I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask.
Right now booting via EFI does not offer me a rescue system but "just"
to install.
Since using the normal rescue mode without EFI is not sufficient to use
e.g. efibootmgr I would ask to have some "proper" rescue system via
efiboot as well.
--
te
On Wed, 2012-02-01 at 20:26 -0500, Tom H wrote:
> [root@localhost ~]# mv /etc/ld.so.conf.d/usrmove.conf .
> [root@localhost ~]# ldconfig
> [root@localhost ~]# ldconfig -p | wc -l
> 825
> [root@localhost ~]# ldconfig -p | grep usr | wc -l
> 11
> [root@localhost ~]# mv usrmove.conf /etc/ld.so.conf.d/
[root@localhost ~]# mv /etc/ld.so.conf.d/usrmove.conf .
[root@localhost ~]# ldconfig
[root@localhost ~]# ldconfig -p | wc -l
825
[root@localhost ~]# ldconfig -p | grep usr | wc -l
11
[root@localhost ~]# mv usrmove.conf /etc/ld.so.conf.d/
[root@localhost ~]# ldconfig
[root@localhost ~]# ldconfig -p
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 6:32 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-02-01 at 18:04 -0500, Tom H wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> > On Fri, 2012-01-27 at 14:10 +0100, Harald Hoyer wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Fedora 17 will locate the entire base operating system in /us
On Wed, 2012-02-01 at 18:04 -0500, Tom H wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-01-27 at 14:10 +0100, Harald Hoyer wrote:
> >>
> >> Fedora 17 will locate the entire base operating system in /usr. The
> >> directories
> >> /bin, /sbin, /lib, /lib64 will o
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-01-27 at 14:10 +0100, Harald Hoyer wrote:
>>
>> Fedora 17 will locate the entire base operating system in /usr. The
>> directories
>> /bin, /sbin, /lib, /lib64 will only be symlinks:
>> /bin → /usr/bin
>> /sbin → /usr/sbin
>
On Wed, 2012-02-01 at 16:33 +, Andre Robatino wrote:
> Frank Murphy gmail.com> writes:
>
> > > A built-in checksum is only useful for checking for natural corruption,
> > > not a
> > > deliberate fake (since in that case it's easy to change the checksum to
> > > the
> > > correct one for th
The following Fedora 15 Security updates need testing:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-1077/wicd-1.7.0-11.fc15
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-0888/curl-7.21.3-13.fc15
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-0939/moodle-1.9.16-1.fc15
On 1 February 2012 10:27, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> So I finally got around to updating the Rawhide system after my last round
> of travel. When yum informed me that there were 1300 packages to update,
> I got a little worried. But things actually mostly work, modulo a suspend
> problem that I wa
So I finally got around to updating the Rawhide system after my last round
of travel. When yum informed me that there were 1300 packages to update,
I got a little worried. But things actually mostly work, modulo a suspend
problem that I want to investigate further when time allows.
One thing has
On Wed, 2012-02-01 at 08:47 +0100, drago01 wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 7:29 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-01-31 at 11:05 -0500, Petr Schindler wrote:
> >
> >> > We made this Beta not Alpha in the criteria on purpose, specifically
> >> > because we don't think it's a significant
On Wed, 2012-02-01 at 08:04 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 01/31/2012 09:00 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-01-31 at 11:43 -0500, Chris Lumens wrote:
> >>> "The installed system must run normally if the user chooses to install
> >>> without SELinux"
> >>>
> >>> There is no test case
Frank Murphy gmail.com> writes:
> > A built-in checksum is only useful for checking for natural corruption, not
> > a
> > deliberate fake (since in that case it's easy to change the checksum to the
> > correct one for the fake). Even md5 is more than enough for this purpose.
> >
>
> So it's not
On 01/02/12 16:11, Andre Robatino wrote:
A built-in checksum is only useful for checking for natural corruption, not a
deliberate fake (since in that case it's easy to change the checksum to the
correct one for the fake). Even md5 is more than enough for this purpose.
So it's not error proof
Frank Murphy gmail.com> writes:
> > "If there is embedded checksum on ISO media, it must be correct."
> >
>
> Not trying to hijack.
> But, is there a reason md5 is still being used?
A built-in checksum is only useful for checking for natural corruption, not a
deliberate fake (since in that cas
On 01/02/12 10:40, Petr Schindler wrote:
You are right. So beside this alpha criterion I propose new final
criterion:
"If there is embedded checksum on ISO media, it must be correct."
Not trying to hijack.
But, is there a reason md5 is still being used?
--
Regards,
Frank Murphy, friend
On Tue, 2012-01-31 at 10:23 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-01-31 at 07:48 -0500, Petr Schindler wrote:
>
> > OK, so test case should stay in alpha and new criterion should be in
> > alpha too. I propose to drop the part about embedded checksum (that
> > would be only additional check
On 01/02/12 10:33, Frank Murphy wrote:
Is it the double softlink that's breaking things.
/usr/bin/ > /usr/lib/libc.so.6 > /usr/lib/libcc-2.15.so
that should be
/lib > > /usr/lib/libc.so.6 > /usr/lib/libcc-2.15.so
--
Regards,
Frank Murphy, friend of fedoraproject
UTF_8 Encoded
--
test mai
On 31/01/12 17:26, Adam Williamson wrote:
The initramfs is generated on-the-fly when the kernel is installed.
I presume initramfs gets the libc.so.6 from /usr/lib ?
On my post /usr box.
/usr/lib/libc.so.6 is a symlink itself to /usr/lib/libcc-2.15.so
Is it the double softlink that's breaking
19 matches
Mail list logo
