Allegedly, on or about 01 August 2013, Marko Vojinovic sent:
> Speaking hypothetically (and playing the devil's advocate a bit), the
> fact that the bugreports were not responded to doesn't mean that they
> were not looked at or maybe reported upstream. It can happen that the
> upstream devs alread
T.C. Hollingsworth writes:
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Sam Varshavchik
wrote:
> I thought that it was an RPM bug, but it's really a package bug, but it's
> really really something that RPM should handle, but does not, so it should
> really be an RPM bug.
It's definitely an RPM bug, just
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> I thought that it was an RPM bug, but it's really a package bug, but it's
> really really something that RPM should handle, but does not, so it should
> really be an RPM bug.
It's definitely an RPM bug, just one that is really, really hard
Rahul Sundaram writes:
Hi
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 6:58 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
There is no real conflict. Something in RPM is FUbared.
bugzilla # ? Thanks
This can't be an obscure bug, it was fairly obvious that everyone who
upgrades is going to run into it. Didn't even bother t
Joe Zeff writes:
On 08/01/2013 03:58 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
It's some kind of an RPM bug. I ran into this when upgrading from F18 to
F19. The solution, on every box, was trivial. yum remove firefox, then
yum install it. You'll be able to reinstall firefox just fine.
And that's what I fin
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 2:07 PM, David wrote:
> Are they still active 'in' Fedora 18 or fedora 19? If yes then reenter them.
Please don't create new bugs just because old ones were closed; it
makes things messier. If you open a new one every time a Fedora
release goes EOL it's much harder to tell
On 08/02/13 06:54, Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 08/01/2013 03:38 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
>> Yep I just got 3 closures of bugs reported in F17 that were looked at
>> and subsequently fixed in F18 but not back ported. I know there will be
>> several other when F18 reaches EOL since the next version of
On 08/01/2013 04:02 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Atleast for me, I just noticed a few bug reports being closed that I
had taken a look at earlier, decided that I will focus on other bugs
since it was a low priority issue and the danger of introducing new
problems were higher. Should I have respond
On 08/01/2013 03:58 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
It's some kind of an RPM bug. I ran into this when upgrading from F18 to
F19. The solution, on every box, was trivial. yum remove firefox, then
yum install it. You'll be able to reinstall firefox just fine.
And that's what I finally did.
There i
On 08/01/2013 03:55 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
If all else fails, I'd use "rpm -e firefox" and subsequently "yum
install firefox". I know it's not the cleanest and most proper way to
deal with it, but I believe that rpm would actually do what it's told to
do. After that it would be up to yum to f
Hi
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 6:58 PM, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
>
> There is no real conflict. Something in RPM is FUbared.
>
bugzilla # ? Thanks
Rahul
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listin
Hi
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 6:54 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 08/01/2013 03:38 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
>
>> Yep I just got 3 closures of bugs reported in F17 that were looked
>> at and subsequently fixed in F18 but not back ported. I know there will be
>> several other when F18 reaches EOL since
Joe Zeff writes:
On 08/01/2013 03:11 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
You have two firefox packages installed. There are multiple ways of fixing
this
with or without yum.
No, I don't. I never did. I had the fc17 version of firefox 22 and
couldn't update to the f19 version of firefox 22 be
On 08/01/2013 03:38 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
Yep I just got 3 closures of bugs reported in F17 that were looked at and
subsequently fixed in F18 but not back ported. I know there will be several
other when F18 reaches EOL since the next version of LibreOffice fixed some and
F18 will remain
On Thu, 01 Aug 2013 15:30:25 -0700
Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 08/01/2013 03:14 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> > (1) do "yum distro-sync full",
> > (2) make sure that /etc/os-release says Fedora 19, and
> > (3) check that repository definitions under/etc/yum.repos.d/
> > actually point to Fedora 19 repos?
On 08/01/2013 03:25 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
While one could consider not answering a bugreport to be a display of
bad manners, David is right that you should check if the bug is
resolved in the later versions of Fedora before getting angry about
being ignored.
Actually, I've had a few that g
On 08/02/13 06:25, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Aug 2013 14:25:30 -0700
> Joe Zeff wrote:
>> On 08/01/2013 02:07 PM, David wrote:
>>> On 8/1/2013 4:31 PM, Tethys wrote:
So here I am, sat with an inbox full of bugs that I reported when
F17 came out and now they're being closed as F
On 08/01/2013 03:14 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
(1) do "yum distro-sync full",
(2) make sure that /etc/os-release says Fedora 19, and
(3) check that repository definitions under/etc/yum.repos.d/
actually point to Fedora 19 repos?
Asked and answered, several times.
--
users mailing list
users@lis
On 08/01/2013 03:11 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
You have two firefox packages installed. There are multiple ways of fixing this
with or without yum.
No, I don't. I never did. I had the fc17 version of firefox 22 and
couldn't update to the f19 version of firefox 22 because of a file
confl
On Thu, 01 Aug 2013 14:25:30 -0700
Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 08/01/2013 02:07 PM, David wrote:
> > On 8/1/2013 4:31 PM, Tethys wrote:
> >> So here I am, sat with an inbox full of bugs that I reported when
> >> F17 came out and now they're being closed as F17 is EOL. Once
> >> again, several of them don
On Thu, 01 Aug 2013 13:51:46 -0700
Joe Zeff wrote:
> There's one package that I can't get upgraded, and it's driving me up
> the wall because every time I run an update via yum or yumex, I have
> to remember to exclude it: firefox. Here's the results of my latest
> try:
>
> Transaction check er
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 3:31 PM, Tethys wrote:
> So here I am, sat with an inbox full of bugs that I reported when F17
> came out and now they're being closed as F17 is EOL. Once again,
> several of them don't appear to have even been looked over *at all* by
> the package maintainer. I wonder why I
On 08/01/2013 03:51 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
> Transaction check error:
> file /usr/lib/firefox/browser/defaults/preferences from install of
> firefox-22.0-1.fc19.i686 conflicts with file from package
> firefox-22.0-1.fc17.i686
You have two firefox packages installed. There are multiple ways of fixi
Cut 'n' loose :)
This is an embedded device,
lspci:
Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTL8188CE 802.11b/g/n WiFi Adapter
[10ec:8176] (rev 01)
Kernel driver in use: rtl8192ce
- filename:
/lib/modules/$(uname-r)/kernel/drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/
rtl8192ce/rtl8192ce.ko
- rpm: kernel
- firmware:
On 01/08/13 14:42, Reindl Harald wrote:
* insert the iso-image in the virtual CD drive
* select to boot from CD in the *virtual BIOS*
nobody burns iso images to a physical media for use them in any VM
google: "virtualbox CD iso image"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oobxm02UrBE
Ok, that was wh
On 08/01/2013 02:07 PM, David wrote:
On 8/1/2013 4:31 PM, Tethys wrote:
So here I am, sat with an inbox full of bugs that I reported when F17
came out and now they're being closed as F17 is EOL. Once again,
several of them don't appear to have even been looked over *at all* by
the package mainta
On 8/1/2013 4:31 PM, Tethys wrote:
> So here I am, sat with an inbox full of bugs that I reported when F17
> came out and now they're being closed as F17 is EOL. Once again,
> several of them don't appear to have even been looked over *at all* by
> the package maintainer. I wonder why I bother some
On Thu, 1 Aug 2013, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 01.08.2013 21:35, schrieb Bill Oliver:
On Thu, 1 Aug 2013, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 01.08.2013 21:02, schrieb Bill Oliver:
One more note. As I've mentioned before, I do a full wipe and installation
periodically on my machines. This can
be a has
There's one package that I can't get upgraded, and it's driving me up
the wall because every time I run an update via yum or yumex, I have to
remember to exclude it: firefox. Here's the results of my latest try:
Transaction check error:
file /usr/lib/firefox/browser/defaults/preferences from
On 08/01/2013 01:31 PM, Tethys wrote:
So here I am, sat with an inbox full of bugs that I reported when F17
came out and now they're being closed as F17 is EOL. Once again,
several of them don't appear to have even been looked over *at all* by
the package maintainer. I wonder why I bother sometim
Hello,
On my laptop with fedora 19, I cannot easily transfer my pictures.
The camera does not seem to be recognized.
However,
After a very long time I was able to mount it from /dev/sdb1 and copy
my files. It is not not very convenient!
Any idea? It works fine from another machine (fedora 18).
So here I am, sat with an inbox full of bugs that I reported when F17
came out and now they're being closed as F17 is EOL. Once again,
several of them don't appear to have even been looked over *at all* by
the package maintainer. I wonder why I bother sometimes...
Tet
--
"Java is a DSL for takin
Am 01.08.2013 21:35, schrieb Bill Oliver:
> On Thu, 1 Aug 2013, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> Am 01.08.2013 21:02, schrieb Bill Oliver:
>>> One more note. As I've mentioned before, I do a full wipe and installation
>>> periodically on my machines. This can
>>> be a hassle if one is left re-installin
Am 01.08.2013 21:02, schrieb Bill Oliver:
> One more note. As I've mentioned before, I do a full wipe and installation
> periodically on my machines. This can
> be a hassle if one is left re-installing other virtual OSs as well. I have
> found that, with VirtualBox, I can
> simply back up the
Am 01.08.2013 20:31, schrieb Bob Goodwin ~ Zuni:
> On 01/08/13 13:18, Joachim Backes wrote:
>>> Ok, I give up, wont waste any more effort on that then but it really
>>> diminishes the usefulness of VB!
>>>
>> Did you install the Vbox extension pack? It's needed for USB access, even in
>> the OSE
On 08/01/2013 11:43 AM, Bob Goodwin ~ Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
>
> VirtualBox defaults to using the CDROM/DVD drive which is pretty
> worthless unless you have a supply of blanks, I don't have many on hand
> presently. I have been trying to make the USB function work without much
> success.
>
>
On Thu, 1 Aug 2013, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 01.08.2013 21:02, schrieb Bill Oliver:
One more note. As I've mentioned before, I do a full wipe and installation
periodically on my machines. This can
be a hassle if one is left re-installing other virtual OSs as well. I have
found that, with
On 08/01/2013 12:18 PM, Suvayu Ali wrote:
The colours the OP is refering to is not the coloured output of ls.
That is controlled by the environment variable LS_COLORS. The OP has to
make sure his PS1 variable does not have any ANSI colour escapes. If
you are interested, take a look at my respon
On Thu, Aug 01, 2013 at 11:49:27AM -0700, Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 08/01/2013 06:20 AM, Tom Horsley wrote:
> >On Thu, 01 Aug 2013 09:07:07 -0400
> >Neal Becker wrote:
> >
> >>I suspect colored prompts are confusing emacs tramp. What's the easiest
> >>way to
> >>turn it off for all users (especially r
Hi,
> Will do, but I'm not sure when I'll have the need just yet.
No need to hurry.
I could try myself at the cost of wasted media and the risc
that my hardware and system differ too much from yours.
Kernel 2.6, burner at USB, ... several reasons why i might be
unable to reproduce.
So it is bette
On Thu, 1 Aug 2013, Bill Oliver wrote:
I can read and write to a flash drive without problems. It worked out of the
box for me. I tried to post a screenshot, but it got held up in moderation.
In the old versions of VirtualBox, USB support was in the "guest additions"
package, as I rememb
On Thu, 1 Aug 2013, Bob Goodwin ~ Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
On 01/08/13 12:54, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 01.08.2013 18:43, schrieb Bob Goodwin ~ Zuni:
VirtualBox defaults to using the CDROM/DVD drive which is pretty worthless
unless you have a supply of blanks, I
don't have many on hand prese
On 8/1/2013 2:31 PM, Bob Goodwin ~ Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
> On 01/08/13 13:18, Joachim Backes wrote:
>>> Ok, I give up, wont waste any more effort on that then but it really
>>> diminishes the usefulness of VB!
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Bob
>>>
>>
>> Did you install the Vbox extension pack? It's
On 08/01/2013 06:20 AM, Tom Horsley wrote:
On Thu, 01 Aug 2013 09:07:07 -0400
Neal Becker wrote:
I suspect colored prompts are confusing emacs tramp. What's the easiest way to
turn it off for all users (especially root)?
There is a whole slew of things in /etc/profile that turn on
annoying e
Am 01.08.2013 20:31, schrieb Bob Goodwin ~ Zuni, Virginia, USA:
I have the Fedora 19 DVD iso saved to my NFS. I can't seem to find any
way to make it install from that either short of saving it to a DVD
firs and don't know where to find answers to these questions. Perhaps
I don't have the rig
On 01/08/13 13:18, Joachim Backes wrote:
Ok, I give up, wont waste any more effort on that then but it really
diminishes the usefulness of VB!
Thanks,
Bob
Did you install the Vbox extension pack? It's needed for USB access,
even in the OSE version!
Joachim Backes
No, I didn't know it e
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Richard Shaw wrote:
> > cdrecord without was at 6X and cdrskin without at about 4X
>
> Source code and man page of cdrskin indicate that a burn
> run on BD-R has a transfer chunk size of 32 KiB if not
> - option stream_recording=on
Am 01.08.2013 18:43, schrieb Bob Goodwin ~ Zuni:
>
> VirtualBox defaults to using the CDROM/DVD drive which is pretty worthless
> unless you have a supply of blanks, I
> don't have many on hand presently. I have been trying to make the USB
> function work without much success.
>
> Googling su
On 08/01/2013 07:08 PM, Bob Goodwin ~ Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
On 01/08/13 12:54, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 01.08.2013 18:43, schrieb Bob Goodwin ~ Zuni:
VirtualBox defaults to using the CDROM/DVD drive which is pretty worthless
unless you have a supply of blanks, I
don't have many on hand pr
On 01/08/13 12:54, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 01.08.2013 18:43, schrieb Bob Goodwin ~ Zuni:
VirtualBox defaults to using the CDROM/DVD drive which is pretty worthless
unless you have a supply of blanks, I
don't have many on hand presently. I have been trying to make the USB function
work without
Hi,
Richard Shaw wrote:
> cdrecord without was at 6X and cdrskin without at about 4X
Source code and man page of cdrskin indicate that a burn
run on BD-R has a transfer chunk size of 32 KiB if not
- option stream_recording=on is given
- or option dvd_obs=64k is given
- or ./configure option --ena
VirtualBox defaults to using the CDROM/DVD drive which is pretty
worthless unless you have a supply of blanks, I don't have many on hand
presently. I have been trying to make the USB function work without much
success.
Googling suggests group/user problems, I have bobg and root listed as
vb
On Wed, 2013-07-31 at 10:45 -0400, Bob Goodwin ~ Zuni, Virginia, USA
wrote:
>
> However, systemctl setup vboxdrv.service still does not run:
>
> [root@box10 bobg]# /sbin/service vboxdrv setup
> Redirecting to /bin/systemctl setup vboxdrv.service
> Unknown operation 'setup'.
Virtual Box appare
Hi
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 11:38 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 07/31/2013 08:57 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>
>>
>> I am not aware of the policy you are referring to. It sounds like a
>> misunderstanding. Perhaps you can provide a reference?
>>
>
> I don't know if it's an official policy or not, but
On Thu, 01 Aug 2013 09:07:07 -0400
Neal Becker wrote:
> I suspect colored prompts are confusing emacs tramp. What's the easiest way
> to
> turn it off for all users (especially root)?
There is a whole slew of things in /etc/profile that turn on
annoying environment variables which enable thing
On Thu, Aug 01, 2013 at 09:07:07AM -0400, Neal Becker wrote:
> I suspect colored prompts are confusing emacs tramp. What's the easiest way
> to
> turn it off for all users (especially root)?
You have to set your PS1 in your ~/.bashrc such that there are no colour
escapes. This is what I do:
I suspect colored prompts are confusing emacs tramp. What's the easiest way to
turn it off for all users (especially root)?
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Co
Hello,
Am 31.07.2013 schrieb Joe Zeff:
> Ever since, the GUI has been unusable even
> after I cleaned up over 1,000 duplicate packages from the CLI.
> There's a mouse pointer, but it doesn't move, and the keyboard is
> ignored.
Same problem here (on a clean Fedora 19 installation and also on
Fedor
58 matches
Mail list logo
