systemd journal interaction with btrfs, unfixable corruption

I'm seeing corruption occur after doing a balance of a btrfs volume. Scrubs before the balance are error free. Scrubs after balance have many errors, so far all seem to be either unlisted or point to a systemd-journal log path. Example: [ 318.029771] btrfs: checksum error at logical 220943974

Re: Default boot/root filesystem

On Sep 24, 2013, at 7:34 PM, William Brown wrote: > > Additionally, with the concerns re device shrink. Yes, XFS won't let you > shrink, but with thin provision LVM that isn't so much an issue: You > just shrink the pv and leave it alone. I would also argue that anyone > who is smart enough to s

Re: Using USB 3 plugs crashes Gnome

On Tue, 2013-09-24 at 15:14 -0700, Digimer wrote: > I can't imagine why USB 3 would effect this, but there you go. Any > advice on debugging? Well, the USB 3.0 ports likely use a different controller from the USB 2.0 ports, so it's not THAT weird. At a first guess the issue is likely in the drive

Re: Default boot/root filesystem

On Mon, 2013-09-09 at 11:02 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 9/9/13 10:56 AM, Till Maas wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 07, 2013 at 05:35:05PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > > >> If people want to switch the Fedora default to XFS, I'll gladly file > >> the feature. :) > > > > Why is XFS better than ext4.

Re: Using USB 3 plugs crashes Gnome

I've had this happen across two different internal hard drives and *many* different USB devices. I've attached all the data on the system I can. Let me know if I can provide anything else. If there is a way to enable debugging, I can trigger the crash and report back on whatever is logged. Here's

Re: Using USB 3 plugs crashes Gnome

Hello, I use USB 3.0 every day on my HP Pavilion DV6Z-QE with everything. There are some odd glitches at times but usually it's my fault as I do weird stuff to my kernel sometimes (really hard to explain). If the mouse is moving, that says to me that the mouse cursor is displayed by the hardware

Using USB 3 plugs crashes Gnome

I know this doesn't make sense on the surface, but bear with me for a minute. I've got a Thinkpad W530 laptop. The first OS was Fedora 17 and it was perfectly stable. By coincidence or not, when I installed Fedora 18, it started crashing sporadically. This remained to this day on Fedora 19. I've

Re: About F19 Firewall

- Original Message - > From: poma > Subject: Re: About F19 Firewall >> Ex. Say I start virt-manager, it prompts me for authentication, I enter > password and click [Ok]. It starts libvirtd in the background, creates > interfaces, adds firewall rules etc. etc. > This must be a new featur

Re: About F19 Firewall

On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 10:15:33AM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > And, the python stack is a meaningfully-large portion of the minimal > install. Right now, that's unavoidable because of yum, but in the not-so-far > future dnf may make it possible to remove that. If we're putting in _more_ > python

Re: [HEADSUP] Atlas changed libraries - arm failures

On 09/24/2013 09:38 AM, Jerry James wrote: On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: All of my atlas using packages are segfaulting on arm. I added a %check section to the atlas package to run the atlas sanity checks and they are segfaulting on arm as well. New build running her

Re: thunderbird-24.0.2 reverted - why? (Use the commit log..., Luke)

On 09/24/2013 11:18 AM, Heiko Adams wrote: Am 24.09.2013 19:06, schrieb Bruno Wolff III: On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 15:50:22 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: if one person maintains thunderbird and the other one lightning how do you imagine that both packages are built at the same moment and get t

Re: thunderbird-24.0.2 reverted - why? (Use the commit log..., Luke)

Am 24.09.2013 19:21, schrieb Michael Cronenworth: > No harm done. That statement was without judging. It was just the realization that process hat either fail or has not been initiated. Nothing more and nothing less. -- Regards, Heiko Adams signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: thunderbird-24.0.2 reverted - why? (Use the commit log..., Luke)

On 09/24/2013 05:09 AM, Remi Collet wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Le 24/09/2013 12:29, Heiko Adams a écrit : The bodhi comments say that thunderbird-lightning dep was broken. But it just needs to be updated to version 2.6 and everything should work fine again. /me real

Re: thunderbird-24.0.2 reverted - why? (Use the commit log..., Luke)

Heiko Adams wrote: So in this case the process seems to be failed or not initiated. This process has worked great in the past. It was just a minor mistake on the maintainers part for pushing the update early. No harm done. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedo

Re: thunderbird-24.0.2 reverted - why? (Use the commit log..., Luke)

Am 24.09.2013 19:06, schrieb Bruno Wolff III: > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 15:50:22 +0200, > Reindl Harald wrote: >> >> if one person maintains thunderbird and the other one lightning >> how do you imagine that both packages are built at the same >> moment and get the same karma? > > There is a pr

Re: thunderbird-24.0.2 reverted - why? (Use the commit log..., Luke)

On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 15:50:22 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: if one person maintains thunderbird and the other one lightning how do you imagine that both packages are built at the same moment and get the same karma? There is a process for this. The t-bird maintainer gives the lightning mai

[Test-Announce] 2013-09-25 @ 16:00 UTC - F20 Beta Blocker Bug Review #1

# F20 Beta Blocker Review meeting #1 # Date: 2013-09-25 # Time: 16:00 UTC (12:00 EDT, 09:00 PDT) # Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.freenode.net Now that F20 alpha has been released, it's time to start looking at beta and the already decent sized list of proposed beta blockers and freeze ex

Re: About F19 Firewall

On 24.09.2013 17:29, P J P wrote: … > Ex. Say I start virt-manager, it prompts me for authentication, I enter > password and click [Ok]. It starts libvirtd in the background, creates > interfaces, adds firewall rules etc. etc. As a user looking at the GUI, I'm > completely oblivious to what it

Re: About F19 Firewall

On 09/24/2013 06:53 PM, Thomas Woerner wrote: On 09/21/2013 12:22 AM, Chuck Anderson wrote: On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 04:17:21PM +0200, Thomas Woerner wrote: If a static firewall configuration fits your needs, just disable firewalld and use the ip*tables firewall services: https://fedoraproject.

Re: About F19 Firewall

On 09/21/2013 12:22 AM, Chuck Anderson wrote: On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 04:17:21PM +0200, Thomas Woerner wrote: If a static firewall configuration fits your needs, just disable firewalld and use the ip*tables firewall services: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FirewallD?rd=FirewallD/#Using_static_f

Re: About F19 Firewall

On 09/21/2013 12:08 AM, Mateusz Marzantowicz wrote: On 20.09.2013 22:23, Björn Persson wrote: Anyone can broadcast an SSID. How does FirewallD authenticate the network connection? FirewallD is not responsible for such authentication/AP validation. Firewall as such is not meant to assure you'

Re: About F19 Firewall

- Original Message - > From: Thomas Woerner > Subject: Re: About F19 Firewall > O.k., then please provide a program that places (user supplied) rules at > the proper position in an (user supplied) rule set in that way that it > will always result in the (user) expected behaviour without

Re: Non-responsive maintainer: Dodji Seketeli

"Darryl L. Pierce" a écrit: >> [1]: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=466672 > > Installed and it works for me. OK. > I had to add configuration options for certificate fingerprints and > it's all good. Yeah, that option is mandatory with SSL now. > +1 on the package. Than

EPEL Fedora 5 updates-testing report

The following Fedora EPEL 5 Security updates need testing: Age URL 520 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2012-5630/bugzilla-3.2.10-5.el5 34 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2013-11276/ssmtp-2.61-21.el5 11 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDO

EPEL Fedora 6 updates-testing report

The following Fedora EPEL 6 Security updates need testing: Age URL 520 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2012-5620/bugzilla-3.4.14-2.el6 38 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2013-11198/filezilla-3.7.3-1.el6 34 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/

Re: About F19 Firewall

On 09/24/2013 05:15 PM, P J P wrote: Hello Thomas, - Original Message - From: Thomas Woerner Subject: Re: About F19 Firewall You have to make sure where you are adding new rules. Here is a simple example where you want to drop everything from 192.168.1.18: If you do it wrong if cou

Re: I am thinking of adding compression to libselinux

On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 03:18:58PM +0200, drago01 wrote: >> > It's basically down to the three big unsolved problems (kernel modules, >> > translations, docs) and then several dozen little things like this. If >> > getting really small is a

Re: I am thinking of adding compression to libselinux

On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 09:19:00AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > > It's basically down to the three big unsolved problems (kernel modules, > > translations, docs) and then several dozen little things like this. If > > getting really small is a priority we need to solve the big problems, but > > chippi

Re: [HEADSUP] Atlas changed libraries - arm failures

On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: > All of my atlas using packages are segfaulting on arm. I added a %check > section to the atlas package to run the atlas sanity checks and they are > segfaulting on arm as well. New build running here: > > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koj

Re: About F19 Firewall

  Hi, - Original Message - > From: Thomas Woerner > Subject: Re: About F19 Firewall > Applications or daemons can only request changes to the firewall if they > are authenticated.   Sure. But user authentication is function of the task an application performs and not of the firewall ru

Re: About F19 Firewall

  Hello Thomas, - Original Message - > From: Thomas Woerner > Subject: Re: About F19 Firewall > You have to make sure where you are adding new rules. Here is a simple > example where you want to drop everything from 192.168.1.18: > > If you do it wrong if could end up like this (output

Re: thunderbird-24.0.2 reverted - why? (Use the commit log..., Luke)

On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > Am 24.09.2013 16:00, schrieb Jan Horak: >> We've decided to revert package because it broke dependencies with >> thunderbird-lightning. Decision to rebase >> package to 24 was made a bit in a hurry and since we wasn't able to rebase >>

[perl-threads] Update dependencies

commit a91daa598597fa790e3d37600a028da2257e08f3 Author: Jitka Plesnikova Date: Tue Sep 24 17:03:11 2013 +0200 Update dependencies perl-threads.spec | 11 +-- 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) --- diff --git a/perl-threads.spec b/perl-threads.spec index 3a6c58b..16

Re: thunderbird-24.0.2 reverted - why? (Use the commit log..., Luke)

Am 24.09.2013 16:00, schrieb Jan Horak: > We've decided to revert package because it broke dependencies with > thunderbird-lightning. Decision to rebase > package to 24 was made a bit in a hurry and since we wasn't able to rebase to > lightning 2.6 fast enough we decide > to use 17.0.9 ESR to k

Re: thunderbird-24.0.2 reverted - why? (Use the commit log..., Luke)

Le 24/09/2013 16:00, Jan Horak a écrit : > ... I'm a bit unsure if keeping max version > (ie. Requires: thunderbird < %{thunderbird_next_version}) for dependent > packages is fruitful here ... FYI: Already droped from Enigmail spec file. But this is a bit specific, as Enigmail doesn't use anymore

Re: Non-responsive maintainer: Dodji Seketeli

On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 03:29:45PM +0200, Dodji Seketeli wrote: > "Darryl L. Pierce" a écrit: > > > Hi, Dodji. It's now been two months since you said you were planning to > > test the latest version. Since then another version has been promoted to > > RC. > > Indeed. And I have been testing th

Re: thunderbird-24.0.2 reverted - why? (Use the commit log..., Luke)

On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 2:39 AM, drago01 wrote: > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Michael J Gruber > wrote: >> Hi there, >> >> I can see that thunderbird 24 had been built successfully and then >> reverted on the fc18 branch (and others). The git commit log and the >> spec changelog say >> >> R

Re: thunderbird-24.0.2 reverted - why? (Use the commit log..., Luke)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Le 24/09/2013 15:50, Reindl Harald a écrit : > > > Am 24.09.2013 15:41, schrieb Remi Collet: >> Le 24/09/2013 12:35, Reindl Harald a écrit : >> >>> and that is why ist *is wrong* to give negative karma because >>> some extension is not updated - who

[389-devel] Jenkins build is back to normal : 389-ds-base #130

See -- 389-devel mailing list 389-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-devel

Re: thunderbird-24.0.2 reverted - why? (Use the commit log..., Luke)

On 09/24/2013 10:16 AM, Michael J Gruber wrote: Hi there, I can see that thunderbird 24 had been built successfully and then reverted on the fc18 branch (and others). The git commit log and the spec changelog say Revert to 17.0.8 and nothing else. I do understand that more than a "successful b

[389-devel] Build failed in Jenkins: 389-ds-base #129

See Changes: [Richard Allen Megginson] Ticket #47504 idlistscanlimit per index/type/value -- Started by an SCM change Building remotely on Fedora18 in workspace

Re: thunderbird-24.0.2 reverted - why? (Use the commit log..., Luke)

On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 3:50 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > Am 24.09.2013 15:41, schrieb Remi Collet: >> Le 24/09/2013 12:35, Reindl Harald a écrit : >> >>> and that is why ist *is wrong* to give negative karma because some >>> extension is not updated - who says that the extension RPM is >>> rele

Announcing the release of Fedora 20 Alpha!

The Fedora 20 "Heisenbug" alpha release has arrived with a preview of the latest fantastic, free, and open source technology currently under development. Take a peek inside: http://fedoraproject.org/get-prerelease *** What is the Alpha Release? *** The Alpha release contains all the exciting fea

Re: thunderbird-24.0.2 reverted - why? (Use the commit log..., Luke)

Am 24.09.2013 15:41, schrieb Remi Collet: > Le 24/09/2013 12:35, Reindl Harald a écrit : > >> and that is why ist *is wrong* to give negative karma because some >> extension is not updated - who says that the extension RPM is >> relevant for all users? > > I don't agree. Broken dep are not ac

Re: thunderbird-24.0.2 reverted - why? (Use the commit log..., Luke)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Le 24/09/2013 12:35, Reindl Harald a écrit : > and that is why ist *is wrong* to give negative karma because some > extension is not updated - who says that the extension RPM is > relevant for all users? I don't agree. Broken dep are not acceptable

Re: thunderbird-24.0.2 reverted - why? (Use the commit log..., Luke)

On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 12:35:47 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: and that is why ist *is wrong* to give negative karma because some extension is not updated - who says that the extension RPM is relevant for all users? No, updates that break dependencies should not be pushed except in extreme e

Re: thunderbird-24.0.2 reverted - why? (Use the commit log..., Luke)

Am 24.09.2013 12:35, schrieb Reindl Harald: > > and that is why ist *is wrong* to give negative karma because some > extension is not updated - who says that the extension RPM is > relevant for all users? > I'd even say it's wrong to unpush an update just because of *one* negative feedback. Regar

Re: Non-responsive maintainer: Dodji Seketeli

"Darryl L. Pierce" a écrit: > Hi, Dodji. It's now been two months since you said you were planning to > test the latest version. Since then another version has been promoted to > RC. Indeed. And I have been testing that 6.5.5 rc version. And it didn't eat any of my emails. I guess I should st

Re: thunderbird-24.0.2 reverted - why? (Use the commit log..., Luke)

Am 24.09.2013 12:29, schrieb Heiko Adams: > Am 24.09.2013 11:39, schrieb drago01: >> >> What happened here is that 24 caused broken deps so the maintainers >> probably reverted to get the security fixes out faster while stuff >> is being sorted out. >> >> And yes I agree that commit messages shou

Re: thunderbird-24.0.2 reverted - why? (Use the commit log..., Luke)

Am 24.09.2013 10:16, schrieb Michael J Gruber: > I can see that thunderbird 24 had been built successfully and then > reverted on the fc18 branch (and others). The git commit log and the > spec changelog say > > Revert to 17.0.8 > > and nothing else. I do understand that more than a "successful

Re: About F19 Firewall

On 09/20/2013 10:10 PM, P J P wrote: Hi, - Original Message - From: Thomas Woerner Subject: Re: About F19 Firewall If a static firewall configuration fits your needs, just disable firewalld and use the ip*tables firewall services: Static? Oh my...! Firewalld allows Applications

File Test-Fatal-0.013.tar.gz uploaded to lookaside cache by pghmcfc

A file has been added to the lookaside cache for perl-Test-Fatal: e3d13b3c7e42f4574c843aca5d9f4570 Test-Fatal-0.013.tar.gz -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailma

Re: About F19 Firewall

On 09/20/2013 09:05 PM, P J P wrote: Hi, - Original Message - From: Thomas Woerner Subject: Re: About F19 Firewall 1) Separate zones. NM connections, interfaces and source addresses or ranges can be bound to zones. The initial default zone is public and all connections will be boun

Re: thunderbird-24.0.2 reverted - why? (Use the commit log..., Luke)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Le 24/09/2013 12:29, Heiko Adams a écrit : > The bodhi comments say that thunderbird-lightning dep was broken. > But it just needs to be updated to version 2.6 and everything > should work fine again. /me really likes the "just needs" ! As simple as

Re: thunderbird-24.0.2 reverted - why? (Use the commit log..., Luke)

Am 24.09.2013 11:39, schrieb drago01: > > What happened here is that 24 caused broken deps so the maintainers > probably reverted to get the security fixes out faster while stuff > is being sorted out. > > And yes I agree that commit messages should be more verbose. > The bodhi comments say that

Re: thunderbird-24.0.2 reverted - why? (Use the commit log..., Luke)

On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Michael J Gruber wrote: > Hi there, > > I can see that thunderbird 24 had been built successfully and then > reverted on the fc18 branch (and others). The git commit log and the > spec changelog say > > Revert to 17.0.8 > > and nothing else. What happened here is

Re: Need some help writing gitlab and gitlab-shell specs

On 09/23/2013 02:11 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote: Dne 19.9.2013 20:42, Axilleas Pipinellis napsal(a): I have asked in #fedora-infra what FHS they use with the git repos in fedorahosted and we concluded that the rails apps would go to /usr/share/ and git repos and satellites to /usr/lib/. Git repos i

Re: thunderbird-24.0.2 reverted - why? (Use the commit log..., Luke)

Michael J Gruber writes: > Hi there, > > I can see that thunderbird 24 had been built successfully and then > reverted on the fc18 branch (and others). The git commit log and the > spec changelog say > > Revert to 17.0.8 > > and nothing else. I do understand that more than a "successful build" is

thunderbird-24.0.2 reverted - why? (Use the commit log..., Luke)

Hi there, I can see that thunderbird 24 had been built successfully and then reverted on the fc18 branch (and others). The git commit log and the spec changelog say Revert to 17.0.8 and nothing else. I do understand that more than a "successful build" is necessary for a package to be pushed, but