> Is Fedora 32 more stable than 33 or vice versa, as on November, 2020?
The older, the more tested, the better patched, the more stable
>
> If a user were to take present state of Rawhide, but not update risky
> packages, would there be any benefit to that ? Meaning to manually
> update, skippin
Take a look here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1895569
It wasn't just you.
I'm not seeing any problems with F32-Mate or F33-Mate. Not sure if it was an
update (unlikely) or something I did (very likely) to trash my Rawhide-Mate
install, but I just reinstalled the latest nightl
I'm not seeing any problems with F32-Mate or F33-Mate. Not sure if it was an
update (unlikely) or something I did (very likely) to trash my Rawhide-Mate
install, but I just reinstalled the latest nightly, and so far, so good.
___
users mailing list --
Is Fedora 32 more stable than 33 or vice versa, as on November, 2020?
While a release is not EOL it tends to stay fairly well synchronized to
the latest release. For example, 33 and 32 are running the same basic
kernel.
If a user were to take present state of Rawhide, but not update ris
On 11/8/20 3:43 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Sun, Nov 08, 2020 at 03:51:02PM -0600, David wrote:
Is Fedora 32 more stable than 33 or vice versa, as on November, 2020?
Based on crash reports, both seem like pretty solid releases. I don't think
one is particularly riskier than the other.
There
On Sun, Nov 08, 2020 at 03:51:02PM -0600, David wrote:
> Is Fedora 32 more stable than 33 or vice versa, as on November, 2020?
Based on crash reports, both seem like pretty solid releases. I don't think
one is particularly riskier than the other.
> If a user were to take present state of Rawhide,
On 10/16/20 10:50 PM, David wrote:
I installed the package "sysbench" and did two operations: "sysbench
memory run" and
"sysbench cpu run", and after about 30 seconds, it listed a bunch of
numbers,
which I have no idea what they mean. I have looked at glances and htop
and cpu-x and have
Thank you.
Let me re-phrase that question. My install is Gnome, ( soon to be
Gnome 40, LOL ! ) I do not
yet know which of my apps besides mediawriter are Qt5. I was reading
another article that the trend
is to move towards flatpak, and that would encourage more Qt5 apps being
used in
On Thu, 2020-09-17 at 10:21 -0500, David wrote:
> I just installed mediawriter and noticed it is a Qt app.What
> other popular apps are Qt in Fedora ?
>
> I just read a year old article about that topic, about the adwaita-qt
> thing, trying to make Qt apps look like gtk apps.
>
> As of Septem
On Thu, 17 Sep 2020 10:21:43 -0500
David wrote:
> Are Qt5 apps lighter ? snappier ? or easier to code than the gtk 3
> counterparts ?
I believe KDE apps are mostly Qt (or a Qt variant with KDE bits wedged in).
I certainly find it easier to code Qt than gtk. The gtk apps I've
debugged from time to
It looks like most of the bumps in the version numbers of the specific
games that I have installed are
just adding or updating the languages translations.
But after tinkering with the game-launcher Athenaeum for a few hours, I do
not yet understand
it very well.
There is an "Update All" feature i
On Jul 7, 2020, at 23:11, David wrote:
> I still have not figured out
> the game-launcher "Athenaeum." I can't get any of the
> games installed with that to update. Is there a separate
> updater inside the game-launcher ? Maybe they are up
> to date, but Gnome Software does not think s
On Sun, 2020-07-05 at 07:57 -0500, David wrote:
> Today, I downloaded the very latest development version of Chromium
> as an appimage, and tried unsuccessfully to run it.
>
> Is that feasible ?
>
> My understanding is that if the app is marked executable, then you
> just click on run in
On Thu, 2020-05-21 at 06:15 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> On 2020-05-21 05:16, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > Just an update on this. After faffing around trying to recover the
> > failing disk, I decided to replace it and start afresh.
> >
> > I formatted 2 1TB drives with ext4 and created a new md
On Wed, 2020-05-20 at 15:50 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 5/20/20 2:16 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > I formatted 2 1TB drives with ext4 and created a new md volume as
> > RAID1. However they are taking many hours to sync, despite being empty.
> > Is this normal?
>
> This is somewhat unclear.
On Wed, 2020-05-20 at 22:16 +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> Also, I presume I should mount the md device, using an fstab entry like
>
> this:
>
>
>
> /dev/md0 /raid ext4defaults0 0
>
>
>
> but attempts to do that give an error:
>
>
>
> mount: /raid:
On 5/20/20 2:16 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
I formatted 2 1TB drives with ext4 and created a new md volume as
RAID1. However they are taking many hours to sync, despite being empty.
Is this normal?
This is somewhat unclear. It sounds like you formatted the drives
before making the raid. I
On 2020-05-21 05:16, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> Just an update on this. After faffing around trying to recover the
> failing disk, I decided to replace it and start afresh.
>
> I formatted 2 1TB drives with ext4 and created a new md volume as
> RAID1. However they are taking many hours to sync, d
On Sat, 2020-05-16 at 11:34 +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-05-15 at 19:57 -0400, Todd Zullinger wrote:
> > George N. White III wrote:
> > > On Fri, 15 May 2020 at 18:41, Patrick O'Callaghan
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Fri, 2020-05-15 at 22:35 +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Sat, 2020-05-16 at 17:18 +0100, Barry Scott wrote:
> > On 15 May 2020, at 11:53, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> >
> > However gsmartcontrol reports that one of the HDDs has internal errors.
> > Would it be best to correct these using mdadm (assuming they can be
> > corrected), and if so, how? Or
> On 15 May 2020, at 11:53, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
>
> However gsmartcontrol reports that one of the HDDs has internal errors.
> Would it be best to correct these using mdadm (assuming they can be
> corrected), and if so, how? Or should I do an offline copy with the
> docking station's "clo
I intentionally partitioned my 3tb drives into 4x750G, and built 4
separate arrays out of it, and used LVM to make it one big device.
#1: it allowed me to use 2x1.5tb in place of a 3tb for a while (I had
the old 1.5tb ones) prior to me buying more 3tb ones, later on it
allowed me to use those 1.5t
Tim:
>> Though it can be surprising to find out how they've used a drive.
>> Such as a 4TB WD MyCloud that provides that 4TB using two 2TB
>> partitions on the *same* drive, using RAID to make them one 4TB. I
>> dunno why they'd do it that way.
George N. White III:
> If you control the hardware
On Fri, 15 May 2020 at 23:09, Tim via users
wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-05-15 at 10:28 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> > This is not so surprising when you realize that most NAS boxes run
> > Linux.
>
> Though it can be surprising to find out how they've used a drive. Such
> as a 4TB WD MyCloud that provi
On Fri, 2020-05-15 at 19:57 -0400, Todd Zullinger wrote:
> George N. White III wrote:
> > On Fri, 15 May 2020 at 18:41, Patrick O'Callaghan
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, 2020-05-15 at 22:35 +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > > > > echo check > /sys/block/md127/md/sync_action
> > >
> > > That's
On Sat, 2020-05-16 at 08:21 +1000, Cameron Simpson wrote:
> On 15May2020 11:53, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > I recently had to throw out an old NAS I've been using for over 10
> > years. However I rescued the 2 HDDs and got a dual-slot USB SATA
> > docking station for them. To my astonishment Fe
On Fri, 2020-05-15 at 10:28 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> This is not so surprising when you realize that most NAS boxes run
> Linux.
Though it can be surprising to find out how they've used a drive. Such
as a 4TB WD MyCloud that provides that 4TB using two 2TB partitions on
the *same* drive, using
George N. White III wrote:
> On Fri, 15 May 2020 at 18:41, Patrick O'Callaghan
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 2020-05-15 at 22:35 +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
echo check > /sys/block/md127/md/sync_action
>>
>> That's giving "permission denied" even with sudo, and with setenforce
>> set to 'off'.
On 5/15/20 3:21 PM, Cameron Simpson wrote:
On 15May2020 11:53, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
Are there any general recommendations for monitoring these beasties? I
don't want to change anything for the time being and will be using the
thing mainly for backup, but I see there is such a thing as mdm
On 15May2020 11:53, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
I recently had to throw out an old NAS I've been using for over 10
years. However I rescued the 2 HDDs and got a dual-slot USB SATA
docking station for them. To my astonishment Fedora recognised them
immediately as a RAID1 array (formatted with XFS)
On Fri, 15 May 2020 at 18:41, Patrick O'Callaghan
wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-05-15 at 22:35 +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > > echo check > /sys/block/md127/md/sync_action
>
> That's giving "permission denied" even with sudo, and with setenforce
> set to 'off'.
>
This can happend if you run :
On Fri, 2020-05-15 at 14:56 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 5/15/20 2:41 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > On Fri, 2020-05-15 at 22:35 +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > > > echo check > /sys/block/md127/md/sync_action
> >
> > That's giving "permission denied" even with sudo, and with setenforc
On 5/15/20 2:41 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Fri, 2020-05-15 at 22:35 +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
echo check > /sys/block/md127/md/sync_action
That's giving "permission denied" even with sudo, and with setenforce
set to 'off'.
First, is that the right md number?
But also, you can'
On Fri, 2020-05-15 at 22:35 +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > echo check > /sys/block/md127/md/sync_action
That's giving "permission denied" even with sudo, and with setenforce
set to 'off'.
poc
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.or
On Fri, 2020-05-15 at 10:27 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 5/15/20 3:53 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > However gsmartcontrol reports that one of the HDDs has internal errors.
> > Would it be best to correct these using mdadm (assuming they can be
> > corrected), and if so, how? Or should I do a
On Fri, 2020-05-15 at 10:28 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 5/15/20 3:53 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > I recently had to throw out an old NAS I've been using for over 10
> > years. However I rescued the 2 HDDs and got a dual-slot USB SATA
> > docking station for them. To my astonishment Fedora
On 5/15/20 3:53 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
I recently had to throw out an old NAS I've been using for over 10
years. However I rescued the 2 HDDs and got a dual-slot USB SATA
docking station for them. To my astonishment Fedora recognised them
immediately as a RAID1 array (formatted with XFS)
On 5/15/20 3:53 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
However gsmartcontrol reports that one of the HDDs has internal errors.
Would it be best to correct these using mdadm (assuming they can be
corrected), and if so, how? Or should I do an offline copy with the
docking station's "clone" button?
It say
On Fri, 15 May 2020 at 09:59, Patrick O'Callaghan
wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-05-15 at 08:50 -0300, George N. White III wrote:
> > > I recently had to throw out an old NAS I've been using for over 10
> > > years. However I rescued the 2 HDDs and got a dual-slot USB SATA
> > > docking station for them.
On Fri, 2020-05-15 at 08:50 -0300, George N. White III wrote:
> > I recently had to throw out an old NAS I've been using for over 10
> > years. However I rescued the 2 HDDs and got a dual-slot USB SATA
> > docking station for them. To my astonishment Fedora recognised them
> > immediately as a RAID
On Fri, 15 May 2020 at 07:54, Patrick O'Callaghan
wrote:
> I recently had to throw out an old NAS I've been using for over 10
> years. However I rescued the 2 HDDs and got a dual-slot USB SATA
> docking station for them. To my astonishment Fedora recognised them
> immediately as a RAID1 array (fo
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 12:44:32 +0100,
Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
One other thing. On connecting the dock, I get this from dmesg:
[259115.502000] sd 7:0:0:0: [sdd] Attached SCSI disk
[259115.505730] sd 7:0:0:1: [sdf] Attached SCSI disk
[259115.820568] md127: Warning: Device sdf1 is misaligne
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 12:32:03 +0100,
Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Fri, 2020-05-15 at 06:20 -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
That's not a good sign, but sometimes you can still get a lot of use out
of such a drive. If you don't want to spend effort figuring out where
the bad sectors are, you
On Fri, 2020-05-15 at 06:20 -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 11:53:11 +0100,
> Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > However gsmartcontrol reports that one of the HDDs has internal errors.
> > Would it be best to correct these using mdadm (assuming they can be
> > corrected), and
On Fri, 2020-05-15 at 06:20 -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 11:53:11 +0100,
> Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > However gsmartcontrol reports that one of the HDDs has internal errors.
> > Would it be best to correct these using mdadm (assuming they can be
> > corrected), and
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 11:53:11 +0100,
Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
However gsmartcontrol reports that one of the HDDs has internal errors.
Would it be best to correct these using mdadm (assuming they can be
corrected), and if so, how? Or should I do an offline copy with the
docking station's "
On Fri, 2012-10-26 at 06:14 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 10/26/2012 06:04 AM, jdow wrote:
> > yum upgrade?
>
> Thanks to Fedora's (IMO: absurd) UsrMove "Feature", this doesn't work
> smoothly for ->F17 upgrades.
>
> IIRC, there's a wiki page somewhere (on Fedoraproject.org?) describing
> t
On 10/25/2012 08:46 PM, ven...@billoblog.com wrote:
>
> Sorry if this is the wrong forum -- if it is, please direct me to the
> right one.
>
> I rent a virtual personal server in another city that runs Fedora 16. I
> want to upgrade it to 17. I did the yum-based preupgrade and such, but
> am st
On 10/26/2012 06:04 AM, jdow wrote:
yum upgrade?
Thanks to Fedora's (IMO: absurd) UsrMove "Feature", this doesn't work
smoothly for ->F17 upgrades.
IIRC, there's a wiki page somewhere (on Fedoraproject.org?) describing
the nasty details - It's pretty tedious and risky ;)
Ralf
--
users m
yum upgrade?
{^_^}
On 2012/10/25 19:47, ven...@billoblog.com wrote:
I did -- he said that it was my responsibility to upgrade the virtual machine.
The service they would provide would only be a reinstall of the image of Fedora
16. The bottom line is that I'm give a virtual box and 5 static ip
I did -- he said that it was my responsibility to upgrade the virtual
machine. The service they would provide would only be a reinstall of the
image of Fedora 16. The bottom line is that I'm give a virtual box and 5
static ips, and all maintenance is my responsibility.
billo
On Thu, 25 Oc
On 10/25/2012 09:46 PM, ven...@billoblog.com wrote:
Sorry if this is the wrong forum -- if it is, please direct me to the
right one.
I rent a virtual personal server in another city that runs Fedora 16.
I want to upgrade it to 17. I did the yum-based preupgrade and such,
but am stuck. Th
52 matches
Mail list logo
