On 2012-12-05 21:44 (GMT-0800) Adam Williamson composed:
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 22:00 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
Why is the first thing we do choosing a device, rather than a
partition or a volume?
Because people find it very valuable to be able to leave certain disks
out of the installatio
On 2012-12-05 21:44 (GMT-0800) Adam Williamson composed:
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 22:00 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Dec 4, 2012, at 5:58 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> I don't know why you'd expect a 'partition assignment only' mode to
> exist, given that there wasn't one in F17 and there was
The following Fedora 17 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
4
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-19442/php-symfony2-HttpFoundation-2.1.4-1.fc17
1 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-19717/xen-4.1.3-7.fc17
0
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/
The following Fedora 16 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
75
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-14452/bacula-5.0.3-33.fc16
3
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-19538/weechat-0.3.9.2-2.fc16
48
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-1
On 3 December 2012 22:26, Kamil Paral wrote:
> > Hi All,
>
> > As you know Liberation 2.0 is one of the feature of Fedora 18. Recent
> > analysis and comparison with Liberation 1 it is more clear that
> > final output of Liberation 2.0 is not as sharp as it was with
> > Liberation 1.0. Though bot
Now I installed the Canon Pixma MP 540 on Fedora 18 Beta (64bit, Gnome Desktop
and 32bit, Lxde Desktop). On both systems the scanner works fine with "Simple
Scanning Utility", The printer works with "Cups+Gutenprint", but the paper feed
seems to be not totally ok. I can use only the paper feed
On 3 December 2012 21:08, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>
> Le Lun 3 décembre 2012 15:26, pravin@gmail.com a écrit :
> > Hi All,
> >
> > As you know Liberation 2.0 is one of the feature of Fedora 18. Recent
> > analysis and comparison with Liberation 1 it is more clear that final
> > output of Libe
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 22:00 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Dec 4, 2012, at 5:58 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >>
> >
> > I don't know why you'd expect a 'partition assignment only' mode to
> > exist, given that there wasn't one in F17 and there was no indication of
> > one in any of the design d
On Dec 5, 2012, at 7:07 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> Or better, if you're using some other instance of GRUB2, is to add a menu
> entry for that GRUB's
cute. I stop thinking, stop typing and hit send…
add a menu entry to that first GRUB's grub.cfg using configfile to point to the
Fedora grub.cf
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 15:50 -0500, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> Hi!
> FESCo on today's meeting decided to move the final change deadline
> by one week earlier (2012-12-11) to avoid Christmas holidays
> break [1] but the final release date remains the same - 2013-01-08 [2].
> After the Final Change Dea
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 12:13 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 09:54:45AM -0500, Kamil Paral wrote:
> > > Having depended on kickstart for years, I'm of the very strong belief
> > > that while it's okay to have a subset for alpha and beta blockers,
> > > *all* documented command
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 20:23 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 12/05/2012 05:10 PM, Kamil Paral wrote:
> > Some of the existing or previous list admins, obviously. I don't remember
> > who.
> > The changes made were related to LinkedIn spam going into moderation queue
> > instead of being
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 07:39 -0500, Scott Robbins wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 06:45:08AM -0500, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
> > On 12/04/2012 05:55 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>
>
> > >On Dec 4, 2012, at 3:13 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >Slightly off topic, I'm kinda liking system-storage
On Dec 4, 2012, at 5:58 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>
>
> I don't know why you'd expect a 'partition assignment only' mode to
> exist, given that there wasn't one in F17 and there was no indication of
> one in any of the design documents for newui.
Maybe it's expected because 95% of the world'
Seeing Kalev's post made me recall that I do have an FAS account. It
suffers from lack of use as a proactive helper. Who can give me advice
about replacing the ssh key on it? I long ago lost track of the private
key. Same thing with the gpg key...it may have expired anyhow.
I also downloaded t
On 12/05/12 14:42, Kalev Lember wrote:
> Hi,
>
> F18 currently has a huge number of unapproved updates queued in
> updates-testing. Could folks that are on F18 please run
> fedora-easy-karma occasionally and file karma as appropriate?
>
> And please don't only file negative karma, positive karma
On Dec 5, 2012, at 11:24 AM, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
> No Logical Volumes listed. There are only the regular partitions and the
> Physical Volume partitions listed under unknown.
>
> Did a pvscan which showed the three VGs on this system. Then I did a lvscan
> which listed all of the Logical
Hi,
F18 currently has a huge number of unapproved updates queued in
updates-testing. Could folks that are on F18 please run
fedora-easy-karma occasionally and file karma as appropriate?
And please don't only file negative karma, positive karma is also very
much needed in case you don't notice any
- Original Message -
>
> > From: Jaroslav Reznik
> > To: devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org, test-
> > annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > Date: 12/05/2012 15:53
> > Subject: [Test-Announce] Heads up: Fedora 18 Final Change Deadline
> > and Feature Process changes
> > Sent by: test-b
> From: Jaroslav Reznik
> To: devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org, test-
> annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Date: 12/05/2012 15:53
> Subject: [Test-Announce] Heads up: Fedora 18 Final Change Deadline
> and Feature Process changes
> Sent by: test-boun...@lists.fedoraproject.org
>
> Hi!
> FES
Hi!
FESCo on today's meeting decided to move the final change deadline
by one week earlier (2012-12-11) to avoid Christmas holidays
break [1] but the final release date remains the same - 2013-01-08 [2].
After the Final Change Deadline only approved blocker and NTH bugs
will be included into the
On 12/05/2012 05:10 PM, Kamil Paral wrote:
Some of the existing or previous list admins, obviously. I don't remember who.
The changes made were related to LinkedIn spam going into moderation queue
instead of being discarded.
The settings have not been unchanged for 4 years, that's not true.
An
=
#fedora-bugzappers: f18final-blocker-review-2
=
Minutes:
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-bugzappers/2012-12-05/f18final-blocker-review-2.2012-12-05-17.01.html
Minutes (text):
http://meetbot.fedorapr
On 12/05/2012 01:24 PM, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
On 12/05/2012 06:57 AM, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
As far as getting F18 installed, some of this is OBE because I used
fedup and it worked just fine so I now have a live F18 system for
testing.
However, I would like the installer to work and of all t
On 12/05/2012 06:57 AM, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
As far as getting F18 installed, some of this is OBE because I used
fedup and it worked just fine so I now have a live F18 system for
testing.
However, I would like the installer to work and of all the parts that
I consider critical, storage conf
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 09:54:45AM -0500, Kamil Paral wrote:
> > Having depended on kickstart for years, I'm of the very strong belief
> > that while it's okay to have a subset for alpha and beta blockers,
> > *all* documented commands should work for final unless they were
> > marked as deprecated
> On 12/05/2012 02:05 PM, Kamil Paral wrote:
> > If I understand correctly, this list allowed unsubscribed people to
> > post to this list (can somebody confirm?). Today I received
> > complaints that it is no longer possible. It might be related to
> > some adjustments I've made in mailman lately.
> > > There is one important drawback, and that is the necessity to be
> > > subscribed to the list.
> >
> > I think this is an interesting idea, but aside from the drawbacks
> > someone else noted (blocker voting is not QA-only), I see another:
> > our
> > current mailing list archive kinda sucks
On 05.12.2012 17:33, Lawrence Graves wrote:
> I am having problems with the installing of Fedora 18 Beta on my PC. I
> have it install from an earlier version namely Fedora 18 Beta TC9. I
> am trying to do afresh install with the lastest release Fedora Beta
> RC1. When I get to the part to select t
I am having problems with the installing of Fedora 18 Beta on my PC. I
have it install from an earlier version namely Fedora 18 Beta TC9. I am
trying to do afresh install with the lastest release Fedora Beta RC1.
When I get to the part to select the drive I want to install Fedora 18
on it simpl
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 09:05:56 -0500,
Kamil Paral wrote:
If I understand correctly, this list allowed unsubscribed people to post to
this list (can somebody confirm?). Today I received complaints that it is no
longer possible. It might be related to some adjustments I've made in mailman
l
On 12/05/2012 02:37 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
while it's okay to have a subset for alpha and beta blockers,
*all*documented commands should work for final unless they were marked as
deprecated and gave warnings in a previous release. (Preferably two
releases, since jumping one release is expecte
On 12/05/2012 02:05 PM, Kamil Paral wrote:
If I understand correctly, this list allowed unsubscribed people to post to
this list (can somebody confirm?). Today I received complaints that it is no
longer possible. It might be related to some adjustments I've made in mailman
lately. It might be
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 09:54:45AM -0500, Kamil Paral wrote:
> > *all* documented commands should work for final unless they were marked
> > as deprecated and gave warnings in a previous release. (Preferably two
> > releases, since jumping one release is expected with our lifecycle.)
> I would pref
On 12/05/2012 01:12 PM, Lukas Brabec wrote:
Hi,
I'm Lukas Brabec (lbrabec) and I'm new Red Hat intern in Fedora QA. I'm
former user of Gentoo and Arch.
I like coffee, beer, rock and metal.
I hope my bug reports will help bring Fedora to brighter tomorrows.
Welcome to the party.
Dont hesitat
> On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 09:05:56 -0500 (EST)
> Kamil Paral wrote:
>
> > If I understand correctly, this list allowed unsubscribed people to
> > post to this list (can somebody confirm?). Today I received
> > complaints that it is no longer possible. It might be related to
> > some adjustments I've m
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 08:22:52AM -0500, Kamil Paral wrote:
> > I tried to make a core selection. I had the following in mind:
> > 1. Kickstarts are used for automation, therefore the most important
> > commands related to automation must work (manual intervention is
> > not fine).
> > 2. Comman
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 08:22:52AM -0500, Kamil Paral wrote:
> I tried to make a core selection. I had the following in mind:
> 1. Kickstarts are used for automation, therefore the most important commands
> related to automation must work (manual intervention is not fine).
> 2. Commands which are
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Kamil Paral wrote:
> I'm not fully decided either way, maybe a bit in favor; I hope some people
> will comment here as well. Just keep in mind we want to keep the core command
> set small.
I agree -- %include and %ksappend should be part of the core command
set t
> I make heavy use of the %include directive which I don't see that
> you've mentioned anywhere. It's a rather fundamental feature for how
> I use kickstarts through livecd-tools to effect dynamic sections. I
> suppose I could revise my tools to create a dynamic, yet monolith
> kickstart script, bu
On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 09:05:56 -0500 (EST)
Kamil Paral wrote:
> If I understand correctly, this list allowed unsubscribed people to
> post to this list (can somebody confirm?). Today I received
> complaints that it is no longer possible. It might be related to
> some adjustments I've made in mailman
If I understand correctly, this list allowed unsubscribed people to post to
this list (can somebody confirm?). Today I received complaints that it is no
longer possible. It might be related to some adjustments I've made in mailman
lately. It might be a bug or it might be just my lame hands.
Ple
> From: Kamil Paral
>
> In the discussion about
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=869978
> we agreed that we should have a list of core kickstart commands that
> should definitely work for a Final release.
>
> All the options are documented here:
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Anacon
> > There is one important drawback, and that is the necessity to be
> > subscribed to the list.
>
> I think this is an interesting idea, but aside from the drawbacks
> someone else noted (blocker voting is not QA-only), I see another:
> our
> current mailing list archive kinda sucks and is a pain
Compose started at Wed Dec 5 09:16:09 UTC 2012
New package: php-Slim-2.1.0-5.fc18
PHP micro framework
New package: phpMemcachedAdmin-1.2.2-5.svn262.fc18
Graphic stand-alone administration for memcached to monitor and
debug purpose
New package: rubygem-openstack-
> Users that need help belong in Fedora and reporters that are at QA
> can
> just participate in the meeting while they "wait"
That's not what https://fedoraproject.org/en/get-prerelease says. Also it's not
what I believe is true - that #fedora-qa is used for pre-release issues
discussion.
>
>
- Original Message -
>
>
> On 12/04/2012 11:27 PM, Tim Flink wrote:
>
>
> We still have quite a few proposed blockers for F18 final and could
> use
> some more votes in bug. Instead of sending out email after email of
> bugs that could use voting or testing, I wrote some code to help me
On Tue, 04 Dec 2012 18:11:46 -0800
Adam Williamson wrote:
> [adamw@adam tmp]$ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/libudev.so.1
> systemd-libs-195-8.fc18.x86_64
Ah, so udev has moved in with systemd. No doubt I can
find a systemd-devel or systemd-libs-devel package
so I can build my programs that need libudev.
Th
In the discussion about https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=869978 we
agreed that we should have a list of core kickstart commands that should
definitely work for a Final release.
All the options are documented here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Anaconda/Kickstart
I tried to make a cor
Hi,
I'm Lukas Brabec (lbrabec) and I'm new Red Hat intern in Fedora QA. I'm
former user of Gentoo and Arch.
I like coffee, beer, rock and metal.
I hope my bug reports will help bring Fedora to brighter tomorrows.
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fe
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 06:45:08AM -0500, Gene Czarcinski wrote:
> On 12/04/2012 05:55 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> >On Dec 4, 2012, at 3:13 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> >
> >
> >Slightly off topic, I'm kinda liking system-storage-manager new to F18 and
> >installable from the live cd.
> >yum install
On 12/05/2012 12:02 PM, Kamil Paral wrote:
Next anyone of us can just explain instead that we are in the middle
of
blocker bug meeting
I don't like the idea that people should be put on hold, probably for several
hours, just because we are having a meeting. #fedora-qa is referenced from
https:
On 12/04/2012 10:12 PM, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote:
On 12/04/2012 04:07 AM, Brendan Jones wrote:
On 12/04/2012 10:39 AM, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote:
Since the latest yum update I have to run audio programs as root
in order to access an audio device. Previously being a member o
On 12/04/2012 11:27 PM, Tim Flink wrote:
We still have quite a few proposed blockers for F18 final and could use
some more votes in bug. Instead of sending out email after email of
bugs that could use voting or testing, I wrote some code to help me
keep track of the bug states and display a reaso
> Next anyone of us can just explain instead that we are in the middle
> of
> blocker bug meeting
I don't like the idea that people should be put on hold, probably for several
hours, just because we are having a meeting. #fedora-qa is referenced from
https://fedoraproject.org/en/get-prerelease .
Dne Út 4. prosince 2012 09:39:03, Adam Williamson napsal(a):
> On Tue, 2012-12-04 at 11:06 +0100, Karel Volný wrote:
> > Dne Po 3. prosince 2012 23:47:14, Adam Williamson napsal(a):
> > > This gets into a very general discussion, but there is a fairly solid
> > > case to be made that excessively ag
As far as getting F18 installed, some of this is OBE because I used
fedup and it worked just fine so I now have a live F18 system for testing.
However, I would like the installer to work and of all the parts that I
consider critical, storage configuration is first in line. I believe
that the b
On 12/04/2012 05:55 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Dec 4, 2012, at 3:13 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
You'll need to make sure you've manually created an LV because neither anaconda
autopart or Manual Partitioning can create an LV from available VG free space.
By this I mean, create the LV outside of
On 12/05/2012 09:10 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 08:37 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 12/05/2012 03:21 AM, Tim Flink wrote:
We're still working to get the proposed blocker list down to something
manageable, so it would be time for another blocker review meeting!
No
On 12/05/2012 08:56 AM, Kamil Paral wrote:
On 12/05/2012 03:21 AM, Tim Flink wrote:
We're still working to get the proposed blocker list down to
something
manageable, so it would be time for another blocker review meeting!
Note the IRC channel change - doing the blocker meeting in
#fedora-qa
is
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 08:37 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 12/05/2012 03:21 AM, Tim Flink wrote:
> > We're still working to get the proposed blocker list down to something
> > manageable, so it would be time for another blocker review meeting!
> > Note the IRC channel change - doing the
> On 12/05/2012 03:21 AM, Tim Flink wrote:
> > We're still working to get the proposed blocker list down to
> > something
> > manageable, so it would be time for another blocker review meeting!
> > Note the IRC channel change - doing the blocker meeting in
> > #fedora-qa
> > is far too disruptive t
> Is it the meeting itself which you find helpful or the discussion and
> information during the review meetings? Could you see asynchronous
> conversation (exact method TBD) being as useful?
The discussion is very helpful. It can be asynchronous, of course. It won't be
as efficient, but that's a
On 12/05/2012 03:21 AM, Tim Flink wrote:
We're still working to get the proposed blocker list down to something
manageable, so it would be time for another blocker review meeting!
Note the IRC channel change - doing the blocker meeting in #fedora-qa
is far too disruptive to other testing work tha
64 matches
Mail list logo
