On 09/19/2013 09:29 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2013-09-01 at 18:25 -0700, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX wrote:
The current Noveau does not support the native 2500x1600 resolution
of my 30 inch monitor. Thje most Noveau can hack is 1600x1200,
about half of what the monitor can do.
It's Nouveau
On Thu, 2013-09-05 at 12:15 -0400, John Dulaney wrote:
> RE the Raspberry Pi, alas, Fedroa does not support it; for one it's ARMv6
> and is an old architecture, and the kernel to run it is not fully open source.
Welcome Mike! There is, of course, Pidora:
http://pidora.ca/
the Fedora Remix for t
On Mon, 2013-09-02 at 21:08 -0400, Olga Johnson wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
>
> I would like to join Fedora QA Team.
>
> I'm Olga from Laurel, MD. I'm fairly new to QA field. I'm freelancing
> in Web applications testing and studying testing methodology and
> tools.
>
> I would like to contribute
On Sun, 2013-09-01 at 18:25 -0700, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX wrote:
> The current Noveau does not support the native 2500x1600 resolution
> of my 30 inch monitor. Thje most Noveau can hack is 1600x1200,
> about half of what the monitor can do.
It's Nouveau. noUveau. no U veau. There are two Us in it,
On 09/19/2013 03:53 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> On Sep 19, 2013, at 8:56 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
>>
>> Given the current state of the art, all known UEFI implementations for
>> VMs require the use of a FAT driver whose license forbids redistribution
>> for general purpose use, which means Fedora ca
Chris Murphy (li...@colorremedies.com) said:
>
> On Sep 19, 2013, at 8:56 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
> >
> > Given the current state of the art, all known UEFI implementations for
> > VMs require the use of a FAT driver whose license forbids redistribution
> > for general purpose use, which means Fe
On Sep 19, 2013, at 4:01 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
>
> Not speaking to any issues of legality or non-legality, but fairly sure he's
> referring to the FAT driver in the EFI bios itself, which would have to be
> distributed in the EFI bios used by QEMU/KVM for virtual systems. It's not
> the lin
On Sep 19, 2013, at 4:13 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> I understand that distinction but as there is a FAT driver in the linux
> kernel distributed with Fedora, I don't see why it's suddenly a problem for
> an EFI virtual firmware that needs a FAT driver to ship with Fedora.
>
> Also, Virtualbo
On Sep 19, 2013, at 8:56 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
>
> Given the current state of the art, all known UEFI implementations for
> VMs require the use of a FAT driver whose license forbids redistribution
> for general purpose use, which means Fedora cannot ship it.
I don't understand this.
First, t
At the Fedora 20 Alpha Go/No-Go Meeting #2 that just occurred, it was
agreed to Go with the Fedora 20 Alpha by Fedora QA, Release Engineering
and Development.
Fedora 20 Alpha will be publicly available on Tuesday, September 24, 2013.
Meeting details can be seen here:
Minutes: http://bit.ly/16chiA
On 09/19/2013 06:53 AM, Greg Woodbury wrote:
>>>
>>> However, there's one corner case to consider. Due to some licensing
>>> issues we still can't test UEFI in VMs.
> Am I being dense, or missing something?
> What "licensing issues"?
>
> I have a new Intel "Haswell" (i5-4430/z87) achitecture mach
64 bit netinst on jump drive still can not configure HD
if booted with UEFI on an Asus p8z77-vle plus and 3770k.
I did not trybooting without UEFI on this machine.
Same jump drive installed nominally on a E6550
on an older mobo plain boot.
--
Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX c...@omen.com www.omen
On 09/19/2013 06:49 AM, Tim Flink wrote:
On Thu, 19 Sep 2013 05:26:03 -0400 (EDT)
Kamil Paral wrote:
1) modify the alpha criterion so that it only requires optical
media to work if the isos are correctly sized
2) require booting from optical media at beta when the isos are
requir
On Thu, 19 Sep 2013 06:23:04 -0400
Bob Lightfoot wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 09/19/2013 05:26 AM, Kamil Paral wrote:
> >> This conversation was started on Monday in the QA meeting but I
> >> forgot to send anything out to the list. We're a bit short on
> >> ti
On Thu, 19 Sep 2013 05:26:03 -0400 (EDT)
Kamil Paral wrote:
> > This conversation was started on Monday in the QA meeting but I
> > forgot to send anything out to the list. We're a bit short on time,
> > so a quick vote would be appreciated
> >
> > Tim
> >
> >
> > As currently written, the Fed
> The rewrite sounds good to me. Just one possible improvement. I work
> almost exclusively with VM for testing so iso size doesn't matter.
> Should it be an alpha requirement that the isos we're talking about
> boot and install in the VM environment which has no care for size?
I think that shou
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/19/2013 05:26 AM, Kamil Paral wrote:
>> This conversation was started on Monday in the QA meeting but I
>> forgot to send anything out to the list. We're a bit short on
>> time, so a quick vote would be appreciated
>>
>> Tim
>>
>>
>> As curren
> This conversation was started on Monday in the QA meeting but I forgot
> to send anything out to the list. We're a bit short on time, so a quick
> vote would be appreciated
>
> Tim
>
>
> As currently written, the Fedora 20 alpha release requirements [1] state
> that optical media must boot:
>
+1 for the revision.
// Mike
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
This conversation was started on Monday in the QA meeting but I forgot
to send anything out to the list. We're a bit short on time, so a quick
vote would be appreciated
Tim
As currently written, the Fedora 20 alpha release requirements [1] state
that optical media must boot:
Release-blocking
> For those who weren't present at today's blocker review meeting -
> http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-blocker-review/2013-09-18/ - we
> agreed to change the Alpha criteria to require only console updating to
> work, and move the requirement for graphical updating to work to Beta or
> later.
21 matches
Mail list logo
