On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 11:25 PM Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> This is called 'dup' profile in Btrfs. Two copies of a block group.
Two copies of a block group ^on the same drive.
--
Chris Murphy
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To uns
On Wednesday, July 1, 2020 7:30:37 AM MST Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Mi, 01.07.20 14:45, Hans de Goede (hdego...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
>
> > I'm not in the bootloader-team, but I do work very closely with them,
> > so I have only one question: who is going to pick up the extra
> > maintenance
Le mercredi 01 juillet 2020 à 23:48 +0200, Dan Čermák a écrit :
> Hi Nicolas,
Hi Dan
> This is a system-wide change because all packages build with
> > redhat-rpm-config, but it only concerns packages that opted to use
> > this part of redhat-rpm-config (auto framework).
> >
> > The change will
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 8:24 PM James Cassell
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020, at 9:43 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 9:27 PM James Cassell
> > > Or maybe make all metadata raid 1, even on single disk set up?
> > >
> >
> > Not that isn't interesting, but what would be the mirror
On Wednesday, July 1, 2020 6:32:15 AM MST Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
> W dniu 01.07.2020 o 12:57, Richard W.M. Jones pisze:
>
>
> > If you mean migration of existing guests, then you need to repartition
> > them and reinstall the bootloader. I doubt anyone has a practical
> > idea of how to do th
On Wednesday, July 1, 2020 11:26:48 AM MST Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
> On 1.7.2020 17:17, Peter Robinson wrote:
> >> The use of legacy or uefi are changes that users have to manually change
> >> themselves in their bios from manufactures default settings. There is no
> >> tool that can do that f
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 2:49 PM Sergio Belkin wrote:
> So the question is: in this case I can override the Fedora compiler flags?
There may be a solution that doesn't require overriding the Fedora
compiler flags, but it is hard to tell without seeing more of the
code. Where is the source code in
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 12:06 PM Susi Lehtola
wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 10:54:16 -0600
> Jerry James wrote:
> > openblas-serial: use if the application is multithreaded
> > openblas-threads: use if the application is single-threaded
>
> No, this is exactly the wrong way around. You should use th
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020, at 9:43 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 9:27 PM James Cassell
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 1, 2020, at 9:03 PM, Przemek Klosowski via devel wrote:
> > > On 7/1/20 3:50 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > > > This sounds like a "wtf, why are you doing this btrfs?" so
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 10:08 PM Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
wrote:
>
> On 2.7.2020 01:42, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 9:23 PM Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
> > wrote:
> >> On 2.7.2020 01:06, Neal Gompa wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 9:03 PM Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
> >>> wrote:
> On
On 2.7.2020 01:42, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 9:23 PM Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On 2.7.2020 01:06, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 9:03 PM Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On 1.7.2020 23:28, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 7:19 PM Björn Persson wrote:
Jóhann
Once upon a time, Josef Bacik said:
> This sounds like a "wtf, why are you doing this btrfs?" sort of
> thing, but this is just the reality of using checksums. It's a
> checksum, not ECC. We don't know _which_ bits are fucked, we just
> know somethings fucked, so we throw it all away. If you ha
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 9:27 PM James Cassell
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020, at 9:03 PM, Przemek Klosowski via devel wrote:
> > On 7/1/20 3:50 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > > This sounds like a "wtf, why are you doing this btrfs?" sort of thing,
> > > but this is just the reality of using checksums
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 9:23 PM Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
>
> On 2.7.2020 01:06, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 9:03 PM Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
> > wrote:
> >> On 1.7.2020 23:28, Neal Gompa wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 7:19 PM Björn Persson wrote:
> Jóhann B. Guðmundss
On 2.7.2020 01:06, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 9:03 PM Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On 1.7.2020 23:28, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 7:19 PM Björn Persson wrote:
Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
More user friendly than Grub ( has lilo like interface easier to change
kern
Solomon Peachy writes:
Even putting that aside, for the past several years CSM/BIOS has been
slowly bitrotting due to a lack of real testing, as the last few Windows
releases have mandated use of UEFI for preinstalled systems, plus the
EOLing of Windows 7 and (especially) XP.
That's only becau
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020, at 9:03 PM, Przemek Klosowski via devel wrote:
> On 7/1/20 3:50 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > This sounds like a "wtf, why are you doing this btrfs?" sort of thing,
> > but this is just the reality of using checksums. It's a checksum, not
> > ECC.
>
> Yes, exactly---why isn'
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 9:03 PM Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
>
> On 1.7.2020 23:28, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 7:19 PM Björn Persson wrote:
> >> Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
> >>> More user friendly than Grub ( has lilo like interface easier to change
> >>> kernel entry, which go
On 1.7.2020 23:28, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 7:19 PM Björn Persson wrote:
Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
More user friendly than Grub ( has lilo like interface easier to change
kernel entry, which goes nicely with the default editor change )
This made me go "What?!". I used Lilo
On 7/1/20 3:50 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
This sounds like a "wtf, why are you doing this btrfs?" sort of thing,
but this is just the reality of using checksums. It's a checksum, not
ECC.
Yes, exactly---why isn't it ECC? Wouldn't it work better, especially in
the context of faulty hardware?
I
On 1.7.2020 23:18, Björn Persson wrote:
Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
More user friendly than Grub ( has lilo like interface easier to change
kernel entry, which goes nicely with the default editor change )
This made me go "What?!". I used Lilo back in the day. Its user
interface was nothing but
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 7:54 PM Gerald B. Cox
> I'm wondering, how do you actually want to define a "production
> release" of a kernel module?
> Does being part of an upstream kernel release (not in staging modules)
> not qualify?
> Because that's already the case, and has been for years. The
>
On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 11:22:26PM +0200, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Jul 2020 17:46:23 +0200, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > * Is this only on x86_64 that you need this? Or all arches?
>
> Sure we should have this on all arches but I haven't tested non-x86_64 yet.
> There possibly may be also some
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 7:19 PM Björn Persson wrote:
>
> Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
> > More user friendly than Grub ( has lilo like interface easier to change
> > kernel entry, which goes nicely with the default editor change )
>
> This made me go "What?!". I used Lilo back in the day. Its user
Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
> More user friendly than Grub ( has lilo like interface easier to change
> kernel entry, which goes nicely with the default editor change )
This made me go "What?!". I used Lilo back in the day. Its user
interface was nothing but a prompt. You had to know what to typ
Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
> Such proposal would never be about stop supporting older hardware that's
> just a misconception people are getting
When you write "stop supporting booting in legacy bios mode and move to
uefi only supported boot", then you shouldn't be too surprised if people
believ
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 6:45 PM Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
>
> On 1.7.2020 21:50, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 5:29 PM Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
> > wrote:
> >> On 1.7.2020 21:00, Neal Gompa wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 12:34 PM Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
> >>> wrote:
> On 1
On 1.7.2020 21:50, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 5:29 PM Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On 1.7.2020 21:00, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 12:34 PM Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
wrote:
On 1.7.2020 16:10, Solomon Peachy wrote:
On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 05:19:01PM +0200, Roberto Ragus
I've got a pair of admittedly old desktop machines that are BIOS-only that run
Fedora 32 just fine. No reason they can't continue to run Fedora into the
future - unless BIOS boot is eliminated.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 5:51 PM Neal Gompa wrote:
> The core of it is that nobody cares. It comes up at least once or
> twice every development cycle in the Workstation Working Group
> meetings, but there's nothing we can do. Sometimes I'll get bullshit
> answers from people. Sometimes they'll just
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 5:29 PM Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
>
> On 1.7.2020 21:00, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 12:34 PM Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
> > wrote:
> >> On 1.7.2020 16:10, Solomon Peachy wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 05:19:01PM +0200, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
> I'm
Hi Nicolas,
Ben Cotton writes:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/rpm_level_auto_release_and_changelog_bumping
>
> == Summary ==
>
> redhat-rpm-config will be updated so users of the auto framework get
> automated release and changelog bumping.
>
> == Owner ==
>
> * Name: [[User:nim| Nicol
On 1.7.2020 21:39, Ricky Zhang wrote:
I second your point.
I don't see any upside to discontinue support of legacy BIOS. Even my latest
machine support legacy BIOS. UEFI caused more headache to me than bringing in
any real positive user experiences.
What headache exactly? You had bad user ex
On 1.7.2020 20:31, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 6/30/20 3:34 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
Given Hans proposal [1] introduced systemd/grub2/Gnome upstream
changes it beg the question if now would not be the time to stop
supporting booting in legacy bios mode and move to uefi only
supported boot
I second your point.
I don't see any upside to discontinue support of legacy BIOS. Even my latest
machine support legacy BIOS. UEFI caused more headache to me than bringing in
any real positive user experiences.
Fix all your bugs not even securities bugs before you concern the securities
featu
No, I strongly disagree your proposal.
Don't break something that works. I have several home machines installing in
legacy BIOS way.
I have followed upgrade path **SMOOTHLY** from Fedora Core 14 up to Fedora 32
today.
Your change will break my dual-boot / multi-boot machines.
Please don't.
On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 at 21:00, Iñaki Ucar wrote:
>
> On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 at 20:24, Susi Lehtola
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 19:28:53 +0200
> > Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> > > I'm no expert, but the FAQ says:
> > >
> > > "You have a GPLed program that I'd like to link with my code to build
> > > a p
On 1.7.2020 21:00, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 12:34 PM Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
wrote:
On 1.7.2020 16:10, Solomon Peachy wrote:
On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 05:19:01PM +0200, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
I'm currently using BIOS, grub, grub2 basically everywhere, even on
fresh new machines,
T
On Wed, 01 Jul 2020 17:46:23 +0200, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> * Is this only on x86_64 that you need this? Or all arches?
Sure we should have this on all arches but I haven't tested non-x86_64 yet.
There possibly may be also some memory problems even on x86_64 (it builds on
my machine w/64GB but Koji h
On 7/1/20 4:08 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 5:06 PM Eric Sandeen wrote:
>>
>> On 7/1/20 11:53 AM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 4:25 pm, Nicolas Mailhot via devel
>>> wrote:
Actually this split is a godsend because you can convince anaconda to
le
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 5:06 PM Eric Sandeen wrote:
>
> On 7/1/20 11:53 AM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 4:25 pm, Nicolas Mailhot via devel
> > wrote:
> >> Actually this split is a godsend because you can convince anaconda to
> >> leave your home alone when reinstalling, wh
On 7/1/20 11:53 AM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 4:25 pm, Nicolas Mailhot via devel
> wrote:
>> Actually this split is a godsend because you can convince anaconda to
>> leave your home alone when reinstalling, while someone always seems too
>> invent a new Fedora change that
On 2020-07-01 18:53, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
The options we are seriously considering for our default going forward are (a)
btrfs, (b) failing that, probably ext4 all one big partition without LVM, (c)
less-likely, maybe xfs all one big partition without LVM. This is being
discussed in https:
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 12:34 PM Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
wrote:
>
> On 1.7.2020 16:10, Solomon Peachy wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 05:19:01PM +0200, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
> >> I'm currently using BIOS, grub, grub2 basically everywhere, even on
> >> fresh new machines,
> > This won't be the case
On 2020-07-01 04:07, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 6:21 AM Antti wrote:
Hello,
I'm in total opposition to this proposal as a long-time Fedora user. The btrfs
is unstable and not ready for production. Most of what I'm about to write is
admittedly anecdotal but it's the onl
Hi,
I'm trying to build a package for resubmission. However it fails with
messages like that
In file included from ./include/UpTools/UpLog.h:77,
from UpLog.cc:46:
UpLog.cc: In function 'void upOpenLogFileInternal(const char*, int, const
char*, int, int (*)(char*))':
./include/UpT
On 7/1/20 6:10 PM, Solomon Peachy wrote:
On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 05:19:01PM +0200, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
I'm currently using BIOS, grub, grub2 basically everywhere, even on
fresh new machines,
This won't be the case for much longer; Intel will finally drop CSM
("BIOS") support this year.
Even
On 6/30/20 3:34 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
Given Hans proposal [1] introduced systemd/grub2/Gnome upstream changes
it beg the question if now would not be the time to stop supporting
booting in legacy bios mode and move to uefi only supported boot which
has been available on any common in
On 7/1/20 2:24 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 06:54:02AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
Making btrfs opt-in for F33 and (assuming the result go well) opt-out for F34
could be good option. I know technically it is already opt-in, but it's not
very visible or popular.
I like this approach, a lot. I'm all in favour of switching to btrfs
(I've been using it for a while, on server & desktop), and I think this
would be a safe approach to do so.
Christopher
On 01.07.20 20:24, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 06:54:02AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Sz
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020, at 9:34 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
> Given Hans proposal [1] introduced systemd/grub2/Gnome upstream changes
> it beg the question if now would not be the time to stop supporting
> booting in legacy bios mode
Among other clouds, AWS doesn't support it and has no pl
On 1 July 2020 20:24:37 CEST, Matthew Miller wrote:
>On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 06:54:02AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
>> Making btrfs opt-in for F33 and (assuming the result go well) opt-out for F34
>> could be good option. I know technically it is already opt-in, but it's not
>> ver
On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 at 20:24, Susi Lehtola
wrote:
>
> On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 19:28:53 +0200
> Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> > I'm no expert, but the FAQ says:
> >
> > "You have a GPLed program that I'd like to link with my code to build
> > a proprietary program. Does the fact that I link with your program
> >
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 at 17:26, Adam Williamson
wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-06-30 at 16:23 +0200, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
> > W dniu 30.06.2020 o 15:34, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson pisze:
> > > Given Hans proposal [1] introduced systemd/grub2/Gnome upstream
> > > changes it beg the question if now would not
On 1.7.2020 17:17, Peter Robinson wrote:
The use of legacy or uefi are changes that users have to manually change
themselves in their bios from manufactures default settings. There is no
tool that can do that for them or migrate those settings however users
should be able to change this for hardw
On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 08:48:57AM -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> > We have https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DNF_Better_Counting,
> > maybe this could be used to collect some statistics about the fs type
> > too.
> I am going to try and nix this one in the bud right here. DNF counting
>
Dne 30. 06. 20 v 20:17 Christopher napsal(a):
> Hi,
>
> I know Fedora doesn't directly support Amazon Linux, but I was
> wondering if the package maintainer for rpmconf on EPEL was aware that
> the latest version doesn't work on Amazon Linux 2, which recently
No, I was not aware of that :)
> upd
On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 06:54:02AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> Making btrfs opt-in for F33 and (assuming the result go well) opt-out for F34
> could be good option. I know technically it is already opt-in, but it's not
> very visible or popular. We could make the btrfs option more p
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 4:52 AM Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 2:18 PM Christopher
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I know Fedora doesn't directly support Amazon Linux, but I was
> > wondering if the package maintainer for rpmconf on EPEL was aware that
> > the latest version do
On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 at 20:13, Susi Lehtola
wrote:
>
> On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 10:54:16 -0600
> Jerry James wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 10:26 AM Iñaki Ucar
> > wrote:
> > > BTW, I would also like to discuss here, as part of this proposal,
> > > which backend should be the system-wide default. I
On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 19:28:53 +0200
Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> I'm no expert, but the FAQ says:
>
> "You have a GPLed program that I'd like to link with my code to build
> a proprietary program. Does the fact that I link with your program
> mean I have to GPL my program? (#LinkingWithGPL)
>
> Not exactly
On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 10:54:16 -0600
Jerry James wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 10:26 AM Iñaki Ucar
> wrote:
> > BTW, I would also like to discuss here, as part of this proposal,
> > which backend should be the system-wide default. I believe we all
> > would agree that OpenBLAS nowadays is the bes
Neal Gompa writes:
> Oh man, that takes me back! I started on DOS with the MS-DOS Editor,
> then went onto the DOS port of Emacs and using DJGPP, then jumped to
> Linux years later...
Now *that* takes me back to the days when I wrote DJGPP ;-)
And for anyone who thinks vi is hard to use, try the
>EarlyOOM being a
>userspace process that races with the memory-consuming processes and that
>may end up not getting scheduled due to the very impending OOM condition
>that it is trying to prevent.
earlyoom consumes 1 MiB VmRSS and all memory is locked by mlockall(). earlyoom
works pretty fast
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 5:49 AM Steven Whitehouse wrote:
>
> If the / and /home split is the main issue, then dm-thin might be an
> alternative solution, and we should check to see if some of the issues
> listed on the change page have been addressed. I'm copying in Jon for
> additional comment on
>10% and 5% to 1% and 0%
Default values is already changed to 4% (but not more than 400 MiB) and 2% (but
not more than 200 MiB). A nonzero threshold helps maintain disk cache and
speeds up system recovery after correction.
___
devel mailing list -- dev
Le mercredi 01 juillet 2020 à 18:35 +0200, Miro Hrončok a écrit :
>
> Given the /usr/share font links in CSS won't work when the
> documentation is
> exposed via a webserver, I assume the docs are mostly intended to be
> browsed
> (possibly offline) from within Fedora anyway.
It’s not that har
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 11:20 AM Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 at 19:03, Jerry James wrote:
> > openblas-openmp: use if the application uses OpenMP
> > openblas-serial: use if the application is multithreaded
> > openblas-threads: use if the application is single-threaded
> >
> > I've alw
On Wed, 2020-07-01 at 16:32 +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
> On 1.7.2020 16:10, Solomon Peachy wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 05:19:01PM +0200, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
> > > I'm currently using BIOS, grub, grub2 basically everywhere, even
> > > on
> > > fresh new machines,
> > This won't be
On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 at 18:39, Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 01. 07. 20 16:24, Ben Cotton wrote:
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/FlexiBLAS_as_BLAS/LAPACK_manager
> >
> > == Summary ==
> > BLAS/LAPACK packages will be compiled against the FlexiBLAS wrapper
> > library, which will set OpenBLAS
On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 at 13:14, Iñaki Ucar wrote:
>
> On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 at 18:54, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> >
> > On 01. 07. 20 18:33, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 11:28 am, Michael Catanzaro
> > > wrote:
> > >> I have not much opinion on whether we should use this vs. nano.
>If both RAM and swap go below 10% free, earlyoom issues SIGTERM to the
process with the largest oom_score. If both RAM and swap go below 5% free,
earlyoom issues SIGKILL
Fedora's earlyoom package is provided with the changed default settings:
```
EARLYOOM_ARGS="-r 0 -m 4 -M 409600 --prefer '^Web
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1852856
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
--- Comment #1 from F
On Mi, 01.07.20 18:31, Gerd Hoffmann (kra...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > > One problem with sd-boot is that the kernels must stay on the ESP, which
> > > can be a problem for dual-boot installs (where Fedora has to run with
> > > the existing ESP and can't just create one which is big enouth).
> >
> >
On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 at 19:03, Jerry James wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 10:26 AM Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> > BTW, I would also like to discuss here, as part of this proposal,
> > which backend should be the system-wide default. I believe we all
> > would agree that OpenBLAS nowadays is the best choi
OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20200630.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20200701.n.0
= SUMMARY =
Added images:2
Dropped images: 0
Added packages: 18
Dropped packages:1
Upgraded packages: 123
Downgraded packages: 0
Size of added packages: 61.88 MiB
Size of dropped packages
> The use of legacy or uefi are changes that users have to manually change
> themselves in their bios from manufactures default settings. There is no
> tool that can do that for them or migrate those settings however users
> should be able to change this for hardware around 2010.
>
> The Installer
On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 at 18:54, Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> On 01. 07. 20 18:33, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 11:28 am, Michael Catanzaro
> > wrote:
> >> I have not much opinion on whether we should use this vs. nano.
> >
> > Actually, playing with it for an extra three minutes..
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 6:42 pm, Miro Hrončok
wrote:
I love micro. The problematic part is it's rather big.
nano: 670 k
micro: 4.7 M
(sizes from repoquery --info)
rpm -qi micro says 16007158 bytes installed... that's 15.3 MiB,
compared to nano at 2.5 MiB, and vim-minimal at 1.3 MiB. I've bee
Hi,
> Also note that this entails a lot more work then just maintaining sd-boot,
> anaconda will need to be adjusted, kernel-install scripts will need to
> be adjusted, etc. And what about upgrades, if upgrades stick with using grub2
> then now we have 3 bootloader configs, including things like
On 01. 07. 20 18:28, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
I notice that when I copy text it instructs me to "install xclip for external
clipboard." That's not OK since xclip won't do anything in Wayland. Could be
avoided by checking $DISPLAY before printing the message.
See https://github.com/zyedidia/mic
On Wed, 2020-07-01 at 16:30 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Mi, 01.07.20 14:45, Hans de Goede (hdego...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> > I'm not in the bootloader-team, but I do work very closely with
> > them,
> > so I have only one question: who is going to pick up the extra
> > maintenance load t
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 4:25 pm, Nicolas Mailhot via devel
wrote:
Actually this split is a godsend because you can convince anaconda to
leave your home alone when reinstalling, while someone always seems
too
invent a new Fedora change that justifies the reformatting of /.
Good luck dealing wit
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 10:26 AM Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> BTW, I would also like to discuss here, as part of this proposal,
> which backend should be the system-wide default. I believe we all
> would agree that OpenBLAS nowadays is the best choice. But then, the
> serial or the openmp version?
First, I
On 01. 07. 20 18:33, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 11:28 am, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
I have not much opinion on whether we should use this vs. nano.
Actually, playing with it for an extra three minutes... it's *really* nice.
I know micro is not nearly as standard or popula
On 01. 07. 20 17:37, Jerry James wrote:
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 5:21 AM Miro Hrončok wrote:
I've worked on this in
https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/churchyard/rpms/python-sphinx_rtd_theme/commits/generator
However, there is "tiny little problem" that makes it not work:
https://github.com/rp
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 11:28 am, Michael Catanzaro
wrote:
I have not much opinion on whether we should use this vs. nano.
Actually, playing with it for an extra three minutes... it's *really*
nice.
I know micro is not nearly as standard or popular as nano, but... this
is worth serious addi
On 1.7.2020 16:10, Solomon Peachy wrote:
On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 05:19:01PM +0200, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
I'm currently using BIOS, grub, grub2 basically everywhere, even on
fresh new machines,
This won't be the case for much longer; Intel will finally drop CSM
("BIOS") support this year.
Even
> > One problem with sd-boot is that the kernels must stay on the ESP, which
> > can be a problem for dual-boot installs (where Fedora has to run with
> > the existing ESP and can't just create one which is big enouth).
>
> Nah, that's not true. Hasn't been for quite a while.
>
> sd-boot checks f
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 6:35 am, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
'sudo dnf install micro' ;)
It seems to work nicely. I especially like the standard keyboard
shortcuts. I can't figure out how to Undo in nano, but in micro I just
Ctrl+Z. I have not much opinion on whether we should use this
On 01. 07. 20 16:24, Ben Cotton wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/FlexiBLAS_as_BLAS/LAPACK_manager
== Summary ==
BLAS/LAPACK packages will be compiled against the FlexiBLAS wrapper
library, which will set OpenBLAS as system-wide default backend, and
at the same time will provide a pr
On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 at 17:53, Jerry James wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 8:25 AM Ben Cotton wrote:
> >
> > Mechanisms such as update-alternatives and modules have been discussed
> > in the past, but were considered improper (the former) or faced
> > technical issues (the former).
>
> I think th
On 7/1/20 4:09 PM, Fabio Valentini wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 4:00 PM Jiri Vanek wrote:
>>
>> On 7/1/20 3:21 PM, Fabio Valentini wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 3:09 PM Aleksandar Kurtakov
>>> wrote:
Fabio, does it mean that the Java SIG agrees with progressing with the
Ch
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 5:49 pm, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
wrote:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/D4FVY3LLMNGUKNUOEIDXNOOAD577W5XN/
None of the comments in that thread support the claim that we cannot
ship configuration files generated by dptf
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 05:46:11PM -, Ian McInerney wrote:
> I have been going through the packages listed in the comps file for rawhide
> (given in here https://pagure.io/fedora-comps) to clean it up and remove any
> packages that are currently not in any Fedora rawhide repos, and to update
On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 05:19:01PM +0200, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
> I'm currently using BIOS, grub, grub2 basically everywhere, even on
> fresh new machines,
This won't be the case for much longer; Intel will finally drop CSM
("BIOS") support this year.
Even putting that aside, for the past sever
So the last two times thermald was proposed (first as a F32 change
proposal, then more recently to the Workstation WG) it was rejected on
the grounds that it was not useful without dptfxtract installed. Now
it's clear that everybody was mistaken about that, so seems it makes
sense to reconsider
On 30.06.2020 22:38, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> Any references would be very interesting, thanks.
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/D4FVY3LLMNGUKNUOEIDXNOOAD577W5XN/
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
__
On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 03:38:26PM +0200, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Jul 2020 15:14:09 +0200, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> > At the moment we have about 10% of the hardware
> > we shipped back in operation and there are at least 2 to 3 weeks to
> > get the rest up. Getting up larger builde
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 8:25 AM Ben Cotton wrote:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/FlexiBLAS_as_BLAS/LAPACK_manager
>
> == Summary ==
> BLAS/LAPACK packages will be compiled against the FlexiBLAS wrapper
> library, which will set OpenBLAS as system-wide default backend, and
> at the same ti
1 - 100 of 186 matches
Mail list logo
