:28 PM, T.C. Hollingsworth
> > wrote:
> >> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 4:54 AM, Richard Shaw wrote:
> >>> If I remember correctly it's not that TrueCrypt is non-free,
On 10/06/2011 04:54 PM, Richard Shaw wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 3:28 PM, T.C. Hollingsworth
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 4:54 AM, Richard Shaw wrote:
>>> If I remember correctly it's not that TrueCrypt is non-free, but that
>>> the license is incompatible with Fedora and upstream was n
On Fri, 2011-10-07 at 11:39 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-10-07 at 17:49 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > On 10/07/2011 02:49 PM, Stanislav Ochotnicky wrote:
> >
> > > I know a lot of people wanted to have a discussion about this first,
> > > but since we had the opportunity to hack
On 10/07/2011 05:00 PM, Aaron Gray wrote:
> Transfer timed out.
Usually one needs full output from the above but anyway check the usual
stuff as in your /etc/xinet.d/tftp file and make sure it's not disabled
as in "disable = yes", file permissions etc...
JBG
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists
On Fri, 2011-10-07 at 17:49 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 10/07/2011 02:49 PM, Stanislav Ochotnicky wrote:
>
> > I know a lot of people wanted to have a discussion about this first,
> > but since we had the opportunity to hack on this we did. I believe
> > there are still many of us still inte
On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 11:29:45AM -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
>>> Richard Shaw wrote:
>>> > I rebooted a few times just to make sure it's not a scheduled fsck
>>> > (not that there
On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 11:29 AM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> Richard Shaw wrote:
>> I rebooted a few times just to make sure it's not a scheduled fsck
>> (not that there is a full fsck for BTRFS yet) and the hard drive light
>> is on pretty solid the whole time...
>
> The fsck tool does nothing a
Josef Bacik wrote:
> I don't doubt it's btrfs, but bootchart will tell me which one of our
> kernel threads is running so I can tell_what_ in btrfs is taking it's
> sweet time. Thanks,
I'll run bootchart and get back to you when I'm at the system in question.
Thanks.
--
devel mailing list
deve
On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> Josef Bacik wrote:
>> What Tomasz said, and if that doesn't help use bootchart and upload
>> the chart somewhere so I can see what's going on. Thanks,
>
> I posted[1] my systemd-analyze results to the list to show as proof that
> it is
On Fri, 2011-10-07 at 10:31 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
> I am, however, running BTRFS on main main partitions on top of LVM
> (since anaconda as of F15 still creates an LVM setup regardless of
> filesystem?)
FYI as of F16 there is a checkbox on the "what type of partitioning do
you want?" screen (
Josef Bacik wrote:
> What Tomasz said, and if that doesn't help use bootchart and upload
> the chart somewhere so I can see what's going on. Thanks,
I posted[1] my systemd-analyze results to the list to show as proof that
it is btrfs.
Plus my system is silent (root is an SSD, btrfs drive is a H
On 10/07/2011 12:57 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> Tomasz Torcz wrote:
>> Do you have caches enabled and fully built? Remounting with
>> "-o space_cache,inode_cache" will enable them. Then wait few minutes
>> for caches to be built (I/O will stop when they're ready). Subsequent
>> mounts s
Reply inline :-
2011/10/7 "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
> On 10/07/2011 03:38 PM, Aaron Gray wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I think this is a development problem. I have tried everything obvious to
> get TFTP to work on F14 but to no avail. Could some one in the know look in
> to this please.
>
> I have tftp -
Tomasz Torcz wrote:
>Do you have caches enabled and fully built? Remounting with
> "-o space_cache,inode_cache" will enable them. Then wait few minutes
> for caches to be built (I/O will stop when they're ready). Subsequent
> mounts should be faster.
No. I'm using "defaults" as my mount opt
On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 11:29:45AM -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
>> Richard Shaw wrote:
>> > I rebooted a few times just to make sure it's not a scheduled fsck
>> > (not that there is a full fsck for BTRFS yet) and the hard drive light
>>
On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 11:29:45AM -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> Richard Shaw wrote:
> > I rebooted a few times just to make sure it's not a scheduled fsck
> > (not that there is a full fsck for BTRFS yet) and the hard drive light
> > is on pretty solid the whole time...
>
> The fsck tool do
Richard Shaw wrote:
> I rebooted a few times just to make sure it's not a scheduled fsck
> (not that there is a full fsck for BTRFS yet) and the hard drive light
> is on pretty solid the whole time...
The fsck tool does nothing and will not be the cause of your delay. If
your fs gets even one bit
On Oct 7, 2011, at 8:21 AM, Till Maas wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 07:53:25AM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
>
>> Might have gone quicker if you pull via git:// and then only push via ssh://
>> reducing your ssh handshakes by half.
>
> How do you ensure the integrity of the git repo if it is pu
On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Clyde E. Kunkel
wrote:
> Don't really know...but, if no LV snapshots, then suspect BTRFS as it is
> still very experimental. There is a newer lvm2
> (lvm2-2.02.84-4.fc15.x86_64) which fixed the LVM snapshot problem and
> systemd (systemd-26-10.fc15.x86_64) for F15
On 10/07/2011 03:38 PM, Aaron Gray wrote:
Hi,
I think this is a development problem. I have tried everything obvious
to get TFTP to work on F14 but to no avail. Could some one in the know
look in to this please.
I have tftp -server working on F14 and have done PXE Instillations
using it. Si
On 10/07/2011 11:31 AM, Richard Shaw wrote:
> I posted this on the main mailing list but didn't get any hits.
> Hopefully I'll have better luck here.
> ---
>
> I found the following thread but I don't think mine is the same problem:
>
> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-June/100861
Hi,
I think this is a development problem. I have tried everything obvious to
get TFTP to work on F14 but to no avail. Could some one in the know look in
to this please.
I have tftp -server working on F14 and have done PXE Instillations using it.
Since then I have done a yum update and ever since
hi
i have two machines with the same USB3 card and massive problems
with two different external disks - should this be a bugreport for
the kernel? i am wondering about this troubles because AFAIK the
linux-kernel was first with support for USB3 and that 2 different
disks and/or both controllers ar
I posted this on the main mailing list but didn't get any hits.
Hopefully I'll have better luck here.
---
I found the following thread but I don't think mine is the same problem:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-June/100861.html
I am, however, running BTRFS on main main partiti
On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 07:53:25AM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> Might have gone quicker if you pull via git:// and then only push via ssh://
> reducing your ssh handshakes by half.
How do you ensure the integrity of the git repo if it is pulled via
git://? As far as I can see doing this automat
A side issue...
Should we request a separate mailing list? I don't expect it to be
high volume obviously but it could make communication easier since
people live across multiple time zones. Also, it would make subjects
easier since right now on the devel list we have to make it pretty
obvious to c
Excerpts from tim.laurid...@gmail.com's message of Fri Oct 07 16:41:49 +0200
2011:
> On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Stanislav Ochotnicky
> wrote:
> > Excerpts from Richard Shaw's message of Thu Oct 06 22:17:51 +0200 2011:
> >> After some initial interest there doesn't appear to be any activity
On Oct 7, 2011, at 2:42 AM, Petr Pisar wrote:
> On 2011-10-06, Jesse Keating wrote:
>> On Oct 5, 2011, at 11:27 PM, Petr Pisar wrote:
>>>
>>> I've written an ultimate heavy-parallel rebuilding tool. (Actually it's
>>> so much parallel that Fedora infrustructure, git repositories namely,
>>> spont
On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Stanislav Ochotnicky
wrote:
> Excerpts from Richard Shaw's message of Thu Oct 06 22:17:51 +0200 2011:
>> After some initial interest there doesn't appear to be any activity
>> unless I'm missing something.
>>
>> I am still interested. Anyone else?
>
> Sorry for tak
Compose started at Fri Oct 7 08:15:32 UTC 2011
Broken deps for x86_64
--
389-admin-1.1.23-1.fc17.i686 requires libicuuc.so.46
389-admin-1.1.23-1.fc17.i686 requires libicui18n.so.46
389-admin-1.1.23-1.fc17.i686 require
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=744165
Petr Sabata changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
On Fri, 2011-10-07 at 17:49 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 10/07/2011 02:49 PM, Stanislav Ochotnicky wrote:
>
> > I know a lot of people wanted to have a discussion about this first,
> > but since we had the opportunity to hack on this we did. I believe
> > there are still many of us still inte
>> "RS" == Richard Shaw writes:
>
> RS> After some initial interest there doesn't appear to be any activity
> RS> unless I'm missing something.
>
> Never could gather enough interest for anyone to actually do anything.
> Basically I stopped after I called for a couple of folks to help me with
On 10/07/2011 02:49 PM, Stanislav Ochotnicky wrote:
> I know a lot of people wanted to have a discussion about this first,
> but since we had the opportunity to hack on this we did. I believe
> there are still many of us still interested, just not knowing what
> exactly we should do next.
>
> [1]
On 2011-10-06, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Oct 5, 2011, at 11:27 PM, Petr Pisar wrote:
>>
>> I've written an ultimate heavy-parallel rebuilding tool. (Actually it's
>> so much parallel that Fedora infrustructure, git repositories namely,
>> spontaneously fails.) It's packaged in `perl-Fedora-Rebuil
Hi,
I have just built pybliographer-1.2.15 for rawhide. The documentation
of the program was converted into Mallard, and it's license changed to
Creative Commons.
So, the license changed from GPLv2+ and GFDL to GPLv2+ and CC-BY-SA.
Zoltan
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https
Excerpts from Jason L Tibbitts III's message of Thu Oct 06 22:30:06 +0200 2011:
> > "RS" == Richard Shaw writes:
>
> RS> After some initial interest there doesn't appear to be any activity
> RS> unless I'm missing something.
>
> Never could gather enough interest for anyone to actually do anyt
Excerpts from Richard Shaw's message of Thu Oct 06 22:17:51 +0200 2011:
> After some initial interest there doesn't appear to be any activity
> unless I'm missing something.
>
> I am still interested. Anyone else?
Sorry for taking time to reply, but I had a bit too many things at
once sprung up on
44 matches
Mail list logo
