The following Fedora 16 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
6
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-0723/thunderbird-17.0.2-1.fc16
38
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-20157/libproxy-0.4.11-1.fc16
118
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-20
The following Fedora 17 Security updates need testing:
Age URL
2
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-0833/seamonkey-2.15-1.fc17
2
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-0834/ettercap-0.7.5-3.fc17.1.20120906gitc796e5
0
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/upd
On Wed, 2013-01-16 at 17:35 +0100, Namikaze Minato wrote:
> > Trying to boot "Fedora 18 Live Desktop" on an EFI machine HP
> > (Probook 4540s) regardless of SecureBoot status results in the
> > following warnings until starting the rescue shell:
>
> It is working by disabling SecureBoot *and* enab
On 01/16/2013 10:31 AM, Clyde E. Kunkel wrote:
Rawhide gnome desktop acting up recently. Have to restart several times
to get desktop that is readable. Several times screens are garbled.
Here is a bit of an Xorg.0.log that may be a clue:
(EE) [mi] EQ overflowing. Additional events will be dis
2013/1/18 Adam Jackson
> On Fri, 2013-01-18 at 20:49 +0200, cornel panceac wrote:
>
>
> > 2013/1/18 Justin M. Forbes
>
> > There are a lof of reasons that this isn't feasible on a
> > running system.
> > You just don't have access to all of the memory for a full
> >
On Fri, 2013-01-18 at 20:49 +0200, cornel panceac wrote:
> 2013/1/18 Justin M. Forbes
> There are a lof of reasons that this isn't feasible on a
> running system.
> You just don't have access to all of the memory for a full
> check.
>
> Justin
>
2013/1/18 Justin M. Forbes
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 09:18:40AM -0800, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R
> wrote:
> > Recently I discovered the motherboard that had been running omen.com
> > had an undetected bad memory chip. This is a real confidence builder.
> >
> > Currently, running a definitive
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 09:18:40AM -0800, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote:
> Recently I discovered the motherboard that had been running omen.com
> had an undetected bad memory chip. This is a real confidence builder.
>
> Currently, running a definitive memory test requires hours of down time
On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 10:01:41 -0800
Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote:
> >
> Option 2 has already been tried. The old motherboard was checked
> with memtest86+ before being placed in service running omen.com.
>
Maybe use an out of box solution:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IomAerbV7g
--
