Jeff,
On 2010-10-03 01:54, Jeff Raber wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 09/22/2010 05:29 AM, Philip Rhoades wrote:
>> Using top I found it is Xorg - taking up nearly 100% of CPU time . .
>>
>> Is there some way to find out what it is about Xorg in particular?
>>
>> T
Hi, folks. Just an update on desktop validation testing for F14 final
(we'll hit the TC stage next week).
I've been chatting to a few people about the idea of having bugs in
desktop validation outside of GNOME block releases, and there turn out
to be quite a lot of questions involved in terms of h
The following Fedora 14 Security updates need testing:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/clamav-0.96.3-1400.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ardour-2.8.11-5.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openswan-2.6.29-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates
James Laska writes:
> Andre correctly reminded me that 'ssh' installer support is not intended
> as a replacement for a telnet install. Rather, it is a means for
> enabling 'ssh' to remotely monitor install progress. Translation, you
> can ssh into the installing system and monitor /tmp/*log or d
Hi,
2010/10/5 J B :
> Hi,
> can anybody explain it ?
>
> After fresh Fedora install (from Fedora repo only) I found in
> "/var/log/messages" records as:
>
> Oct 1 07:08:26 ns kernel: [ cut here ]
> Oct 1 07:08:26 ns kernel: WARNING: at lib/dma-debug.c:791
> check_unmap+0x
Hi,
can anybody explain it ?
After fresh Fedora install (from Fedora repo only) I found in
"/var/log/messages" records as:
Oct 1 07:08:26 ns kernel: [ cut here ]
Oct 1 07:08:26 ns kernel: WARNING: at lib/dma-debug.c:791
check_unmap+0x7a/0x59b()
Oct 1 07:08:26 ns kernel:
On Mon, Oct 04, 2010 at 03:44:56PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 16:26 -0600, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 04, 2010 at 02:51:04PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> > >
> > > What's better to do in the case of having a 'ghost' package in the
> > > database - it'
On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 16:26 -0600, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 04, 2010 at 02:51:04PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 11:18 -0600, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
> > >
> > > Running 'package-cleanup --cleandupes' would likely help. After
> >
> > I'd highly recommend
On Mon, Oct 04, 2010 at 02:51:04PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 11:18 -0600, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
> >
> > Running 'package-cleanup --cleandupes' would likely help. After
>
> I'd highly recommend being very cautious about that, because what this
> seems to do is actua
2010/10/4 Adam Williamson :
> On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 11:18 -0600, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 04, 2010 at 02:44:00PM +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>> > e2fsprogs-1.41.10-7.fc13.i686 has missing requires of libss.so.2
>> > e2fsprogs-1.41.12-5.fc13.x86_64 is a duplicate with
>> > e2fspro
On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 22:46 +0100, mike cloaked wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 10:19 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Sun, 2010-10-03 at 16:16 +0100, mike cloaked wrote:
> >
> >> This presumes the key is already formatted with a boot flag set. The
> >> documentation is just not clear enough to b
#138: critpath lacks proventester attention since a month
---+
Reporter: nphilipp | Owner:
Type: proventester request | Status: closed
Priority: major | Milestone
On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 11:18 -0600, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 04, 2010 at 02:44:00PM +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> > e2fsprogs-1.41.10-7.fc13.i686 has missing requires of libss.so.2
> > e2fsprogs-1.41.12-5.fc13.x86_64 is a duplicate with
> > e2fsprogs-1.41.10-7.fc13.x86_64
>
>
On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 10:19 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-10-03 at 16:16 +0100, mike cloaked wrote:
>
>> This presumes the key is already formatted with a boot flag set. The
>> documentation is just not clear enough to be easily understandable
>> even by experienced Fedora users (I ha
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/04/2010 02:20 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-10-03 at 14:49 -0400, John Poelstra wrote:
>> Start End Name
>> Tue 28-Sep Mon 18-Oct Beta Testing
>> Thu 07-Oct Wed 13-Oct Pre-RC Acceptance Test Plan
>> Fri 08-Oct Fri 0
On Sun, 2010-10-03 at 14:49 -0400, John Poelstra wrote:
> Start End Name
> Tue 28-Sep Mon 18-Oct Beta Testing
> Thu 07-Oct Wed 13-Oct Pre-RC Acceptance Test Plan
> Fri 08-Oct Fri 08-Oct Final Blocker Meeting (f14blocker) #3
> Mon 11-Oct Fri 15-Oct Daily Review & Notification o
On Sun, 2010-10-03 at 16:16 +0100, mike cloaked wrote:
> This presumes the key is already formatted with a boot flag set. The
> documentation is just not clear enough to be easily understandable
> even by experienced Fedora users (I have been with Fedora since its
> inception!)
And you don't know
#138: critpath lacks proventester attention since a month
--+-
Reporter: nphilipp | Owner:
Type: proventester request | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone:
Co
James Laska (jla...@redhat.com) said:
> > I'm not seeing a test case that obviously covers this. Am I missing
> > something?
>
> Under the DVD test group, in addition to the other tests run against all
> ISO media, you should see ...
>
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Mediakit_Repoclo
On Mon, 4 Oct 2010 15:11:52 +, Branched wrote:
> Summary:
> Added Packages: 0
> Removed Packages: 0
> Modified Packages: 0
Why is the report empty despite packages waiting to be pushed to stable?
Is that on purpose or because of a problem?
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To
The following Fedora 14 Security updates need testing:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/clamav-0.96.3-1400.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pam_mount-2.5-1.fc14,libHX-3.6-1.fc14
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ardour-2.8.11-5.fc14
https://admin.fedorapro
On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 13:42 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> James Laska (jla...@redhat.com) said:
> > > > - Trees are tested for broken dependencies
> >
> > Should be covered using existing tests called out in the installation
> > matrix
> > (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Ins
2010/10/4 Michal Jaegermann :
> On Mon, Oct 04, 2010 at 02:44:00PM +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>> e2fsprogs-1.41.10-7.fc13.i686 has missing requires of libss.so.2
>> e2fsprogs-1.41.12-5.fc13.x86_64 is a duplicate with
>> e2fsprogs-1.41.10-7.fc13.x86_64
>
>>
>> Is there any way to remove th
Adam Jackson redhat.com> writes:
> > 632805,
>
> No, this is a PanelID bug and should already be fixed in xorg-x11-server
> 1.9.0-9.
I already tested the corresponding F13 build, and it didn't work - see
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=632805#c39
Unfortunately I can't test the F14
On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 09:50 -0400, Andre Robatino wrote:
> According to one of the VirtualBox developers (Frank Mehnert), bugs
> 621893 (VirtualBox) and 623956 (KVM) may actually be the same bug in
> Xorg affecting VESA 2.0. He filed an upstream bug
>
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id
James Laska (jla...@redhat.com) said:
> > > - Trees are tested for broken dependencies
>
> Should be covered using existing tests called out in the installation
> matrix
> (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Installation_Test).
I'm not seeing a test case that obviously covers thi
On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 12:55 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 04, 2010 at 11:34:26AM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > James Laska (jla...@redhat.com) said:
> > > I'm not in favor of this criteria addition at this time. I'd love to
> > > see this happen, but I don't think it's realistic
On Mon, Oct 04, 2010 at 02:44:00PM +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> e2fsprogs-1.41.10-7.fc13.i686 has missing requires of libss.so.2
> e2fsprogs-1.41.12-5.fc13.x86_64 is a duplicate with
> e2fsprogs-1.41.10-7.fc13.x86_64
>
> Is there any way to remove these warnings? These versions are no
>
On Mon, Oct 04, 2010 at 11:34:26AM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> James Laska (jla...@redhat.com) said:
> > I'm not in favor of this criteria addition at this time. I'd love to
> > see this happen, but I don't think it's realistic at this stage in the
> > release or in this forum (F-14). Can we
On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 17:21 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> It seemed to me that preupgrade process should not require any user
> interactions. I've used this tool twice on this system and I do not
> recall that I had to provide any user input.
Preupgrade should, preupgrade itself is the tool th
On Sat, 2010-10-02 at 20:56 -0400, Janina Sajka wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Jon Hermansen writes:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Janina Sajka wrote:
> >
> > > Seems telnet installs are again broken. I've filed bug 639629 Submitted
> > > - Installation over telnet isn't working
> > >
> >
James Laska (jla...@redhat.com) said:
> I'm not in favor of this criteria addition at this time. I'd love to
> see this happen, but I don't think it's realistic at this stage in the
> release or in this forum (F-14). Can we have more input from devel +
> rel-eng who initially proposed the change
CC'ing kernel list
Regards,
Michal
2010/10/4 Anne & Lynn Wheeler :
> EXT4 filesystem directory with 100,000+ small files, 4-core intel
> processor, batch process that runs parallel on all four processors
> ... adding/deleting several hundred files.
Let me guess - fsfuzzer? :)
>
> No problem on
2010/10/4 James Laska :
> On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 14:44 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>> W dniu 4 października 2010 13:10 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski
>> napisał:
>> >
>> > Apart from that it seems that everything went well.
>> >
>>
>> I can not upgrade my system after this preupgrade update. Anyo
2010/10/4 James Laska :
> Thanks for posting your logs. See comments below.
>
> On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 16:26 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>> 2010/10/4 James Laska :
>> > On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 15:28 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>> >> 2010/10/4 James Laska :
>> >> > On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 13:10
Compose started at Mon Oct 4 13:15:36 UTC 2010
Broken deps for x86_64
--
almanah-0.7.3-3.fc14.x86_64 requires libedataserverui-1.2.so.10()(64bit)
antlr3-python-3.1.2-7.fc14.noarch requires python(abi) = 0:2.6
evolutio
EXT4 filesystem directory with 100,000+ small files, 4-core intel
processor, batch process that runs parallel on all four processors
... adding/deleting several hundred files.
No problem on F13 but fairly consistently happens since recent
"preupgrade" to F14. If I serialize the processing, problem
On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 14:44 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> W dniu 4 października 2010 13:10 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski
> napisał:
> >
> > Apart from that it seems that everything went well.
> >
>
> I can not upgrade my system after this preupgrade update. Anyone else
> has this problem?
> ht
Thanks for posting your logs. See comments below.
On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 16:26 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> 2010/10/4 James Laska :
> > On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 15:28 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> >> 2010/10/4 James Laska :
> >> > On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 13:10 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>
2010/10/4 James Laska :
> On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 15:28 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>> 2010/10/4 James Laska :
>> > On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 13:10 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>> >> W dniu 4 października 2010 00:16 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski
>> >> napisał:
>> >> > W dniu 3 października 2010 23
Hey Adam,
Thanks for taking this meeting topic to the list. Comments below.
On Fri, 2010-10-01 at 13:28 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-10-01 at 16:16 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 01, 2010 at 01:10:28PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2010-10-01 at 15:58
# Fedora Quality Assurance Meeting
# Date: 2010-10-04
# Time: 15:00 UTC (11:00 EDT, 17:00 CEST) [1]
# Location: #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net
Greetings gang,
Apologies, I have a conflict again halfway through today's meeting. Can
someone help #chair today? As for discussion topics, I woul
On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 15:28 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> 2010/10/4 James Laska :
> > On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 13:10 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> >> W dniu 4 października 2010 00:16 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski
> >> napisał:
> >> > W dniu 3 października 2010 23:58 użytkownik Bruno Wolff III
W dniu 4 października 2010 13:10 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski
napisał:
>
> Apart from that it seems that everything went well.
>
I can not upgrade my system after this preupgrade update. Anyone else
has this problem?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=639960
BTW. I've got a few 'yum che
2010/10/4 James Laska :
> On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 13:10 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>> W dniu 4 października 2010 00:16 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski
>> napisał:
>> > W dniu 3 października 2010 23:58 użytkownik Bruno Wolff III
>> > napisał:
>> >> There
>> >> was some recent security updates that
On Sun, 2010-10-03 at 23:35 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm thinking about upgrade of my devel (php, python2, python3,
> postgres, mysql, firebird, cherokee, apache, git, some xorg related
> libs etc) system from F13 to F14Beta+. I've seen recently some bug
> reports about serious bu
2010/10/4 James Laska :
> The blocker list is always a good reference to answer that question.
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/showdependencytree.cgi?id=F14Blocker&hide_resolved=1
Thanks.
It seems that nothing on this list is relevant for this system.
>
> Thanks,
> James
Regards,
Michal
--
tes
W dniu 4 października 2010 00:16 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski
napisał:
> W dniu 3 października 2010 23:58 użytkownik Bruno Wolff III
> napisał:
>> There
>> was some recent security updates that affected pretty much all versions.
>> I haven't run into any f14 specific problems recently.
>>
>
> Goo
On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 13:10 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> W dniu 4 października 2010 00:16 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski
> napisał:
> > W dniu 3 października 2010 23:58 użytkownik Bruno Wolff III
> > napisał:
> >> There
> >> was some recent security updates that affected pretty much all versio
Compose started at Mon Oct 4 08:15:25 UTC 2010
Broken deps for x86_64
--
almanah-0.7.3-3.fc14.x86_64 requires libedataserverui-1.2.so.10()(64bit)
antlr3-python-3.1.2-7.fc14.noarch requires python(abi) = 0:2.6
clutter-
According to one of the VirtualBox developers (Frank Mehnert), bugs
621893 (VirtualBox) and 623956 (KVM) may actually be the same bug in
Xorg affecting VESA 2.0. He filed an upstream bug
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30585
which was closed as a duplicate of
https://bugs.freedeskto
#129: Replace installer telnet test case with newer ssh support
--+-
Reporter: jlaska | Owner: rhe
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: minor| Milestone: Fedora 14
C
52 matches
Mail list logo
