Re: Thanks to Fedora community; Installation & Disk Partitioning ISSUE

On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 9:47 AM, Greg Woods wrote: All this was just an answer to the question "why would anybody ever want > to boot from /home". I don't claim this is the optimal setup. > Yes, it was just a question for information point of view, and now cleared that /home is for the data stora

Re: An idea: good for community implementation

On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 9:37 AM, Michael Ekstrand wrote: I think this already happens, except twice a year rather than once - > every release. When a new Fedora version is released, there are parties > around the world for Fedora users and developers to gather and > celebrate. Not all in one place,

Re: gnomebaker [WAS: Re: question(s) on Brassero (maybe bug)]

Off the top, isn't this bug the same ole bug that happens in nearly every new Linux distro that runs with GnomeBaker/Brassero & MusicPlayer..? I'm bets if all the related glitch-data in the old OS's was compiled, the experts might come-up with a viable cure-solution to the problem never occurring

F-16 should have more easy custom user default-options, right to the core...

F-16 should have more easy custom user options, all of them, right to the core... If something is fun the whole world loves it... Most of my Internet work is done downloading and uploading pix-edits.. Sure would be sweet if when I clicked "save pix", the "save" would happen right where the curs

GNOME 3 with GNOME 2 look via Linux Mint Extensions

http://www.webupd8.org/2011/11/try-new-mint-gnome-shell-extensions.html Linux Mint team has done it again, they have made excellent set of extensions (and used some existing ones) to recreate GNOME 2 look in Gnome-Shell. If these extensions work on GNOME 3.2 expect a really slick Fusion Linux 16

Re: Is btrfs ready to be default fs in F17 ?

On 06.11.2011, Alan Cox wrote: > B tree based file systems ought to be wonderful things. They can do > a lot of stuff a traditional cylinder group based file system cannot > do nicely. But they've also proved to be very fragile, very hard > to get right and very difficult to performance tune f

Re: Thanks to Fedora community; Installation & Disk Partitioning ISSUE

On Mon, 2011-11-07 at 04:50 +1030, Tim wrote: > Then you have funny things, like: A laptop that will suspend and wake > up, but goes permanently into a coma if you try to hibernate then wake > up. Yes, unfortunately, whether Linux suspend and/or hibernate will work well is a function of exactl

Re: Thanks to Fedora community; Installation & Disk Partitioning ISSUE

On Mon, 2011-11-07 at 04:51 +1030, Tim wrote: > On Sun, 2011-11-06 at 07:43 -0700, Greg Woods wrote: > > The /boot partition is where Fedora boots from. It contains a > > grub/grub.conf file for booting various Fedora kernels. I need some > > other partition to use for the main boot loader. > > Yo

Re: Thanks to Fedora community; Installation & Disk Partitioning ISSUE

On 11/06/2011 10:21 AM, Tim wrote: > You can have more than one boot partition, you can even give them all > the same name (which can be a nuisance to sort through), or different > names (a bit more logical). If that's what you want, you're probably best off giving them descriptive labels, such a

/boot on MD RAID-1 broken in F16 anaconda

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=750480 Ouch! -- Ian Pilcher arequip...@gmail.com "If you're going to shift my paradigm ... at least buy me dinner first." =

Re: Thanks to Fedora community; Installation & Disk Partitioning ISSUE

On Sun, 2011-11-06 at 07:43 -0700, Greg Woods wrote: > The /boot partition is where Fedora boots from. It contains a > grub/grub.conf file for booting various Fedora kernels. I need some > other partition to use for the main boot loader. You can have more than one boot partition, you can even give

Re: Thanks to Fedora community; Installation & Disk Partitioning ISSUE

On Sun, 2011-11-06 at 07:59 -0700, Greg Woods wrote: > Essentially, hibernation is a method of writing the contents of RAM > and the CPU registers to the swap space, then powering down the > computer. When the computer comes back on, it reloads the RAM and the > CPU registers from the hard drive, a

Re: Is btrfs ready to be default fs in F17 ?

> I´ve run Btree based HPFS for over a decade... > http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~bolo/shipyard/hpfs.html HPFS is for the most part a traditional Unix file system with cylinder groups. You have superblock (block 16), and then 8MB bands of data with allocation bitmaps between them. Sound familiar ? It

Re: Is btrfs ready to be default fs in F17 ?

On 11/06/2011 12:11 PM, Alan Cox wrote: > > Right now btrfs is not a production fs. In 18 months maybe, in six months > the bits like fsck may exist in a usable form but I don't believe there > will be enough testing history to be sure. > > It took a very very long time to get the reiserfs fsck u

Re: Is btrfs ready to be default fs in F17 ?

> That´s what I care about. You seem more focused on scaring people with the > fear that it might not work, eat users´ data and their children, too. > "perhaps". Right now btrfs is not a production fs. In 18 months maybe, in six months the bits like fsck may exist in a usable form but I don't beli

Re: Is btrfs ready to be default fs in F17 ?

On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 12:40, Alan Cox wrote: > Yes it'll change eventually perhaps - Oracle, and Red Hat and others > according to Chris Mason are committed to making it work. > That´s what I care about. You seem more focused on scaring people with the fear that it might not work, eat users´ da

Re: Is btrfs ready to be default fs in F17 ?

On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 12:40, Alan Cox wrote: > B tree based > file systems ought to be wonderful things. They can do a lot of stuff a > traditional cylinder group based file system cannot do nicely. But > they've also proved to be very fragile, very hard to get right and very > difficult to perf

Re: Is btrfs ready to be default fs in F17 ?

On Sun, 6 Nov 2011 11:20:22 -0300 Fernando Cassia wrote: > On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 07:30, Alan Cox wrote: > > > Plus in a funny way btrfs is now in part un-needed, > > > Funny how so many people think the btrfs designers are morons. Funny how some people read strange things into discussions f

Re: Thanks to Fedora community; Installation & Disk Partitioning ISSUE

On Sat, 2011-11-05 at 11:50 -0400, Linux Tyro wrote: > > I really don't know what is hibernation and all that. Can you step by > step let me know or point me to the link what is hibdernation for > beginners? Sorry, I just can't resist: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=linux%20hibernation Essentially, hibe

autofs/nfs issue with Fedora 16

I use autofs to mount a nfs share that contains both the contents of the various Fedora install DVD's and packages I've built for a local repository. This has worked quite well on all my Fedora 14 & 15 machines. I updated my laptop to Fedora 16 and it's having trouble see below: [richard@laptop l

Re: Thanks to Fedora community; Installation & Disk Partitioning ISSUE

On Sun, 2011-11-06 at 21:51 +1030, Tim wrote: > > As you say, you only need to chainload through an extra location to be > able to get around the "computer always resumes without giving me a > choice" problem. You could chainload to home, or to any other > partition. Using home would seem an od

Re: Thanks to Fedora community; Installation & Disk Partitioning ISSUE

On Sat, 2011-11-05 at 08:55 -0700, Joe Zeff wrote: > On 11/05/2011 08:42 AM, Greg Woods wrote: > The master boot block contains pointers to the /home boot > > configuration that has nothing in it but chainloaders. Then grub inside > > Fedora is installed only on the Fedora root partition > > Woul

Re: An idea: good for community implementation

On 11/06/2011 07:21 AM, Linux Tyro wrote: > Fedora should celebrate every year its birth-day, like having a great > party and celebration of its success and an optional party for all to > attend (people attending with their own money of travel) and so it > becomes more like that of 'a great achieve

Re: Is btrfs ready to be default fs in F17 ?

On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 07:30, Alan Cox wrote: > Plus in a funny way btrfs is now in part un-needed, Funny how so many people think the btrfs designers are morons. Or as if it were a half-baked project cooked hours ago.BTRFS is five years old. "In 2008, the principal developer of the ext3

An idea: good for community implementation

Hi, I have an idea as follows: Fedora should celebrate every year its birth-day, like having a great party and celebration of its success and an optional party for all to attend (people attending with their own money of travel) and so it becomes more like that of 'a great achievement', how this i

Re: Preparing for F16 / uid/gid limit

Den 06. nov. 2011 12:21, skrev Tim: > On Sat, 2011-11-05 at 19:57 +0100, Frode wrote: >> my uncertainty revolves around whether there are other things that >> could be a problem when changing the uid/gid for an existing account >> in F15, e.g. files in /etc or other places that might need to be >>

Re: Is btrfs ready to be default fs in F17 ?

Alan Cox lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> writes: > > > But what about those atractive features (some ZFS-like) the users would > > like to > > have, e.g.: > > - checksumming > > - roll back > > - snapshots > > - pools > > > > Is it possible to implement them on ext4 ? > > Possibly but the entire point of

Re: A general history question

On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 1:37 PM, inode0 wrote: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_distribution > I read this.. On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 3:10 PM, Don Quixote de la Mancha < quix...@dulcineatech.com> wrote: Richard Stallman and his colleagues at The Freesoftware Foundation > assert that the prop

Re: Is btrfs ready to be default fs in F17 ?

> But what about those atractive features (some ZFS-like) the users would like > to > have, e.g.: > - checksumming > - roll back > - snapshots > - pools > > Is it possible to implement them on ext4 ? Possibly but the entire point of ext4 was to grow ext3 and do so in a maximally safe fashion. So

Re: Is btrfs ready to be default fs in F17 ?

Alan Cox lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> writes: > ... > Plus in a funny way btrfs is now in part un-needed, With the move to SSD > devices (which looks like it will speed up rapidly due to the > catastrophic flooding) the seek and I/O rate problems mostly go away > for existing fs types. > ... But what ab

Re: Thanks to Fedora community; Installation & Disk Partitioning ISSUE

On Sat, 2011-11-05 at 09:42 -0600, Greg Woods wrote: > I have a system with Windows dual boot, and I want to be able to > hibernate Linux, boot into Windows, and then resume Linux from > hibernation. With recent versions of Fedora, this is not possible from > the standard grub configuration, becaus

Re: Preparing for F16 / uid/gid limit

On Sat, 2011-11-05 at 19:57 +0100, Frode wrote: > my uncertainty revolves around whether there are other things that > could be a problem when changing the uid/gid for an existing account > in F15, e.g. files in /etc or other places that might need to be > modified as well. (I know /etc is not supp

Re: Is btrfs ready to be default fs in F17 ?

I think btrfs as default would be somewhere between very brave and negligent at this point until it has a good well tested fsck tool and some of the underlying other performance problems are sorted out nicely. If your desktop is a bit iffy it crashes maybe it annoys people, it's hard to use it's a

Re: Is btrfs ready to be default fs in F17 ?

Fernando Cassia gmail.com> writes: > > > On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 15:45, JB gmail.com> wrote: > Perhaps you could make your statement in the upcoming Fedora Project Board and > FESCo elections > > > Nobody forces you to use BTRFS, or IBM JFS or XFS for that matter. But I´d > like to have the o

Re: Preparing for F16 / uid/gid limit

On 06/11/11 02:57, Frode wrote: > there are other things that could be a problem when changing the uid/gid > for an existing account in F15, e.g. files in /etc or other places that > might need to be modified as well. (I know /etc is not supposed to hold > user specific info; just using it as an e

Re: Is btrfs ready to be default fs in F17 ?

On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 15:45, JB wrote: > Perhaps you could make your statement in the upcoming Fedora Project Board > and > FESCo elections > Nobody forces you to use BTRFS, or IBM JFS or XFS for that matter. But I´d like to have the option of using BTRFS available. Instead of creating a campa

Re: Is btrfs ready to be default fs in F17 ?

On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 15:45, JB wrote: > Various tests show ext3 and ext4 are the leaders, with btrfs in last place > (also using way more CPU than the others). > There are other considerations besides raw speed. H*ck, in OS/2 HPFS386 (written in assembler) was in most scenarios way faster than