On 8/31/24 19:39, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 8/31/24 7:35 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
On 8/31/24 19:10, Samuel Sieb wrote:
I wonder if the spice agent can't communicate with xfce because it
isn't providing the necessary interfaces.
# rpm -qa \*spice\*
spice-vdagent-0.22.1-6.fc40.x86_64
# sy
On 8/31/24 19:39, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 8/31/24 7:35 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
On 8/31/24 19:10, Samuel Sieb wrote:
I wonder if the spice agent can't communicate with xfce because it
isn't providing the necessary interfaces.
# rpm -qa \*spice\*
spice-vdagent-0.22.1-6.fc40.x86_64
# sy
On 8/31/24 7:35 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
On 8/31/24 19:10, Samuel Sieb wrote:
I wonder if the spice agent can't communicate with xfce because it
isn't providing the necessary interfaces.
# rpm -qa \*spice\*
spice-vdagent-0.22.1-6.fc40.x86_64
# systemctl status spice-vdagent
Unit spic
On 8/31/24 19:10, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 8/31/24 6:43 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
On 8/31/24 18:33, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 8/31/24 6:29 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
On 8/31/24 17:43, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 8/31/24 4:32 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
On 8/31/24 16:09, Samuel Sieb w
On 8/31/24 6:43 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
On 8/31/24 18:33, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 8/31/24 6:29 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
On 8/31/24 17:43, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 8/31/24 4:32 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
On 8/31/24 16:09, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 8/31/24 3:53 PM, ToddAndMarg
On 8/31/24 6:43 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
On 8/31/24 18:33, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 8/31/24 6:29 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
On 8/31/24 17:43, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 8/31/24 4:32 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
On 8/31/24 16:09, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 8/31/24 3:53 PM, ToddAndMarg
On 8/31/24 18:33, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 8/31/24 6:29 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
On 8/31/24 17:43, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 8/31/24 4:32 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
On 8/31/24 16:09, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 8/31/24 3:53 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
On my Fedora 40 XFCe/MATE qemu-
On 8/31/24 6:29 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
On 8/31/24 17:43, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 8/31/24 4:32 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
On 8/31/24 16:09, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 8/31/24 3:53 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
On my Fedora 40 XFCe/MATE qemu-kvm guest virtual
machine configures f
On 8/31/24 17:43, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 8/31/24 4:32 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
On 8/31/24 16:09, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 8/31/24 3:53 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
On my Fedora 40 XFCe/MATE qemu-kvm guest virtual
machine configures for QXL video. How do I
install the guest QXL drive
On 8/31/24 4:32 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
On 8/31/24 16:09, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 8/31/24 3:53 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
On my Fedora 40 XFCe/MATE qemu-kvm guest virtual
machine configures for QXL video. How do I
install the guest QXL drivers?
They're included by default as p
On 8/31/24 16:09, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 8/31/24 3:53 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
On my Fedora 40 XFCe/MATE qemu-kvm guest virtual
machine configures for QXL video. How do I
install the guest QXL drivers?
They're included by default as part of the kernel.
When I expand the windows si
On 8/31/24 3:53 PM, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
On my Fedora 40 XFCe/MATE qemu-kvm guest virtual
machine configures for QXL video. How do I
install the guest QXL drivers?
They're included by default as part of the kernel.
--
___
users mailing list
Hi All,
On my Fedora 40 XFCe/MATE qemu-kvm guest virtual
machine configures for QXL video. How do I
install the guest QXL drivers?
Yours in confusion,
-T
--
~~
Computers are like air conditioners.
They malfunction when you open windows
~~
On 8/31/24 1:41 PM, Barry Scott wrote:
On 31 Aug 2024, at 20:17, home user via users
wrote:
1634 Aug 30 08:11:11 coyote cupsd[1258]: Unknown directive BrowseOrder on line
6 of /etc/cups/cupsd.conf.
I think your /etc/cups/cupsd.conf is out of date.
I do not see lines with the keywords tha
> On 31 Aug 2024, at 20:17, home user via users
> wrote:
>
> 1634 Aug 30 08:11:11 coyote cupsd[1258]: Unknown directive BrowseOrder on
> line 6 of /etc/cups/cupsd.conf.
I think your /etc/cups/cupsd.conf is out of date.
I do not see lines with the keywords that the logs report in the file on
good afternoon,
(f39 standalone workstation, last patched Thursday, August 29)
The next group of boot log messages of possible concern is related to cups. I
hope that we don't need context lines for this. Here are the messages (with
line numbers):
- - - - - -
1634 Aug 30 08:11:11 coyote cu
On 8/31/24 10:58 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Sat, 2024-08-31 at 09:26 -0600, home user via users wrote:
My apologies for wording my question vaguely.
I think that when I bought this workstation 11 years ago, I bought
the motherboard separately from the tower. But it was 11 years ago,
s
On Sat, 2024-08-31 at 09:26 -0600, home user via users wrote:
> > You check the motherboard manufacturer's web page for BIOS updates. For
> > an 11-year old mobo it's unlikely that there'll be anything recent, but
> > you may get a more up to date version of the firmware than what you
> > have. In
On 8/30/24 1:10 PM, home user via users wrote:
Good afternoon,
(f39 standalone workstation last patched Thursday, August 29)
My boot log (from journalctl -b > jlog.txt) contains the messages below. Note
that for context, I'm including the last 5 lines before the errors and the first 5
lines
On 8/31/24 5:36 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Fri, 2024-08-30 at 18:31 -0600, home user via users wrote:
On 8/30/24 5:39 PM, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 3:11 PM home user via users
wrote:
ACPI tables are part of the firmware. You should update your BIOS/UEFI
to the la
On Fri, 2024-08-30 at 18:31 -0600, home user via users wrote:
> On 8/30/24 5:39 PM, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 3:11 PM home user via users
> > wrote:
>
> >
> > ACPI tables are part of the firmware. You should update your BIOS/UEFI
> > to the latest version provided by the
Matthew Saltzman:
> > > Microsoft's August security update included a patch to prevent
> > > vulnerable GRUB2 (susceptible to bypassing UEFI secure boot)
> > > installations from booting.
Tim:
> > Hmm, would they prevent their own system from booting if it had (yet
> > another) security flaw?
> >
> On 31 Aug 2024, at 01:46, home user via users
> wrote:
>
> Actually, in light of what Patrick said, is this going to be worth the
> trouble?
Give the age and the system is working I would not change the BIOS.
barry--
___
users mailing list -- u
23 matches
Mail list logo
