Re: ati drivers f12
On 01/07/2010 06:41 PM, François Patte wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Le 07/01/2010 15:17, Joonas Sarajärvi a écrit : Fedora has never included fglrx (a.k.a. Catalyst), but it has usually been available in 3rd party repositories, like RPM Fusion non-free. AFAIK recent fglrx/Catalyst versions do not support any of the X1200 cards anymore. Fedora 12's default driver should have hw opengl support and other goodies for it, out of the box. OK thanks for the info but running glxgears gives an averave of 200FPS, is it the maximun ? Another problem: X cannot resume after suspend. Is there a special config to have suspend available with this default driver? Thanks for attention. - -- François Patte UFR de mathématiques et informatique Université Paris Descartes 45, rue des Saints Pères F-75270 Paris Cedex 06 Tél. +33 (0)1 4286 2145 http://www.math-info.univ-paris5.fr/~patte -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAktGKt0ACgkQdE6C2dhV2JWuMwCfa/+gtM+wCPRz9M+H8CetYS6G OzMAnRPIeZk+StGcznCZ2btU4sB/ZmX0 =8+DZ -END PGP SIGNATURE- If sounds as if ony software 3D is working on your board. You can run glxinfo and look for the line starting OpenGL renderer string to find out. I'm afraid the graphics drivers in F12, especially with respect to 3D support is very dodgy at the moment and does not look likely to improve in the short term. You can try modifying the driver options in /etc/X11/xorg.conf. The F12 release notes in a section under ATI give some possible options to try. Also adding nomodeset to the kernel boot line in /etc/grub.conf can sometimes help with particular graphics cards to get around the numerous bugs. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F12: KDE and PulseAudio latest update
On 01/01/2010 06:57 PM, Rex Dieter wrote: Terry Barnaby wrote: On 01/01/2010 05:34 PM, Jud Craft wrote: How to I get Skype to use my USB webcams mic ? GNOME should allow you to choose which device for speaker input. Doesn't the webcam mike show up under Sound Properties (right click on speaker in bar)? Yes, it does work under Gnome, however we use KDE. There does not seem to be away in KDE of setting which devices are used by the pulseaudio default sound device. 2 ways, 1. use pavucontrol 2. updating to https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F12/FEDORA-2009-13296 should make all media devices visible in systemsettings-multimedia -- Rex I just tried to update my other systems to pulseaudio-0.9.21-2.fc12. However this seems to have disappeared from updates-testing and been replaced by pulseaudio-0.9.20-1.fc12 ... Has someone built the latest package with the wrong version number ? -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F12: KDE and PulseAudio latest update
On 01/01/2010 05:34 PM, Jud Craft wrote: How to I get Skype to use my USB webcams mic ? GNOME should allow you to choose which device for speaker input. Doesn't the webcam mike show up under Sound Properties (right click on speaker in bar)? Yes, it does work under Gnome, however we use KDE. There does not seem to be away in KDE of setting which devices are used by the pulseaudio default sound device. Also the applications, such as Skype, only sees the PulseAudio sound device and so cannot choose a specific input or output device. Actually does the design of PulseAudio allow an application to choose to use a specific input/output device ? If not I would consider this a major failing -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F12: KDE and PulseAudio latest update
On 01/01/2010 05:22 PM, Martin Airs wrote: On 12/30/2009 03:13 PM, Terry Barnaby wrote: Having just updated my systems I have been trying to use skype with an USB webcam having its own microphone under KDE. The skype app only sees the PulseAudio device and cannot select the USB webcams mic from its options menu. This used to work some time in the past (F10 rather than F12 ?). Also the KDE System Settings/Multimedia screen only shows the PulseAudio Sound Server. paman shows the USB webcam mic is present. How to I get Skype to use my USB webcams mic ? make a file called ~/.pulse/client.conf in it put... autospawn = no then killall pulseaudio or pulseaudio -k then it'll see all your devices but change autospawn to yes afterwards for normal pulseaudio behaviour Martin Thanks for the info, but I am trying to do this in the proper way using PulseAudio rather than reverting to direct Alsa access (if possible :) ). Also my kids may have problems using this method. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F12: KDE and PulseAudio latest update
On 01/01/2010 06:57 PM, Rex Dieter wrote: Terry Barnaby wrote: On 01/01/2010 05:34 PM, Jud Craft wrote: How to I get Skype to use my USB webcams mic ? GNOME should allow you to choose which device for speaker input. Doesn't the webcam mike show up under Sound Properties (right click on speaker in bar)? Yes, it does work under Gnome, however we use KDE. There does not seem to be away in KDE of setting which devices are used by the pulseaudio default sound device. 2 ways, 1. use pavucontrol 2. updating to https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F12/FEDORA-2009-13296 should make all media devices visible in systemsettings-multimedia -- Rex Installing pulseaudio* from updates-testing fixed this. Thanks for this :) On the second question, does the design of PulseAudio allow an application, on an application by application basis, to choose to use a specific input/output device ? If not I would consider this a major failing I would have thought that PulseAudio would, in effect, publish all of the available Alsa audio devices along with default. An application would then connect to default by default which would use the standard PulseAudio configuration but could use any of the other devices including other pulseaudio servers over the network. Each of these devices would be handled by PulseAudio (ie sound would pass through PulseAudio to/from the device in question). -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
F12: KDE and PulseAudio latest update
Having just updated my systems I have been trying to use skype with an USB webcam having its own microphone under KDE. The skype app only sees the PulseAudio device and cannot select the USB webcams mic from its options menu. This used to work some time in the past (F10 rather than F12 ?). Also the KDE System Settings/Multimedia screen only shows the PulseAudio Sound Server. paman shows the USB webcam mic is present. How to I get Skype to use my USB webcams mic ? -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F12: NetworkManager-Firefox: Firefox is currently in offline mode and can't browse the Web
On 12/03/2009 09:51 AM, Terry Barnaby wrote: On 12/03/2009 08:49 AM, Terry Barnaby wrote: The MODE was set up by system-config-network, it is from its list of possible options for Mode and I think was the default. If I run ifup the error you mention is not reported and the interface comes up fine. However, I do get the error: domainname: you must be root to change the domain name Which I assume is due to another F12 bug. Could this cause NM to abort the connection ? I note that domainname is called from /etc/dhcp/dhclient.d/nis.sh. At point of invocation $UID and $EUID are 0 I added a sh into /etc/dhcp/dhclient.d/nis.sh to have a look. Here getuid() and geteuid() return 0. whoami returns root. But when I run domainname kingnet I get the error: domainname: you must be root to change the domain name Also su states su: incorrect password without even prompting for one. What is happening here ? The environment variables are set by dhcp and do not have the usual user environment variables Note that on this system, selinux is disabled. Looking at this I guess the CAP_SYS_ADMIN capability has been lost somewhere. Maybe the dhclient ? This all seems fixed in NetworkManager-0.7.997-1.fc12 Thanks to all who fixed this. Cheers Terry -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: F12: NetworkManager-Firefox: Firefox is currently in offline mode and can't browse the Web
The MODE was set up by system-config-network, it is from its list of possible options for Mode and I think was the default. If I run ifup the error you mention is not reported and the interface comes up fine. However, I do get the error: domainname: you must be root to change the domain name Which I assume is due to another F12 bug. Could this cause NM to abort the connection ? I note that domainname is called from /etc/dhcp/dhclient.d/nis.sh. At point of invocation $UID and $EUID are 0 I added a sh into /etc/dhcp/dhclient.d/nis.sh to have a look. Here getuid() and geteuid() return 0. whoami returns root. But when I run domainname kingnet I get the error: domainname: you must be root to change the domain name Also su states su: incorrect password without even prompting for one. What is happening here ? The environment variables are set by dhcp and do not have the usual user environment variables Note that on this system, selinux is disabled. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: F12: NetworkManager-Firefox: Firefox is currently in offline mode and can't browse the Web
On 12/03/2009 08:49 AM, Terry Barnaby wrote: The MODE was set up by system-config-network, it is from its list of possible options for Mode and I think was the default. If I run ifup the error you mention is not reported and the interface comes up fine. However, I do get the error: domainname: you must be root to change the domain name Which I assume is due to another F12 bug. Could this cause NM to abort the connection ? I note that domainname is called from /etc/dhcp/dhclient.d/nis.sh. At point of invocation $UID and $EUID are 0 I added a sh into /etc/dhcp/dhclient.d/nis.sh to have a look. Here getuid() and geteuid() return 0. whoami returns root. But when I run domainname kingnet I get the error: domainname: you must be root to change the domain name Also su states su: incorrect password without even prompting for one. What is happening here ? The environment variables are set by dhcp and do not have the usual user environment variables Note that on this system, selinux is disabled. Looking at this I guess the CAP_SYS_ADMIN capability has been lost somewhere. Maybe the dhclient ? -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: F12: NetworkManager-Firefox: Firefox is currently in offline mode and can't browse the Web
On 12/02/2009 09:32 PM, Dan Williams wrote: On Tue, 2009-12-01 at 10:24 +, Terry Barnaby wrote: On 12/01/2009 07:50 AM, Dan Williams wrote: On Mon, 2009-11-30 at 19:52 +, Terry Barnaby wrote: On 11/30/2009 06:12 PM, Dan Williams wrote: On Mon, 2009-11-30 at 09:55 +, Terry Barnaby wrote: On 11/29/2009 11:30 PM, Dan Williams wrote: On Sat, 2009-11-28 at 09:10 +, Terry Barnaby wrote: On 11/28/2009 08:35 AM, Rakesh Pandit wrote: 2009/11/28 Terry Barnaby wrote: If the NetworkManager service is running, but not managing the current network connection, then Firefox starts up in offline mode. Is this a bug in NetworkManager or Firefox ? This is odd behaviour and needs to be fixed. I would suggest open up a bug against firefox. I know one can change toolkit.networkmanager.disable preference, but it is a PITA for our users. One of use cases is: Sometime network manager does not connect me via my CDMA usb modem (in case signal is weak), but wvdial does and once I switch from NM to wvdial, my firefox gets to offline mode, which I don't expect it to as I am connected. Ok, filed as: 542078 NetworkManager is intended to control the default internet connection. If NetworkManager cannot control the default internet connection, then you may not want to use NetworkManager. In your case, you're using a mobile broadband device. The real bug here is that for whatever reason, NM/MM aren't connecting your modem, and we should follow up on that bug instead. Dan I am not using a mobile broadband device. The network connection my systems My mistake. I guess it was Rakesh Pandit who was using a CDMA 3G connection. use is not just the Internet it is a local network LAN connection that also serves the internet. Most of my systems use a local network server which provides NIS, /home and /data using NFS and VPN etc. I normally use the service network to bring up wired or wireless networking for this. Fedora, by default, uses NetworkManager to manage all network devices though. I use the service network as, for some reason, the NetworkManager service is started after the netfs and other services are started. Is there a reason for this ?? No particular reason, in fact that looks like a bug. NM no longer depends on HAL, but that dependency is still in the initscript, which looks like it pushes NM later than netfs. But in reality, you're looking for a dependency based initsystem which we don't quite yet have. There are already scripts that kick netfs to mount stuff when NM brings the network up (/etc/NetworkManager/dispatcher.d/05-netfs), so you get asynchronous bootup *and* your mounts. The rest of the system, if it requires something from the mounted directories, needs to be smart enough to know that. If you need to, you can set NETWORKWAIT=yes in /etc/sysconfig/network, which causes the NetworkManager initscript to block until a network connection is brought up, or 30 seconds have passed. I can obviously turn of the NetworkManager service, which I have done on the desktop systems. However, I also have a few Laptops that can roam. In F11 and before I have used the network and NetworkManager services. When the laptop boots away from home, the network service fails and I can then use the NetworkManager service to connect to whatever wireless network or G3 network is available. It does seem sensible to me that the system provides applications with info on if the network is up (not just the Internet). The NetworkManager service seems the place to do this and it looks like the applications are starting to use it for this purpose. So maybe a generic NM isNetworkUp() API call is called for ? See the other mail; the problem with a generic isUp() is that it simply says hey, is there a connection? It doesn't provide enough information about the networking state of the system for anything to make an intelligent decision about anything. It's a hey I'm connected to something but there's no information about *what* you're connected to; whether it's a secure home network, whether it's a slow 3G network, whether it's billed by the minute or the hour or unlimited, etc. Dan Hi, Thanks for the info. I would have thought that a generic isUp() is good enough for the likes of Firefox and Pidgen though to decide if to start offline. Being connected to a Network is probably all you need, you may be accessing an Intranet as all my systems Firefox home pages do ... Anyway, following your email (And notes in Bugzilla) I thought I'd try and use NM properly for my config. However I have a problem, which may be a bug. I have turned off the Network services and turned on NetworkManger. I have two main network interfaces eth0 (wired) and eth1 (Wifi), both are set to be managed by NM and to start at boot. I have also added NETWORKWAIT=yes in /etc/sysconfig/network. When I boot with this the network (eth1 (eth0 is disconnected)) does not come up at boot. There is a message stating a failure on the line where
Re: F12: NetworkManager-Firefox: Firefox is currently in offline mode and can't browse the Web
On 12/01/2009 07:50 AM, Dan Williams wrote: On Mon, 2009-11-30 at 19:52 +, Terry Barnaby wrote: On 11/30/2009 06:12 PM, Dan Williams wrote: On Mon, 2009-11-30 at 09:55 +, Terry Barnaby wrote: On 11/29/2009 11:30 PM, Dan Williams wrote: On Sat, 2009-11-28 at 09:10 +, Terry Barnaby wrote: On 11/28/2009 08:35 AM, Rakesh Pandit wrote: 2009/11/28 Terry Barnaby wrote: If the NetworkManager service is running, but not managing the current network connection, then Firefox starts up in offline mode. Is this a bug in NetworkManager or Firefox ? This is odd behaviour and needs to be fixed. I would suggest open up a bug against firefox. I know one can change toolkit.networkmanager.disable preference, but it is a PITA for our users. One of use cases is: Sometime network manager does not connect me via my CDMA usb modem (in case signal is weak), but wvdial does and once I switch from NM to wvdial, my firefox gets to offline mode, which I don't expect it to as I am connected. Ok, filed as: 542078 NetworkManager is intended to control the default internet connection. If NetworkManager cannot control the default internet connection, then you may not want to use NetworkManager. In your case, you're using a mobile broadband device. The real bug here is that for whatever reason, NM/MM aren't connecting your modem, and we should follow up on that bug instead. Dan I am not using a mobile broadband device. The network connection my systems My mistake. I guess it was Rakesh Pandit who was using a CDMA 3G connection. use is not just the Internet it is a local network LAN connection that also serves the internet. Most of my systems use a local network server which provides NIS, /home and /data using NFS and VPN etc. I normally use the service network to bring up wired or wireless networking for this. Fedora, by default, uses NetworkManager to manage all network devices though. I use the service network as, for some reason, the NetworkManager service is started after the netfs and other services are started. Is there a reason for this ?? No particular reason, in fact that looks like a bug. NM no longer depends on HAL, but that dependency is still in the initscript, which looks like it pushes NM later than netfs. But in reality, you're looking for a dependency based initsystem which we don't quite yet have. There are already scripts that kick netfs to mount stuff when NM brings the network up (/etc/NetworkManager/dispatcher.d/05-netfs), so you get asynchronous bootup *and* your mounts. The rest of the system, if it requires something from the mounted directories, needs to be smart enough to know that. If you need to, you can set NETWORKWAIT=yes in /etc/sysconfig/network, which causes the NetworkManager initscript to block until a network connection is brought up, or 30 seconds have passed. I can obviously turn of the NetworkManager service, which I have done on the desktop systems. However, I also have a few Laptops that can roam. In F11 and before I have used the network and NetworkManager services. When the laptop boots away from home, the network service fails and I can then use the NetworkManager service to connect to whatever wireless network or G3 network is available. It does seem sensible to me that the system provides applications with info on if the network is up (not just the Internet). The NetworkManager service seems the place to do this and it looks like the applications are starting to use it for this purpose. So maybe a generic NM isNetworkUp() API call is called for ? See the other mail; the problem with a generic isUp() is that it simply says hey, is there a connection? It doesn't provide enough information about the networking state of the system for anything to make an intelligent decision about anything. It's a hey I'm connected to something but there's no information about *what* you're connected to; whether it's a secure home network, whether it's a slow 3G network, whether it's billed by the minute or the hour or unlimited, etc. Dan Hi, Thanks for the info. I would have thought that a generic isUp() is good enough for the likes of Firefox and Pidgen though to decide if to start offline. Being connected to a Network is probably all you need, you may be accessing an Intranet as all my systems Firefox home pages do ... Anyway, following your email (And notes in Bugzilla) I thought I'd try and use NM properly for my config. However I have a problem, which may be a bug. I have turned off the Network services and turned on NetworkManger. I have two main network interfaces eth0 (wired) and eth1 (Wifi), both are set to be managed by NM and to start at boot. I have also added NETWORKWAIT=yes in /etc/sysconfig/network. When I boot with this the network (eth1 (eth0 is disconnected)) does not come up at boot. There is a message stating a failure on the line where it is waiting for the network to come up. When I log in as a local user the network then comes up
Re: F12: NetworkManager-Firefox: Firefox is currently in offline mode and can't browse the Web
On 11/29/2009 11:30 PM, Dan Williams wrote: On Sat, 2009-11-28 at 09:10 +, Terry Barnaby wrote: On 11/28/2009 08:35 AM, Rakesh Pandit wrote: 2009/11/28 Terry Barnaby wrote: If the NetworkManager service is running, but not managing the current network connection, then Firefox starts up in offline mode. Is this a bug in NetworkManager or Firefox ? This is odd behaviour and needs to be fixed. I would suggest open up a bug against firefox. I know one can change toolkit.networkmanager.disable preference, but it is a PITA for our users. One of use cases is: Sometime network manager does not connect me via my CDMA usb modem (in case signal is weak), but wvdial does and once I switch from NM to wvdial, my firefox gets to offline mode, which I don't expect it to as I am connected. Ok, filed as: 542078 NetworkManager is intended to control the default internet connection. If NetworkManager cannot control the default internet connection, then you may not want to use NetworkManager. In your case, you're using a mobile broadband device. The real bug here is that for whatever reason, NM/MM aren't connecting your modem, and we should follow up on that bug instead. Dan I am not using a mobile broadband device. The network connection my systems use is not just the Internet it is a local network LAN connection that also serves the internet. Most of my systems use a local network server which provides NIS, /home and /data using NFS and VPN etc. I normally use the service network to bring up wired or wireless networking for this. Fedora, by default, uses NetworkManager to manage all network devices though. I use the service network as, for some reason, the NetworkManager service is started after the netfs and other services are started. Is there a reason for this ?? I can obviously turn of the NetworkManager service, which I have done on the desktop systems. However, I also have a few Laptops that can roam. In F11 and before I have used the network and NetworkManager services. When the laptop boots away from home, the network service fails and I can then use the NetworkManager service to connect to whatever wireless network or G3 network is available. It does seem sensible to me that the system provides applications with info on if the network is up (not just the Internet). The NetworkManager service seems the place to do this and it looks like the applications are starting to use it for this purpose. So maybe a generic NM isNetworkUp() API call is called for ? -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: F12: NetworkManager-Firefox: Firefox is currently in offline mode and can't browse the Web
On 11/30/2009 06:12 PM, Dan Williams wrote: On Mon, 2009-11-30 at 09:55 +, Terry Barnaby wrote: On 11/29/2009 11:30 PM, Dan Williams wrote: On Sat, 2009-11-28 at 09:10 +, Terry Barnaby wrote: On 11/28/2009 08:35 AM, Rakesh Pandit wrote: 2009/11/28 Terry Barnaby wrote: If the NetworkManager service is running, but not managing the current network connection, then Firefox starts up in offline mode. Is this a bug in NetworkManager or Firefox ? This is odd behaviour and needs to be fixed. I would suggest open up a bug against firefox. I know one can change toolkit.networkmanager.disable preference, but it is a PITA for our users. One of use cases is: Sometime network manager does not connect me via my CDMA usb modem (in case signal is weak), but wvdial does and once I switch from NM to wvdial, my firefox gets to offline mode, which I don't expect it to as I am connected. Ok, filed as: 542078 NetworkManager is intended to control the default internet connection. If NetworkManager cannot control the default internet connection, then you may not want to use NetworkManager. In your case, you're using a mobile broadband device. The real bug here is that for whatever reason, NM/MM aren't connecting your modem, and we should follow up on that bug instead. Dan I am not using a mobile broadband device. The network connection my systems My mistake. I guess it was Rakesh Pandit who was using a CDMA 3G connection. use is not just the Internet it is a local network LAN connection that also serves the internet. Most of my systems use a local network server which provides NIS, /home and /data using NFS and VPN etc. I normally use the service network to bring up wired or wireless networking for this. Fedora, by default, uses NetworkManager to manage all network devices though. I use the service network as, for some reason, the NetworkManager service is started after the netfs and other services are started. Is there a reason for this ?? No particular reason, in fact that looks like a bug. NM no longer depends on HAL, but that dependency is still in the initscript, which looks like it pushes NM later than netfs. But in reality, you're looking for a dependency based initsystem which we don't quite yet have. There are already scripts that kick netfs to mount stuff when NM brings the network up (/etc/NetworkManager/dispatcher.d/05-netfs), so you get asynchronous bootup *and* your mounts. The rest of the system, if it requires something from the mounted directories, needs to be smart enough to know that. If you need to, you can set NETWORKWAIT=yes in /etc/sysconfig/network, which causes the NetworkManager initscript to block until a network connection is brought up, or 30 seconds have passed. I can obviously turn of the NetworkManager service, which I have done on the desktop systems. However, I also have a few Laptops that can roam. In F11 and before I have used the network and NetworkManager services. When the laptop boots away from home, the network service fails and I can then use the NetworkManager service to connect to whatever wireless network or G3 network is available. It does seem sensible to me that the system provides applications with info on if the network is up (not just the Internet). The NetworkManager service seems the place to do this and it looks like the applications are starting to use it for this purpose. So maybe a generic NM isNetworkUp() API call is called for ? See the other mail; the problem with a generic isUp() is that it simply says hey, is there a connection? It doesn't provide enough information about the networking state of the system for anything to make an intelligent decision about anything. It's a hey I'm connected to something but there's no information about *what* you're connected to; whether it's a secure home network, whether it's a slow 3G network, whether it's billed by the minute or the hour or unlimited, etc. Dan Hi, Thanks for the info. I would have thought that a generic isUp() is good enough for the likes of Firefox and Pidgen though to decide if to start offline. Being connected to a Network is probably all you need, you may be accessing an Intranet as all my systems Firefox home pages do ... Anyway, following your email (And notes in Bugzilla) I thought I'd try and use NM properly for my config. However I have a problem, which may be a bug. I have turned off the Network services and turned on NetworkManger. I have two main network interfaces eth0 (wired) and eth1 (Wifi), both are set to be managed by NM and to start at boot. I have also added NETWORKWAIT=yes in /etc/sysconfig/network. When I boot with this the network (eth1 (eth0 is disconnected)) does not come up at boot. There is a message stating a failure on the line where it is waiting for the network to come up. When I log in as a local user the network then comes up ... I also note that, before the user is logged in, I cannot start the network with service network
Re: Fedora 12 Graphics Issues: Cancel F13 and concentrate on fixing F12 ?
On 11/28/2009 10:26 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Sat, 2009-11-28 at 07:31 +, Terry Barnaby wrote:
Some really useful info in How_to_debug_Xorg_problems. I couldn't easily
find it from the main wiki home page however. Maybe a link to this page marked
Graphics issues could be made on the front page (focus users on improving the
graphics) ?
That doesn't scale. There's lots of useful pages in the Wiki. We can't
link to all of them from the front page.
I was thinking of this more as a special Graphics debug push :)
There's a link on the front page which says 'Report a new bug', with the
word 'bug' a link to
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugsAndFeatureRequests . The X page is
linked from that page in the 'Information required for bugs in specific
components' section. That's two steps from the front page.
Could improve the title Graphics problems and bug reporting ?
We have multiple pages of this type, all named
How_to_debug_foobar_problems . We found that the best generic naming
scheme for all such pages.
and add some search terms such as Graphics Problems, 3D problems etc.
I'm not sure you can add search terms to Wiki pages, but if you can,
then sure.
I would have thought that simply adding the text for these in the page would
have helped searching ?
Add some info on what to set for Bugzilla fields ?
That's not appropriate for subject-specific pages; it's discussed in the
main 'how to report bugs' page,
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugsAndFeatureRequests .
Maybe the bug reports should include the package version numbers ?
That might be useful in some cases, yeah.
Maybe some simple user tools could be generated to ease and make bug reporting
more useful. Something simple like the following might be useful:
#!/bin/sh
date bug1
lspci | grep VGA bug1
(echo -n kernel: ; uname -r) bug1
rpm -q --qf %{NAME}-%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}\n xorg-x11-server-Xorg bug1
rpm -q --qf %{NAME}-%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}\n xorg-x11-drv-ati bug1
rpm -q --qf %{NAME}-%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}\n mesa-dri-drivers bug1
glxinfo | grep OpenGL renderer string bug1
It's a decent idea, the problem I have with it is you wind up with a
forest of little scripts with no decent maintenance strategy. I'd rather
have a more integrated and properly maintained tool, it may grow out of
abrt in future.
Yes, but that the moment the Graphics bugs seem to have random user inputs
of information. I would have thought that a simple script to help with just
Graphics bugs would help just now. (I am hoping all of the graphics problems
will have gone away by next year :) )
It might be worth including info on how to update from fedora-testing just
graphics related packages. Ie add something like:
includepkgs=kernel* xorg-x11-* mesa*
to the updates-testing section of fedora-updates-testing.repo and
enable the repo ? Also how to revert. Should it state that all tests
should be done with fedora-updates-testing packages ?
The automated systems for handling updates usually handle this (when an
update is submitted to updates-testing that's marked by the maintainer
as fixing a particular bug, an automatic comment is added to the bug
with a note that an update is in updates-testing to be tried).
I notice there is a new xorg-x11-drv-ati. It does look like things are moving :)
All we need now is 2 months down the line for Fedora 12.1 to be released with
updated anaconda and all updated packages in ISO form so that
Joe public can easily install a good working Fedora release ...
We don't do this except for extreme major brokenness which we somehow
missed during testing, it's not worth the effort involved. Fedora Unity
does updated re-spins, however they haven't got anything out for F11 yet
due to some problems, I believe they're looking for extra volunteers.
You say that producing a Fedora 12.1 release is not worth the effort
involved. Is that truly the case ?
Certainly that is what I always do here. Normally the initial Fedora releases
contain quite a few issues and there are a flurry of updates. So I use pungi to
create my own updated release that I use to install on further systems. There is
very little effort in this and, I would have thought, not to much further
testing effort needed. It is a problem that anaconda updates aren't released
however. Certainly from the users front I would have thought that this is worth
the effort. It allows them to install a Fedora system with the core bugs that
users have found fixed in one pass.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora 12 Graphics Issues: Cancel F13 and concentrate on fixing F12 ?
On 11/28/2009 07:31 AM, Terry Barnaby wrote:
On 11/27/2009 08:12 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Fri, 2009-11-27 at 20:04 +, Terry Barnaby wrote:
Hi,
I did take part in the Radeon test day. Unfortunately the tests did not
really cover 3D and it was difficult to test this using the Live system.
I did feed back this.
Right...that is mainly a product of what Dave mentioned, that general 3D
functionality is unfortunately right at the bottom of the priority list,
at least until we have drivers that work really solidly for basic
desktop functionality. But I'd be happy to have more extensive 3D tests
in the list for future test days, please do feel free to submit some.
But they are a good idea and I would have thought
could be extended to having a test day after a release has been going
for a month or so so more users could take part.
It's not a bad idea, for sure. I'm not sure _I'd_ do it, though, it's
enough work organizing the test days for the upcoming release without
doing ones for the last release too. :) However, we do have a process
for allowing anyone to organize a Test Day. You can propose one just by
mailing test-list or filing a ticket in QA trac, and we have an SOP for
the whole process of actually hosting one:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/SOP_Test_Day_management
so it'd be perfectly feasible for a community member to organize
post-release graphics test events for the stable release. I'd be happy
to work those into the upcoming test day schedule if you'd be interested
in doing it.
Actually it was not me with NVIDIA. I don't have any systems using this
chipset.
sorry, yes, mistaken identity :)
Yes I take your points, but it is hard for users, quite often, to
test the
system and know how to track down where a bug is occurring and report
it.
Generally users and volunteers do not have the experience of how the
Fedora developer community and its systems work, how the graphics system
works and how to test and report issues. So some involvement of
developers
to getting a relatively simple testing regime going may help get this
underway.
We do have a page on reporting X.org bugs:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_debug_Xorg_problems
which should cover the major points, and which we try to direct people
to wherever we can. Do you think there's anything missing from that?
Anyway, I have been convinced, from what Dave has said, that things
are being
done and have now started trying to use F12 and will attempt to
report back
issues I see.
Thanks a lot.
Some really useful info in How_to_debug_Xorg_problems. I couldn't easily
find it from the main wiki home page however. Maybe a link to this page
marked Graphics issues could be made on the front page (focus users on
improving the
graphics) ?
Could improve the title Graphics problems and bug reporting ?
and add some search terms such as Graphics Problems, 3D problems etc.
Add some info on what to set for Bugzilla fields ?
Maybe the bug reports should include the package version numbers ?
Maybe some simple user tools could be generated to ease and make bug
reporting more useful. Something simple like the following might be useful:
#!/bin/sh
date bug1
lspci | grep VGA bug1
(echo -n kernel: ; uname -r) bug1
rpm -q --qf %{NAME}-%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}\n xorg-x11-server-Xorg bug1
rpm -q --qf %{NAME}-%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}\n xorg-x11-drv-ati bug1
rpm -q --qf %{NAME}-%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}\n mesa-dri-drivers bug1
glxinfo | grep OpenGL renderer string bug1
It might be worth including info on how to update from fedora-testing
just graphics related packages. Ie add something like:
includepkgs=kernel* xorg-x11-* mesa*
to the updates-testing section of fedora-updates-testing.repo and
enable the repo ? Also how to revert. Should it state that all tests
should be done with fedora-updates-testing packages ?
I notice there is a new xorg-x11-drv-ati. It does look like things are
moving :)
All we need now is 2 months down the line for Fedora 12.1 to be released
with
updated anaconda and all updated packages in ISO form so that
Joe public can easily install a good working Fedora release ...
Cheers
Terry
Which are the best Bugzilla components to register bugs against:
X11 driver ATI: xorg-x11-drv-ati
3D driver: mesa
DRM: kernel ???
Cheers
Terry
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: F12: NetworkManager-Firefox: Firefox is currently in offline mode and can't browse the Web
On 11/28/2009 08:35 AM, Rakesh Pandit wrote: 2009/11/28 Terry Barnaby wrote: If the NetworkManager service is running, but not managing the current network connection, then Firefox starts up in offline mode. Is this a bug in NetworkManager or Firefox ? This is odd behaviour and needs to be fixed. I would suggest open up a bug against firefox. I know one can change toolkit.networkmanager.disable preference, but it is a PITA for our users. One of use cases is: Sometime network manager does not connect me via my CDMA usb modem (in case signal is weak), but wvdial does and once I switch from NM to wvdial, my firefox gets to offline mode, which I don't expect it to as I am connected. Ok, filed as: 542078 -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora 12 Graphics Issues: Cancel F13 and concentrate on fixing F12 ?
On 11/28/2009 08:36 AM, Terry Barnaby wrote:
On 11/28/2009 07:31 AM, Terry Barnaby wrote:
On 11/27/2009 08:12 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Fri, 2009-11-27 at 20:04 +, Terry Barnaby wrote:
Hi,
I did take part in the Radeon test day. Unfortunately the tests did not
really cover 3D and it was difficult to test this using the Live
system.
I did feed back this.
Right...that is mainly a product of what Dave mentioned, that general 3D
functionality is unfortunately right at the bottom of the priority list,
at least until we have drivers that work really solidly for basic
desktop functionality. But I'd be happy to have more extensive 3D tests
in the list for future test days, please do feel free to submit some.
But they are a good idea and I would have thought
could be extended to having a test day after a release has been going
for a month or so so more users could take part.
It's not a bad idea, for sure. I'm not sure _I'd_ do it, though, it's
enough work organizing the test days for the upcoming release without
doing ones for the last release too. :) However, we do have a process
for allowing anyone to organize a Test Day. You can propose one just by
mailing test-list or filing a ticket in QA trac, and we have an SOP for
the whole process of actually hosting one:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/SOP_Test_Day_management
so it'd be perfectly feasible for a community member to organize
post-release graphics test events for the stable release. I'd be happy
to work those into the upcoming test day schedule if you'd be interested
in doing it.
Actually it was not me with NVIDIA. I don't have any systems using this
chipset.
sorry, yes, mistaken identity :)
Yes I take your points, but it is hard for users, quite often, to
test the
system and know how to track down where a bug is occurring and report
it.
Generally users and volunteers do not have the experience of how the
Fedora developer community and its systems work, how the graphics
system
works and how to test and report issues. So some involvement of
developers
to getting a relatively simple testing regime going may help get this
underway.
We do have a page on reporting X.org bugs:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_debug_Xorg_problems
which should cover the major points, and which we try to direct people
to wherever we can. Do you think there's anything missing from that?
Anyway, I have been convinced, from what Dave has said, that things
are being
done and have now started trying to use F12 and will attempt to
report back
issues I see.
Thanks a lot.
Some really useful info in How_to_debug_Xorg_problems. I couldn't easily
find it from the main wiki home page however. Maybe a link to this page
marked Graphics issues could be made on the front page (focus users on
improving the
graphics) ?
Could improve the title Graphics problems and bug reporting ?
and add some search terms such as Graphics Problems, 3D problems etc.
Add some info on what to set for Bugzilla fields ?
Maybe the bug reports should include the package version numbers ?
Maybe some simple user tools could be generated to ease and make bug
reporting more useful. Something simple like the following might be
useful:
#!/bin/sh
date bug1
lspci | grep VGA bug1
(echo -n kernel: ; uname -r) bug1
rpm -q --qf %{NAME}-%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}\n xorg-x11-server-Xorg
bug1
rpm -q --qf %{NAME}-%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}\n xorg-x11-drv-ati bug1
rpm -q --qf %{NAME}-%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}\n mesa-dri-drivers bug1
glxinfo | grep OpenGL renderer string bug1
It might be worth including info on how to update from fedora-testing
just graphics related packages. Ie add something like:
includepkgs=kernel* xorg-x11-* mesa*
to the updates-testing section of fedora-updates-testing.repo and
enable the repo ? Also how to revert. Should it state that all tests
should be done with fedora-updates-testing packages ?
I notice there is a new xorg-x11-drv-ati. It does look like things are
moving :)
All we need now is 2 months down the line for Fedora 12.1 to be released
with
updated anaconda and all updated packages in ISO form so that
Joe public can easily install a good working Fedora release ...
Cheers
Terry
Which are the best Bugzilla components to register bugs against:
X11 driver ATI: xorg-x11-drv-ati
3D driver: mesa
DRM: kernel ???
Cheers
Terry
Where is the location of the DRM kernel module master git tree now ?
It used to be at: http://cgit.freedesktop.org/mesa/drm/linux-core
Is it now worked on directly withing the kernel source trees ?
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora 12 Graphics Issues: Cancel F13 and concentrate on fixing F12 ?
On 11/26/2009 10:12 PM, Dave Airlie wrote: Yes, some graphics boards I am sure work well, although 3D should really be working on all cards in 2009 ... But this is the point, there are a lot of different graphics boards, and so a much wider scope for the testing is required here which requires more users over more time with many different applications using basically the same software. Why do you think 3D should be working in 2009 as opposed to any previous years btw? I'm interested in the logic that leads to this point. GPUs have gotten more and more complex every 6 months for about 8 years now. A current radeonhd 4000 series bears little resemblence to the radeon r100 that was out then. The newer GPUs require a full complier to be written for an instruction set more complex than x86 in some places. The newer GPUs get more and more varied modesetting combos that all require supporting. Now I'd would guess (educated slightly) that the amount of code required to write a full driver stack for a modern GPU has probably gone up 40-50x what used to be required, whereas the number of open source community developers has probably doubled since 2001. Also newer GPU designs have forced us to redesign the Linux GPU architecture, this had to happen in parallel with all the other stuff, again with similiar number of developers. So yes it sucks but it should point out why there is no reason why 3D should really be working on all cards. Dave. Hi Dave, My logic, if you call it that :), is that for an operating system in 2009 not to have good 3D support across most graphics cards is not good. In earlier years, when 3D was a new beast and not used much that was not an issue, but I would have thought that it should be a reasonably core part of a Desktop computers functionality these days. As you say, and I'm sure you know better than me, new graphics chipsets are complicated and difficult to get working correctly, especially with limited documentation. In my case though I am using Intel 845G, ATI R200 and ATI R300 based chipsets which are quite old now. I can see you are working hard on fixing the ATI issues, I thank you very much for all this work, and I will try and feed back issues I am having and help out if I can. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora 12 Graphics Issues: Cancel F13 and concentrate on fixing F12 ?
On 11/26/2009 10:14 PM, Dave Airlie wrote: On Fri, 2009-11-27 at 07:23 +1000, Dave Airlie wrote: On Thu, 2009-11-26 at 20:16 +, Terry Barnaby wrote: On 11/26/2009 07:46 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote: On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 17:09:14 +, Terry Barnabyter...@beam.ltd.uk wrote: I really want to help and get a stable release and present bug reports and even fix them if I can. But, the current short term release schedule, and no focus on testing and fixing graphics issues, does not inspire me with confidence that a stable usable release will emerge. This makes it difficult for me to justify the effort. Convince me :) I follow the radeon updates pretty closely and my 9200 finally starting working with 3d again a few weeks before the release. Airlie has continued development in the f12 branch and there have been several updates over the last couple of weeks. If you have just tried F11 and not F12 you should consider doing so. For r5xx and below, grab a live image and install one of the smaller 3d apps and try it out. For r6xx and above you'll want to install mesa-experimental-drivers and update xorg-x11-drv-ati. This won't get you the kernel updates related to graphics since the release, but should give you a good look at where things are at so that you can decide if you want install F12 on the machine. Hi, I have tried out F12 on 4 different systems, 2 with different ATI graphics and two with different Intel based boards. Only the last one appears to be able to run Blender. You mention Airlie has continued development in the f12 branch. If that means there are people working on the bugs and producing new driver updates for F12 (DRM,MESA,X11), especially for ATI then I certainly will give it some time. So is blender working the only thing you consider as working? The current focus is on making graphics work for as many ppl as possible first, then 3D is always further down the list, this is just common sense. Current priorities are: 0) you aren't running a binary driver - if so no priority for you. a) Can you see stuff on the screen at install/boot? b) can you run GNOME desktop in reasonably useful manner? i.e. firefox runs okay, no glitches, major slowdowns etc. c) can you suspend/resume? d) can you run compiz/gnome-shell? e) can you run non-Gnome desktops at reasonable speed? (yes we have to prioritise gnome over KDE, it sucks but thats life) f) does misc 3D application run? I should follow up just as far as the Red Hat X team goes a-d are what we are paid to do, e/f and nice to haves, so really if some community effort was to be brought up around this, e/f are where it would make sense to focus it. Having some sort of repos where we can publish a new kernel/libdrm/mesa/intel/ati/nouveau package in one block for people to test and find regression that isn't rawhide and isn't updates-testing (since it would be abusing that) would be an excellent place to start. Dave. I use Linux in an engineering environment that requires 3D for CAD and data visualisation. Blender is just a simple well known 3D program that seems to exercise the 3D system to a reasonable extent. Its a simple first pass test that I have been using. I did mention something like your repos idea during F11. I suggested having something like a fedora-testing-graphics repo that would have any development packages to allow people to test new graphics related drivers easily. One problem noted by people was the amount of work to maintain this and keep it in sync with main fedora-updates repo though. Also mentioned then I thought it would be good to have a basic, and simple for users, graphics testing system to easily allow users to test and feedback issues. Even if this is simply a short list of 2D/3D applications and a list of operations to try. Would a graphics testing day on F12 with the special graphics repo and some basic list of tests be useful to the developers ? -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora 12 Graphics Issues: Cancel F13 and concentrate on fixing F12 ?
On 11/27/2009 08:12 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Fri, 2009-11-27 at 20:04 +, Terry Barnaby wrote:
Hi,
I did take part in the Radeon test day. Unfortunately the tests did not
really cover 3D and it was difficult to test this using the Live system.
I did feed back this.
Right...that is mainly a product of what Dave mentioned, that general 3D
functionality is unfortunately right at the bottom of the priority list,
at least until we have drivers that work really solidly for basic
desktop functionality. But I'd be happy to have more extensive 3D tests
in the list for future test days, please do feel free to submit some.
But they are a good idea and I would have thought
could be extended to having a test day after a release has been going
for a month or so so more users could take part.
It's not a bad idea, for sure. I'm not sure _I'd_ do it, though, it's
enough work organizing the test days for the upcoming release without
doing ones for the last release too. :) However, we do have a process
for allowing anyone to organize a Test Day. You can propose one just by
mailing test-list or filing a ticket in QA trac, and we have an SOP for
the whole process of actually hosting one:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/SOP_Test_Day_management
so it'd be perfectly feasible for a community member to organize
post-release graphics test events for the stable release. I'd be happy
to work those into the upcoming test day schedule if you'd be interested
in doing it.
Actually it was not me with NVIDIA. I don't have any systems using this
chipset.
sorry, yes, mistaken identity :)
Yes I take your points, but it is hard for users, quite often, to test the
system and know how to track down where a bug is occurring and report it.
Generally users and volunteers do not have the experience of how the
Fedora developer community and its systems work, how the graphics system
works and how to test and report issues. So some involvement of developers
to getting a relatively simple testing regime going may help get this
underway.
We do have a page on reporting X.org bugs:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_debug_Xorg_problems
which should cover the major points, and which we try to direct people
to wherever we can. Do you think there's anything missing from that?
Anyway, I have been convinced, from what Dave has said, that things are being
done and have now started trying to use F12 and will attempt to report back
issues I see.
Thanks a lot.
Some really useful info in How_to_debug_Xorg_problems. I couldn't easily
find it from the main wiki home page however. Maybe a link to this page marked
Graphics issues could be made on the front page (focus users on improving the
graphics) ?
Could improve the title Graphics problems and bug reporting ?
and add some search terms such as Graphics Problems, 3D problems etc.
Add some info on what to set for Bugzilla fields ?
Maybe the bug reports should include the package version numbers ?
Maybe some simple user tools could be generated to ease and make bug reporting
more useful. Something simple like the following might be useful:
#!/bin/sh
date bug1
lspci | grep VGA bug1
(echo -n kernel: ; uname -r) bug1
rpm -q --qf %{NAME}-%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}\n xorg-x11-server-Xorg bug1
rpm -q --qf %{NAME}-%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}\n xorg-x11-drv-ati bug1
rpm -q --qf %{NAME}-%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}\n mesa-dri-drivers bug1
glxinfo | grep OpenGL renderer string bug1
It might be worth including info on how to update from fedora-testing just
graphics related packages. Ie add something like:
includepkgs=kernel* xorg-x11-* mesa*
to the updates-testing section of fedora-updates-testing.repo and
enable the repo ? Also how to revert. Should it state that all tests
should be done with fedora-updates-testing packages ?
I notice there is a new xorg-x11-drv-ati. It does look like things are moving :)
All we need now is 2 months down the line for Fedora 12.1 to be released with
updated anaconda and all updated packages in ISO form so that
Joe public can easily install a good working Fedora release ...
Cheers
Terry
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
F12: NetworkManager-Firefox: Firefox is currently in offline mode and can't browse the Web
If the NetworkManager service is running, but not managing the current network connection, then Firefox starts up in offline mode. Is this a bug in NetworkManager or Firefox ? -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Fedora 12 Graphics Issues: Cancel F13 and concentrate on fixing F12 ?
Ok, controversial title. I have just tried to test install F12 on some of my systems, (5 different ones). All of these bar 1 has problems with the graphics (X11 lockups, system lockups and other problems) mainly in 3D but also in 2D. I still am using F8 on most of my systems as the Graphics systems have not been stable enough for 3D in Fedora since around those times. I know there is a lot of work going on in the graphics front, I myself have worked on and fed back issues as time and ability allow. During F11 I helped with some issues, but unfortunately none of these made it back into updates for F11 and now F12 is out with yet more issues. The Linux kernel is generally relatively stable, as is the main system libraries etc in Fedora. The core issues most people seem to be facing is Graphics and Sound issues. Obviously a major issue with Graphics is the sheer number of different graphics chip sets in use and the lack of documentation for quite a few of them. Due to this it requires a lot of user testing and feedback to get these issues sorted out. Unfortunately the very fast Fedora new release schedule gets in the way of getting this testing done and things do not get fixed prior to a new release which introduces yet another set of problems. The new release speed also uses a lot of developer and user time in just managing to create a new release and updating systems to use it. I know the quick release cycle is one of Fedora's features in its aim to be close to the leading edge, but this has to be balanced with usability otherwise there will be few people actually using it in anger and thus actually testing the software. This could lead to the demise of Fedora. As an idea, at this stage, how about canceling the F13 release and just fixing and updating the F12 release ? This will concentrate developers and users into one system release. Similar to the pre-release test days we could have post-release test days. For example a Graphics test day for F12 where a certain set of tests with a test suite and a set of well known applications could be run. As F12 would be out longer, more people could participate in this. If a commitment, all round, to producing updates fixing the issues in F12 were made, I think more people would be willing to participate as users could expect to see a stable system for their efforts. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora 12 Graphics Issues: Cancel F13 and concentrate on fixing F12 ?
On 11/26/2009 02:12 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 02:01:00PM +, Terry Barnaby wrote: another set of problems. The new release speed also uses a lot of developer and user time in just managing to create a new release and updating systems to use it. This is the key flaw in your suggestion. Fedora developer effort isn't as malleable as you seem to think -- managing a new release is very different from fixing graphics bugs, and even if everyone involved in a different aspect of the project _wanted_ to switch to graphics driver programming _and_ was qualified to do so _and_ was able to get up to speed in a reasonable time, you can't necessarily solve programming problems faster by multiplying the number of developers. That is true, but a major amount of work in getting a release out must be testing it. Those Fedora people involved in the testing, which are also user-testers, have their own systems with there own hardware and are fully conversant with delving into bugs and reporting them in the correct way. On the other hand, having a release which emphasizes stability over new features is an idea that's been around for a while. It may be a good idea occasionally, but one of the problems you get is that new development in general doesn't stop and wait for stabilization, so the _next_ release, where you open things up again, ends up extra-unstable as all that new stuff hits at once. No things don't stop and they shouldn't. But at least it gives a reference platform to assist with future developments and bug fixing and also a stable release that people can recommend. I am unable to recommend F9, F10, F11, or F12 ... -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora 12 Graphics Issues: Cancel F13 and concentrate on fixing F12 ?
On 11/26/2009 02:14 PM, Rudolf Kastl wrote: 2009/11/26 Terry Barnabyter...@beam.ltd.uk: Ok, controversial title. I have just tried to test install F12 on some of my systems, (5 different ones). All of these bar 1 has problems with the graphics (X11 lockups, system lockups and other problems) mainly in 3D but also in 2D. I still am using F8 on most of my systems as the Graphics systems have not been stable enough for 3D in Fedora since around those times. which cards exactly did you try? which drivers do you use... and what are the bugzilla bug numbers? The cards I have tried include: Intel Corporation 82945G/GZ Integrated Graphics Controller ATI Technologies Inc RV535 [Radeon X1650 Series] ATI Technologies Inc M22 [Mobility Radeon X300] ATI Technologies Inc RV280 [Radeon 9200 PRO] (rev 01) VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation 82G33/G31 Express Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 02) I have not entered any bugzilla numbers as yet. I spent days with F11 and previous releases diagnosing reporting and attempting to fix bugs. No graphics updates were ever made available for F11 and still Fedora cannot run even Blender on most of my machines. At the moment I am not convinced that it is worth spending this time on F12. It seems likely no updates will appear and in F13 the whole ball game may have changed anyway. As an idea, at this stage, how about canceling the F13 release and just fixing and updating the F12 release ? This will concentrate developers and users into one system release. Similar to the pre-release test days we could have post-release test days. For example a Graphics test day for F12 where a certain set of tests with a test suite and a set of well known applications could be run. As F12 would be out longer, more people could participate in this. i dont see the point because that will definitely lead to new regressions in f12 and annoy other people. interested partys can at any time of the development cycle test the current state of development (aka rawhide) and report and fix bugs in it. For testing Graphics you need a lot of testers. I would not have thought that the number of people testing rawhide is enough. I would have thought that real users actually using Fedora are required here. Certainly the F12 release seems to reflect the lack of 3D graphics testing ... my personal experience is: intel (i965) works fine... there are some problems with shaders i have to investigate and there is a problem with interlaced resolutions. even displayport output works (hooked up to a fullhd tv via displayport - hdmi adapter) radeon 4650 works fine... even 3d works to some extent with the experimental dri drivers testing a new mesa build from koji even fixed various issues with 3d games i had left... also some effects/shaders seem to be not properly implemented yet... but hey... it is experimental) nvidia: nouveau kernel mode setting works and 2d experience is alot better already. 2d works in all setups i have personally tested. 3d still requires some progress but i dont see how it helps to stay on one release to get them resolved. Yes, some graphics boards I am sure work well, although 3D should really be working on all cards in 2009 ... But this is the point, there are a lot of different graphics boards, and so a much wider scope for the testing is required here which requires more users over more time with many different applications using basically the same software. kind regards, Rudolf Kastl If a commitment, all round, to producing updates fixing the issues in F12 were made, I think more people would be willing to participate as users could expect to see a stable system for their efforts. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora 12 Graphics Issues: Cancel F13 and concentrate on fixing F12 ?
On 11/26/2009 02:43 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: On 11/26/2009 08:09 PM, Terry Barnaby wrote: I have not entered any bugzilla numbers as yet. I spent days with F11 and previous releases diagnosing reporting and attempting to fix bugs. No graphics updates were ever made available for F11 and still Fedora cannot run even Blender on most of my machines. At the moment I am not convinced that it is worth spending this time on F12. It seems likely no updates will appear and in F13 the whole ball game may have changed anyway. Seems a bunch of incorrect assumptions considering that Fedora 11 did get many updates and I already see updates for Fedora 12 in updates-testing repository. Specific bug reports are definitely going to help. Rahul Sorry, should have been more specific. On the graphics package front, there have been no ATI or Intel X11 driver updates in F11 so far. Mesa was last updated 14th of June. Not sure about DRM as that is in the kernel and may have been updated with kernel updates. Yes, clear bug reports are needed but they also need the follow through to a fix and updated packages. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora 12 Graphics Issues: Cancel F13 and concentrate on fixing F12 ?
On 11/26/2009 03:11 PM, Tomasz Torcz wrote: On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 03:04:43PM +, Terry Barnaby wrote: On 11/26/2009 02:43 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: On 11/26/2009 08:09 PM, Terry Barnaby wrote: I have not entered any bugzilla numbers as yet. I spent days with F11 and previous releases diagnosing reporting and attempting to fix bugs. No graphics updates were ever made available for F11 and still Fedora cannot run even Blender on most of my machines. At the moment I am not convinced that it is worth spending this time on F12. It seems likely no updates will appear and in F13 the whole ball game may have changed anyway. Seems a bunch of incorrect assumptions considering that Fedora 11 did get many updates and I already see updates for Fedora 12 in updates-testing repository. Specific bug reports are definitely going to help. Rahul Sorry, should have been more specific. On the graphics package front, there have been no ATI or Intel X11 driver updates in F11 so far. Mesa was last updated 14th of June. Not sure about DRM as that is in the kernel and may have been updated with kernel updates. xorg-x11-drv-intel-2.7.0-9.fc11 ajax2009-11-20 20:35:24 xorg-x11-drv-intel-2.7.0-8.fc11 mjg59 2009-09-24 20:58:55 xorg-x11-drv-intel-2.7.0-7.fc11 krh 2009-05-28 19:32:16 xorg-x11-drv-ati-6.12.2-18.fc11 airlied 2009-06-29 02:40:01 And from kernel changelogs: * Fri Sep 25 2009 Chuck Ebbertcebb...@redhat.com 2.6.30.8-63 - Disable the GEM graphics manager on i686 PAE kernels (fixes modesetting on Intel graphics.) * Fri Aug 14 2009 Chuck Ebbertcebb...@redhat.com 2.6.30.5-28.rc2 - Linux 2.6.30.5-rc2 - Dropped drm-intel-tv-fix.patch, merged in -stable now. Wed Aug 12 2009 Kyle McMartink...@redhat.com - DRM patch sync-up with F-11-2.6.29.y, ABI probably isn't right yet though... - drm-modesetting-radeon.patch - drm-nouveau.patch - drm-no-gem-on-i8xx.patch - drm-i915-resume-force-mode.patch - drm-intel-big-hammer.patch - drm-intel-gen3-fb-hack.patch - drm-intel-hdmi-edid-fix.patch - drm-modesetting-radeon-fixes.patch - drm-radeon-new-pciids.patch - drm-dont-frob-i2c.patch - drm-intel-tv-fix.patch - drm-radeon-cs-oops-fix.patch - drm-pnp-add-resource-range-checker.patch - drm-i915-enable-mchbar.patch - The rest were merged upstream. Anyway, I understand you sentiment. I was bitten by Intel graphics bug (EQ overflowing) which wasn't fixed for all F11 life. Things are much better in F12 now. But still, without any bug number we have nothing to talk about. Mind you the above xorg packages are not in F11 updates ... I note that there is a package in fedora-testing for xorg-x11-drv-intel but I can't see anything for xorg-x11-drv-ati is this somewhere else ? For me F12 seems worse than F11, so far on this aspect. I'm sure others mileage will vary in the same manner as the number of different graphics boards :) As you obviously know tracking down and reporting bugs like these do take a lot of time and effort, quite often more than actually fixing them. At the moment with the frequency of Fedora releases and the lack of a push to testing and stability on this front I am not enthused, at the moment, with doing this and I suspect many others feel the same. Cheers Terry -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora 12 Graphics Issues: Cancel F13 and concentrate on fixing F12 ?
On 11/26/2009 04:34 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 04:08:27PM +, Terry Barnaby wrote: As you obviously know tracking down and reporting bugs like these do take a lot of time and effort, quite often more than actually fixing them. At the moment with the frequency of Fedora releases and the lack of a push to testing and stability on this front I am not enthused, at the moment, with doing this and I suspect many others feel the same. I'm confused. You want Fedora to skip a release to focus on testing and fixing, and you have no plans to help and aren't enthusiastic about actually participating in the testing and fixing? josh I really want to help and get a stable release and present bug reports and even fix them if I can. But, the current short term release schedule, and no focus on testing and fixing graphics issues, does not inspire me with confidence that a stable usable release will emerge. This makes it difficult for me to justify the effort. Convince me :) -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora 12 Graphics Issues: Cancel F13 and concentrate on fixing F12 ?
On 11/26/2009 05:05 PM, Jesse Keating wrote: On Nov 26, 2009, at 6:01, Terry Barnaby ter...@beam.ltd.uk wrote: Ok, controversial title. I have just tried to test install F12 on some of my systems, (5 different ones). All of these bar 1 has problems with the graphics (X11 lockups, system lockups and other problems) mainly in 3D but also in 2D. I still am using F8 on most of my systems as the Graphics systems have not been stable enough for 3D in Fedora since around those times. I know there is a lot of work going on in the graphics front, I myself have worked on and fed back issues as time and ability allow. During F11 I helped with some issues, but unfortunately none of these made it back into updates for F11 and now F12 is out with yet more issues. The Linux kernel is generally relatively stable, as is the main system libraries etc in Fedora. The core issues most people seem to be facing is Graphics and Sound issues. Obviously a major issue with Graphics is the sheer number of different graphics chip sets in use and the lack of documentation for quite a few of them. Due to this it requires a lot of user testing and feedback to get these issues sorted out. Unfortunately the very fast Fedora new release schedule gets in the way of getting this testing done and things do not get fixed prior to a new release which introduces yet another set of problems. The new release speed also uses a lot of developer and user time in just managing to create a new release and updating systems to use it. I know the quick release cycle is one of Fedora's features in its aim to be close to the leading edge, but this has to be balanced with usability otherwise there will be few people actually using it in anger and thus actually testing the software. This could lead to the demise of Fedora. As an idea, at this stage, how about canceling the F13 release and just fixing and updating the F12 release ? This will concentrate developers and users into one system release. Similar to the pre-release test days we could have post-release test days. For example a Graphics test day for F12 where a certain set of tests with a test suite and a set of well known applications could be run. As F12 would be out longer, more people could participate in this. If a commitment, all round, to producing updates fixing the issues in F12 were made, I think more people would be willing to participate as users could expect to see a stable system for their efforts. You make the assumption that if fedora stopped, so would upstream. You also state that the kernel is stable, yet most of the graphics work is going on at the kernel level so we have to continue to bring in new kernels to pick up these changes. Graphics work is not a fedora issue alone. It is an upstream issue first and formost. By abandoning upstream and trying to stagnate will ultimatly damage upstreams ability to gennew changes tested and released. -- Jes I'm not suggesting F12 should not be updated, in fact the opposite. As you state most of the Graphics work is being done up-stream, but it is the distributions role to package, release and allow users to test this and feed back bugs. I am saying that a focus on Graphics with a quick update cycle will help upstream get the testing they need and the users to get fixes. Actually a question on the Mesa packages, these are packaged as version 7.6-0.13 in F12. It seems however, that this is packaged from Mesa's 7.7-devel tree. I think the mesa developers have branched 7.6 as a stable branch and moved new development to 7.7. Shouldn't F12's Mesa packages have a 7.7 version number ?? -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Fedora 12 Graphics Issues: Cancel F13 and concentrate on fixing F12 ?
On 11/26/2009 07:46 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote: On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 17:09:14 +, Terry Barnabyter...@beam.ltd.uk wrote: I really want to help and get a stable release and present bug reports and even fix them if I can. But, the current short term release schedule, and no focus on testing and fixing graphics issues, does not inspire me with confidence that a stable usable release will emerge. This makes it difficult for me to justify the effort. Convince me :) I follow the radeon updates pretty closely and my 9200 finally starting working with 3d again a few weeks before the release. Airlie has continued development in the f12 branch and there have been several updates over the last couple of weeks. If you have just tried F11 and not F12 you should consider doing so. For r5xx and below, grab a live image and install one of the smaller 3d apps and try it out. For r6xx and above you'll want to install mesa-experimental-drivers and update xorg-x11-drv-ati. This won't get you the kernel updates related to graphics since the release, but should give you a good look at where things are at so that you can decide if you want install F12 on the machine. Hi, I have tried out F12 on 4 different systems, 2 with different ATI graphics and two with different Intel based boards. Only the last one appears to be able to run Blender. You mention Airlie has continued development in the f12 branch. If that means there are people working on the bugs and producing new driver updates for F12 (DRM,MESA,X11), especially for ATI then I certainly will give it some time. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Is F12 ready to upgrade ? Is it worth it ?
On 11/26/2009 12:53 PM, Timothy Murphy wrote: Tim wrote: I'm perplexed by the posts I am seeing regarding F12 upgrades. Lots of upgrade issues and darn faint praise as far as I can tell ? On a support list you, typically, see more problems than all is well postings. It surprises me that there is not a greater attempt to get feed-back on the frequency of problems, or equally, the lack of problems. I would have thought it would be relatively easy to design an online form that Fedora users could be asked to complete. There are certainly issues with X11 graphics in F12. On 4 different systems I have installed it on 3 do not work in 3D (System hangs, etc). 2 of the systems have hangs (X11 and/or system) in 2D. The problems I have experienced and I believe a number of others are experiencing are due to graphics driver problems (DRM,DRI,MESA,X11) with certain graphics chip sets (At least 4 different ones in my case). I know there are a lot of changes happening on the Graphics front, but I do feel its time to focus on fixing these issues rather than spending valuable developer and user time on a new release ... -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Is F12 ready to upgrade ? Is it worth it ?
On 11/26/2009 02:08 PM, Timothy Murphy wrote: Terry Barnaby wrote: It surprises me that there is not a greater attempt to get feed-back on the frequency of problems, or equally, the lack of problems. I would have thought it would be relatively easy to design an online form that Fedora users could be asked to complete. There are certainly issues with X11 graphics in F12. On 4 different systems I have installed it on 3 do not work in 3D (System hangs, etc). 2 of the systems have hangs (X11 and/or system) in 2D. If you don't mind my using your problem as a hook to hang an opinion on: You have had graphics problems with 3 out of 4 machines. Personally, I have had no graphics problems with Fedora-12/KDE on 5 machines, though I have had other minor (and unimportant) problems. But how rare or common is your experience? Have only 5% of Fedora users had graphics problems with F-12? Or is it 50%? Or 75%? I don't see how it is possible to plan development rationally without some idea of the statistics. I agree. I could be unlucky with my particular systems. Although from the forum there apear to be many people having install problems that sound like Graphics driver issues. I am also mainly talking about 3D apps that, I guess, a lot of people do not use. Are there any statistics of actual F12 users, not just those who downloaded the systems and installed them ? (I have test installed 5 F12 systems but use none of them). -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Fedora 12: Install: 3D Graphics System Problems Still
On 11/17/2009 03:53 PM, Terry Barnaby wrote: I have just done some test installs of Fedora 12 on two different hardware platforms using: Fedora-12-i686-Live-KDE.iso via a USB stick. The installs went fine and the install experience was good and relatively quick. I have not had a good look at the system yet, but superficially it looks fine. However, there are some serious graphics issues still, at least on the two systems I have test installed onto. System 1: With: With: Intel Corporation 82945G/GZ Integrated Graphics Controller With: Intel Corporation 82801G (ICH7 Family) Boot sometimes fails with a message like drm: ... tried to release a fb we did not own glxgears runs fine at 999FPS blender locks up the X (system still running but unable to kill X) Not sure if PulseAudio is working (GUI messages stating problems) System 2: ATI Technologies Inc RV535 [Radeon X1650 Series] With: Intel Corporation 82801EB/ER (ICH5/ICH5R) Fails at boot 30% of the time. locks up with black screen glxgears runs at 0.8FPS !! blender runs (I think) but takes 5mins to display the first screen Not sure if PulseAudio is working (GUI messages stating problems) This is not good. The 3D graphics system, appears to me, to be still severely broken. In fact there are also 2D problems now (lock ups) which were not there in F11. A lot of people have obviously done a lot of good and hard work on F12, but it looks like the graphics system is going to let them and the system down again. I really think some serious work needs to be done to stabilise the graphics system. This includes much better QA. I note that F12 is using Mesa 7.7-devel even though the RPM's are 7.6-0.13. I thought that 7.6 was now a stable branch and 7.7 an experimental branch ? Couldn't F12 use 7.6 and feedback issues on this to get a stable release ? There were no real 3D graphics updates in F11, is this going to be the same for F12 ? I will try F12 on some other systems, but if there are not going to be any updates that fix the 3D graphics issues in F12, I for one cannot use the system and will have to stick with F8 or find something better. Terry I have just tried the Fedora-12-i686-Live-KDE.iso on an IBM Thinkpad R52 which uses an ATI Technologies Inc M22 [Mobility Radeon X300]. Again F12 boots fine, however 3D graphics is still broken. glxgears runs at 450FPS. This is fine but is 50% of the speed in F11. blender: This runs ! However the pop up menus are not working properly with the highlighted item not being under the cursor and also are slow. On the 3 different systems I have installed F12 on, 3D graphics has problems at least with Blender. I will try a couple more systems today ... I spent a lot of my time debugging and feeding back 3D issues in F11 and I was just one among many others. The menu offset bug was actually fixed, I believe, in the GIT trees. However, none of the bug fixing work performed was ever packaged as an update for F11 and thus 3D graphics remained broken in that release. Is this going to be the same for F12 ? I think there should be a real push in F12 to get the graphics system fixed with all of the updates being made available for F12. Are there any comments on why the Mesa code is 7.7 although the RPMS are 7.6 ? -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Fedora 12: Install: 3D Graphics System Problems Still
I have just done some test installs of Fedora 12 on two different hardware platforms using: Fedora-12-i686-Live-KDE.iso via a USB stick. The installs went fine and the install experience was good and relatively quick. I have not had a good look at the system yet, but superficially it looks fine. However, there are some serious graphics issues still, at least on the two systems I have test installed onto. System 1: With: With: Intel Corporation 82945G/GZ Integrated Graphics Controller With: Intel Corporation 82801G (ICH7 Family) Boot sometimes fails with a message like drm: ... tried to release a fb we did not own glxgears runs fine at 999FPS blender locks up the X (system still running but unable to kill X) Not sure if PulseAudio is working (GUI messages stating problems) System 2: ATI Technologies Inc RV535 [Radeon X1650 Series] With: Intel Corporation 82801EB/ER (ICH5/ICH5R) Fails at boot 30% of the time. locks up with black screen glxgears runs at 0.8FPS !! blender runs (I think) but takes 5mins to display the first screen Not sure if PulseAudio is working (GUI messages stating problems) This is not good. The 3D graphics system, appears to me, to be still severely broken. In fact there are also 2D problems now (lock ups) which were not there in F11. A lot of people have obviously done a lot of good and hard work on F12, but it looks like the graphics system is going to let them and the system down again. I really think some serious work needs to be done to stabilise the graphics system. This includes much better QA. I note that F12 is using Mesa 7.7-devel even though the RPM's are 7.6-0.13. I thought that 7.6 was now a stable branch and 7.7 an experimental branch ? Couldn't F12 use 7.6 and feedback issues on this to get a stable release ? There were no real 3D graphics updates in F11, is this going to be the same for F12 ? I will try F12 on some other systems, but if there are not going to be any updates that fix the 3D graphics issues in F12, I for one cannot use the system and will have to stick with F8 or find something better. Terry -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Fedora 12 Beta
On 10/21/2009 11:49 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote: 2009/10/21 Adam Williamsonawill...@redhat.com: On Wed, 2009-10-21 at 12:31 +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote: I guess this is a plymouth bug. I disabled it in grub conf and system works correctly. Is there any chance to completely remove plymouth from the system? (even from initrd) From a quick look, we don't have a bug filed for the fact that entering the root password at this point doesn't work with Plymouth. Could you please file one with a full description, and mark it as blocking F12Blocker? Thanks. Here is a bug report https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530224 I don't know how to mark it as a blocker. 4 - F12 boots really slow on my laptop http://www.stardust.webpages.pl/files/tmp/bootchart.png something wrong is happening while udev loading Please file a bug for this, on 'udev' component for now, and CC Harald Hoyer (hhoyer at redhat). Thanks! Note that on my Thinkpad R52 Laptop F11 started doing this after a udev RPM update. It turned out to be the fact that there was no floppy drive in my system but the BIOS was configured with one enabled. I suspect this is default in some laptops so that docking stations etc work ?? I think this bug is in Bugzilla, but I suspect it has not been fixed ... Done https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530226 5 - default gnome sound scheme is terrible This is a pretty subjective topic. Yes, I know :) Regards, Michal -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: How about releasing an update of xorg-x11-drv-intel for Fedora 11
On 10/09/2009 12:19 AM, Dave Airlie wrote: On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 09:37 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 14:05 +0100, Terry Barnaby wrote: No, I don't what to force testing on anyone (although F11 has done that already :) ) I was just suggesting that a separate yum archive with the packages necessary to test the later graphics development code that will be in F12 could be made available for people to try out easily with their F11 systems. They can optionally try these. I think it will allow 3D to work for many people (from my experience of the latest GIT versions) although others would not be so lucky. They can easily back these changes out if they have more issues than the standard graphics system. Then please feel free to make one. :) I don't mean that in a snide fashion, but it really is the answer. As noted, having our X.org developers spend time on such a repository directly subtracts that amount of time from the time they would otherwise spend actually developing the drivers (our X.org maintainers are also major upstream developers) and fixing reported bugs. I thought about doing something like this the other day, but really if we had something like Ubuntu PPA, which I think is on the longterm plans for Fedora then it would be a lot easier to do. At the moment its just too distracting to do. The thing with doing updates for F11 is the regression rate due to lack of QA, I put Mesa packages into updates-testing that fixed a lot of r300/r500 bugs back at the start of F11 and it went into testing a few weeks later and broke Intel, I got 0 reports during that u-t phase about breakage. So now I have a package in stable that lets 3D works for x num of people and breaks compiz for y number. So I've pretty much given up on pushing anything to previous Fedora releases that isn't a security fix or major crash fix, because we simply don't have the QA in place to avoid regression current users, at least if you install F11 on your hw, and it doesn't work well, you know that, if you install it and it works well then later stops working well, thats a lot worse situation to end up in. I think for F12 updates we could really do with some sort of side repo setup, so we could have a stability period where QA could happen on packages that may end up in updates a month or two later. Dave. Given that there is a lot of development work to do on these drivers (which is why you find the newer versions better...) and a lot of bugs to fix (we generally barely keep up with the rate of bugs filed as it is), we don't see that as a good trade-off. You'd get backported drivers for stable releases, but the rate of development of the actual upstream drivers would be noticeably slowed, and fewer reported bugs would ultimately get fixed. Backporting packages is not intrinsically very difficult, though it is somewhat time-consuming, so it's something for which a far greater candidate pool exists than X driver development. Thus, the suggestion that someone else do it. For instance, you. It seems you've already successfully built the latest versions of things locally; if you can do that, you can put them in a package and put the package in a repository, it's not a very hard process and it's all documented on the Wiki. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net I totally agree with you on the QA issue. Maybe I am wrong, but I haven't seen any real set of tests to be performed on Fedora 3D graphics. I tried the ATI test day for graphics. On the 3D graphics side it said to run glxgears and if you like other 3D apps that you use. Running your other 3D apps is difficult from a limited Live distribution... I really think a simple test procedure should be implemented and documented to at least check for basic functionality with the main 3D applications. Ideally an automatic test program should be part of this. This would allow a relative novice to test the 3D system on their hardware and hopefully automatically feed back constructive results from the myriad of different graphics hardware options. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: How about releasing an update of xorg-x11-drv-intel for Fedora 11
On 10/08/2009 01:51 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote: On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 10:54:54 +0100, Terry Barnabyter...@beam.ltd.uk wrote: Are you confident that F12 will make 3D usable under Linux on the majority of mainstream graphics cards ? It's not going to provide 3d for nvidia, though it is hoped that nouveau will be somewhat improved. Intel and all much of ATI (through at least r600 series) is supposed to get working 3d with kernel mode setting. Due to the range of graphics hardware and the differences between them, I would have thought that a significant amount of user testing and bug fixing would need to be done to achieve this. I tried the F12 ATI graphics testing day and although a good idea the 3D tests were very limited and due to the amount of effort a user has to put in I guess limited in scope. Although people, myself included, feed back bugs upstream into the freedesktop GIT repository I would have thought that a larger audience was required ... So you'd prefer to force F11 users to do testing whether they want to or not? No, I don't what to force testing on anyone (although F11 has done that already :) ) I was just suggesting that a separate yum archive with the packages necessary to test the later graphics development code that will be in F12 could be made available for people to try out easily with their F11 systems. They can optionally try these. I think it will allow 3D to work for many people (from my experience of the latest GIT versions) although others would not be so lucky. They can easily back these changes out if they have more issues than the standard graphics system. I would have thought that more people would be likely to try out the graphics updates if it is easy for them to install on their running systems and use in their normal usage patterns rather than have to maintain a separate test system just to test and feed back issues ... It isn't going to be simple to do this. With the modesetting changes there are a lot of interactions between parts and you need to change a number of things (X, mesa, drm, kernel) at once to have a working system. Yes, there are quite a few changes, that is why it is difficult for people to test the changes ... Although I would have though that for the most part it would be just building the appropriate set of the F12 packages for F11. Ah well, I will probably have to wait for F12 or F13 before I can truly move from F8 :( -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: How about releasing an update of xorg-x11-drv-intel for Fedora 11
On 10/08/2009 05:37 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 14:05 +0100, Terry Barnaby wrote: No, I don't what to force testing on anyone (although F11 has done that already :) ) I was just suggesting that a separate yum archive with the packages necessary to test the later graphics development code that will be in F12 could be made available for people to try out easily with their F11 systems. They can optionally try these. I think it will allow 3D to work for many people (from my experience of the latest GIT versions) although others would not be so lucky. They can easily back these changes out if they have more issues than the standard graphics system. Then please feel free to make one. :) I don't mean that in a snide fashion, but it really is the answer. As noted, having our X.org developers spend time on such a repository directly subtracts that amount of time from the time they would otherwise spend actually developing the drivers (our X.org maintainers are also major upstream developers) and fixing reported bugs. Given that there is a lot of development work to do on these drivers (which is why you find the newer versions better...) and a lot of bugs to fix (we generally barely keep up with the rate of bugs filed as it is), we don't see that as a good trade-off. You'd get backported drivers for stable releases, but the rate of development of the actual upstream drivers would be noticeably slowed, and fewer reported bugs would ultimately get fixed. Backporting packages is not intrinsically very difficult, though it is somewhat time-consuming, so it's something for which a far greater candidate pool exists than X driver development. Thus, the suggestion that someone else do it. For instance, you. It seems you've already successfully built the latest versions of things locally; if you can do that, you can put them in a package and put the package in a repository, it's not a very hard process and it's all documented on the Wiki. I was thinking of doing that, I have done this sort of thing before, until the drivers/drm/mesa needed changes in the XServer which is dependent on a lot of things. I would then be fighting a battle with the main updates repositories for evermore, well until F12 which will then bring in its own set of problems -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: How about releasing an update of xorg-x11-drv-intel for Fedora 11
On 10/04/2009 04:05 PM, John Reiser wrote: The title says it all. How about that? We really need it for old intel h/w such as an i855 for example. Enumerate the reasons, please. Which _specific_ bugs or features have been improved elsewhere but not in F11? Why are they important to you and others? The graphics system in F11 is horribly broken for 3D, at least on Intel 845, ATI 200 and ATI 300 chipsets. Certainly the Blender program will not run on any of my computers (5 different graphics hardware versions). I have been using drm/mesa/xf86-video-ati code from GIT to get around this, but now the XServer is out of date so it has got difficult. A new release of drm/mesa/xf86-video-ati/Xserver code for F11 based on the new 1.7 XServer and 7.6 mesa would be very useful. I understand that changing the Graphics system could break many users systems, so maybe a build of all the necessary packages could be put into the testing repository or perhaps a special graphics-testing repository could be added. This would help get the graphics issues fixed prior to F12's release ... It would be good to have a Linux system that could actually to 3D with the major applications by the end of 2009 ! Cheers Terry -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Re: Blender is not working properly
On 09/10/2009 10:31 AM, Antonio M wrote: 2009/9/10 Antonio Mantonio.montagn...@gmail.com: I installed latest blender blender-2.49a-1.fc11.i586 and when I start it on my laptop with intel graphics I get a blank screen on workarea, and it is pretty unusable, I found that setting LIBGL_ALWAYS_SOFTWARE fixes the screen corruption in bug 510872. Where??? Same problem with blender-2.49b-1.fc11.i586. Any help??? -- Antonio Montagnani Skype : antoniomontag SIP: antoniomon...@ekiga.net LIBGL_ALWAYS_SOFTWARE=1 blender from a terminal makes it work Is the bug connected to xorg or to blender The bug is likely to be XOrg/Drm/Mesa related. The versions of these are under heavy development and the version that F11 uses is quite bug ridden. I have managed to get Blender to work on my systems by using later releases of these components from freedesktop GIT sources. Really 3D support in Fedora 11 is broken and will be until a much more recent release of XOrg/Drm/Mesa makes its way into F11 updates. From the responses to questions I have asked on this, it does not seem that this is likely to happen. We all may have to wait for F12. Tt still may be broken in F12, although it looks like Blender at least will work for a good majority of Graphics boards. Cheers Terry -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F11: Firefox v3.5.2-2 causes daily system lockouts.
On 09/06/2009 10:11 PM, Tony Nelson wrote: On 09-09-06 13:20:31, Daniel B. Thurman wrote: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.2) Gecko/20090803 Fedora/3.5.2-2.fc11 Firefox/3.5.2 After extensive testing with the divide conquer method, I have discovered that FireFox is causing all sorts of hissy-fits, the worst, being a complete system lockout, once per day, requiring a hard-reboot. This is cause during inactivity, and no, it is NOT the Gnome screen-saver. As long as FF is NOT running, I used my system for 1 week, gnome screen-saver w/ random - not a single lockout, no problems. The second worse part about FF is the rendering of the graphics are horrible - extra black lines vertically, horizontally, both on forums with tables, and some weird characters every now and then. I also see font rendering artifacts, mostly in Firefox, but in other apps as well. I blame the video driver, possibly the EXA acceleration, though I haven't tried XAA yet (per `man radeon`). I have an old ATI Radeon RV100 QY [Radeon 7000/VE] rev 0. It could be that your lockups have the same cause. I also had quite a lot of lock-ups with a system using an ATI R200 based graphics chip (and issues with a R300 ATI stsrem). I suspect that the fact that you use Firefox a lot leads you to suspect Firefox although the problem affects many other apps ... In my case compiling and using the latest freedesktop drm/mesa/xf86-video-ati graphics driver code from git sources fixed the issues. Unfortunately there have been no drm/mesa/xf86-video-ati updates for Fedora 11 yet ... -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: ati drivers fail -- migrating to ubuntu
On 09/07/2009 08:49 PM, Frank Cox wrote: On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 15:38:48 -0400 Kevin Abbey wrote: I'm interested to learn opinions on this subject from the fedora community. What ATI card do you have? The ATI Radeon X1950 Pro in this computer works great (and the X1550 that I had previously also worked great), WITHOUT the proprietary drivers. I installed F11 on this computer and everything just worked, including the video (1680x1050 on this 22 widescreen monitor). No need for any proprietary driver at all. Video cards are relatively cheap; perhaps you would be well advised to simply get a good one -- I can recommend either two models above because I know they work. In my experience with 3 different ATI graphics chipset based systems and two Intel chipset based systems things are not good. Generally 2D is Ok with some X11 lockups and pixel corruptions with two of the ATI boards. 3D is a different story though. None of the graphics cards I have will work with Blender, a fairly mainstream 3D app and some other 3D apps that I use and I'm sure that the X1950 Pro and X1550 won't either as there are some fundamental issues in the mesa/Xorg code that F11 is based upon. These are getting ironed out in the latest freedesktop git sources and when/if F11's XOrg/Mesa code is updated I think things will be better. Not sure how well accelerated Video is supported ... I am still stuck with F8 using the ATI propitiatory driver for my 3D apps ... -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Fedora11: Plans for updated mesa/xorg packages ?
On 09/03/2009 03:10 PM, Terry Barnaby wrote: On 09/03/2009 02:11 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: On 09/03/2009 01:34 PM, Terry Barnaby wrote: Does anyone know if there is a plan to release updated xorg/mesa packages for F11 any time soon ? The F11 ones are very broken, at least for ATI radeon based systems. I have been using code from freedesktops git sources (drm,mesa,xf86-video-ati) and this is now getting there, at least blender works ! However, the changes needed to the stock F11 are now getting larger (xserver update) and it would be good to have an RPM based system again ! Do you have bugzilla numbers so we know what breakage you are talking about? Rahul There are a large number of ATI R200/R300/R500 bugs listed in Freedesktop's bugzilla. Two that I have had dealings with are: 21774 and 23232, however due to heavy development in the xorg/mesa packages there are a lot more than that. Before using the git sources for drm/mesa,xf86-video-ati I had various crashes, hangs, system lockups and pixel errors on the screen on both R300 and R200 based systems. I think it is the same for Intel graphics as well. I don't like using raw git/non RPM code on my systems, but, without the git xorg/mesa code F11 is unworkable for me. Unfortunately the bug, 23232, requires a more recent XOrg XServer. This has heavy system dependencies and would require me to do a lot of work in building many packages right down to OpenSSL ... It seems, to me, that the XOrg/Mesa code has got a lot better since the code F11 was based on and a F11 update is due. It would certainly help me and many others ... Cheers Terry So are there any plans for updated mesa/xorg packages for F11 ? Looking at the Mesa and freedesktop mail lists, Mesa is just branching its 7.6 branch for stable/bug fixing and Xorg is stabilising for release 1.7 of the XServer. Sounds like a good time for Fedora 11 to update to the latest ... Is there any road map or plans for F11 somewhere ? Cheers Terry -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Fedora repository issues: gnonlin-0.10.12-1.fc11.i586
Hi, For a few days now there is a depenancy issue in the Fedora repositories: Missing Dependency: gstreamer-plugins-base = 0.10.24 is needed by package gnonlin-0.10.12-1.fc11.i586 (updates) Cheers Terry -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Fedora11: Plans for updated mesa/xorg packages ?
Does anyone know if there is a plan to release updated xorg/mesa packages for F11 any time soon ? The F11 ones are very broken, at least for ATI radeon based systems. I have been using code from freedesktops git sources (drm,mesa,xf86-video-ati) and this is now getting there, at least blender works ! However, the changes needed to the stock F11 are now getting larger (xserver update) and it would be good to have an RPM based system again ! -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Fedora11: Plans for updated mesa/xorg packages ?
On 09/03/2009 02:11 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: On 09/03/2009 01:34 PM, Terry Barnaby wrote: Does anyone know if there is a plan to release updated xorg/mesa packages for F11 any time soon ? The F11 ones are very broken, at least for ATI radeon based systems. I have been using code from freedesktops git sources (drm,mesa,xf86-video-ati) and this is now getting there, at least blender works ! However, the changes needed to the stock F11 are now getting larger (xserver update) and it would be good to have an RPM based system again ! Do you have bugzilla numbers so we know what breakage you are talking about? Rahul There are a large number of ATI R200/R300/R500 bugs listed in Freedesktop's bugzilla. Two that I have had dealings with are: 21774 and 23232, however due to heavy development in the xorg/mesa packages there are a lot more than that. Before using the git sources for drm/mesa,xf86-video-ati I had various crashes, hangs, system lockups and pixel errors on the screen on both R300 and R200 based systems. I think it is the same for Intel graphics as well. I don't like using raw git/non RPM code on my systems, but, without the git xorg/mesa code F11 is unworkable for me. Unfortunately the bug, 23232, requires a more recent XOrg XServer. This has heavy system dependencies and would require me to do a lot of work in building many packages right down to OpenSSL ... It seems, to me, that the XOrg/Mesa code has got a lot better since the code F11 was based on and a F11 update is due. It would certainly help me and many others ... Cheers Terry -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Conf File Backup Idea
On 08/01/2009 04:58 AM, Tony Nelson wrote:
On 09-07-31 19:17:46, Thom Paine wrote:
Thanks for the suggestions. I'll have a look at some of them and see
if I can figure something out.
I don't mind manually making lists of files as I start working with
them. What really prompted this was that I have some home automation
working really well on an old server I had. One power outtage that
lasted longer than 30 minutes while I was away from home, two hard
drives in the array went offline. I thought the whole server was lost
and last night I dusted it off and rooted around in the adaptec
interface and was able to force them both back online and bring the
array back up. I quickly copied off my heyu files but I got to
thinking if there was a way to automatically rsync files somewhere
when I edit them, it would make things simpler on a server I have no
need to completely back up, yet have some good info on it.
I'm a sloppy person, so I set up an rsync-based solution derived from a
script I snagged through googling. It keeps 4-hourly, daily, 4 weekly,
and several monthly rotating backups of the directories I list. Let me
know if you want it. Sometime I'll clean it up some more and put it on
my web site.
Something that we do to get most of the configuration files backed up is:
# Create list of RPM config files that have changed
files_rpmconfig
rpm -qac --dump | sed -e /^(/d | while read -a line
do
# echo Line: ${line[0]} ${line[3]}
if false
then
if [ ! -r ${line[0]} ]
then
echo Unable to access file: ${line[0]}
fi
fi
if [ -f ${line[0]} ]
then
fi=(`md5sum ${line[0]}`)
# echo Sum: ${fi[0]}
if [ ${fi[0]} != ${line[3]} ]
then
echo ${line[0]} files_rpmconfig
fi
fi
done
This should backup any files that are marked as configuration files in the RPM
packages and have changed. If you has installed tarballs etc, you will obviously
have to add any configuration files for those manually. We normally do this
during OS updates so we can quickly look back at configuration changes without
having to go and get the full backup disk.
Cheers
Terry
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F11 + XFCE stability vs F10 + Gnome?
On 07/27/2009 10:32 PM, Philip Rhoades wrote: People, On 2009-07-26 20:59, Terry Barnaby wrote: On 07/26/2009 10:54 AM, John Austin wrote: On Sun, 2009-07-26 at 18:46 +1000, Philip Rhoades wrote: People, I upgraded from F10 + Gnome to F11 + XFCE and found that I am getting fairly frequent screen lockups which require a remote shutdown and at least on one occasion required a power reset. I am having heat problems though so I am not sure if the problems are related to the upgrade or deteriorating hardware. Does anyone know of stability problems with XFCE? Thanks, Phil. Mine has been very stable but I did a clean install not upgrade Linux naxos 2.6.29.6-213.fc11.x86_64 John There are a few graphics driver issues in F11 due to the large changes going on in X-Windows currently that can lock up the XServer. Different graphics cards are affected more than others. Certainly I have lockups with some ATI cards ... Terry I should have said I did a clean install as well. The lockups are happening every couple/few days but there is nothing in /var/log/messages about it - is there some sort of logging of the video driver I can do to help debug the problem? Thanks, Phil. I'm not sure if you can easily get any debug info from this. I suspect it is similar to the issue I am having with some ATI cards where the XServer locks up in a tight loop within the kernel (probably DRM driver). I guess you cannot kill the XServer either There is some debug ability in the drm module, not sure how to use this though. I would suggest having a look at the freedesktop bugzilla at: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/. Search under the product xorg for your graphics chipset (lspci) and/or lockup and filing any extra info you have there. I have been trying the latest git freedesktop code for ATI chipsets, unfortunately, it does not fix the bugs I am seeing as yet. Terry -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: will we ever have radeon drivers that aren't crap?
On 07/29/2009 02:52 AM, Bruno Wolff III wrote: On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 09:51:25 +0100, Anne Wilsonan...@kde.org wrote: On Tuesday 28 July 2009 04:11:36 john wendel wrote: The one and only time I ever had an ATI card was when I was running Windows 98 (the last version I ever owned) and the ATI driver wouldn't get out of 640x480 mode. I gave the card away, and vowed to never buy ATI video again. I suggest you do the same. It's unfair to compare ATi so long ago with ATi now. But then many people are running ancient cards and expect them to work with modern drivers. It's unrealistic. ATi are working better with Linux these days, but it has only been this last couple of years. Anything older than that, you just have to accept what it gives you. Why? The important parts of the spec for the older radeon cards are available. In fact the r200 specs have been available for a very long time. Having a quick look at the subject, it does look like things are moving in the right direction at AMD/freedesktop. As stated AMD have released a lot of detailed documentation for their chipsets (90% of the battle ?) and there appears to be quite a lot of work going on. Some catch up work to DRI2/Gallium/KMS/Gem and other future graphics API's has been just done as well as tidying up the code so that more code is shared between different chipset varients. It looks like the large amount of work/changes being introduced for Intel cards (by Intel ?) has caused a bit of a rumpus in the graphics scene :) From what I can see, people are saying that the ATI drivers should improve and have better (reliability/performance) in the medium term. There are statements of 6 to 9 months, but I guess that depends on how many people are working on them and the quality of bug reports ... -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: fedora 11 worst then ever release
On 07/27/2009 09:26 AM, Fernando Cassia wrote: On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 9:30 PM, solarflow99solarflo...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 12:23 AM, Ben Boeckelmaths...@gmail.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Farkas Levente wrote: On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 5:41 PM, Alan Cox a...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk wrote: all of my system has a wrong openssl version all these symptoms sound like your upgrade went horribly wrong. I've seen preupgrade mash up a box by half upgrading like that. It's the main reason I don't think preupgrade is actually safe to use yet. i use fedora install dvd in this case! if it's do a half upgrade then it's also the bug of the installer. i already install f11 yum show 2069 packages to update!!! just one month after the release! my system consist of 2059 In other words your box didn't update to F11 in the first place, it just updated a few things and exploded, which is what it tends to do. You were basically running FC10 and a few random bits of FC11. as i wrote i use fedora install dvd! if it's jusr updated a few things then it's also the bug of the installer. This is a problem with the DVD that is hard to solve. Fully updated F10 is newer than F11 was when the DVD was spun (especially when the DVD is a month old)...so not everything got updated. There was a thread on it earlier on this list. It either breaks other things to fix or the DVD is just broken to update from after X days of release. so you're not the only one with F11 problems, I cant even install it, the bug isn't being looked at either, there nothing I can do. Wait for a re-spin... http://fedoraunity.org/re-spins-info/faq/fedora-media-and-the-re-spins http://www.kanarip.com/2009/07/new-fedora-11-respin-in-testing-plus-anaconda-updates FC On this subject, why isn't the standard anaconda package for F11 updated when bugs are found and fixed ? I, amongst others I'm sure, make their own local re-spins of F11 that we can install on our local systems. One of the major items needed in a respin is the anaconda installer as if this has bugs for our systems installing is very difficult. All other packages can be fixed by a later yum update. If anaconda updated packages were released as part of the normal F11 updates then respins built with pungi would have all of the latest installation bugs fixed. Terry -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: fedora 11 worst then ever release
On 07/27/2009 01:21 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote: On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 11:02:46 +0100, Terry Barnabyter...@beam.ltd.uk wrote: On this subject, why isn't the standard anaconda package for F11 updated when bugs are found and fixed ? I, amongst others I'm sure, make their own local re-spins of F11 that we can install on our local systems. One of the major items needed in a respin is the anaconda installer as if this has bugs for our systems installing is very difficult. All other packages can be fixed by a later yum update. If anaconda updated packages were released as part of the normal F11 updates then respins built with pungi would have all of the latest installation bugs fixed. I think it is partly a time and priority issue. In the past there was a lot of point of maintaining a stable anaconda since it would have little use. Doing that would take time away from work on the development version. So it didn't seem to be a good trade off. Nowadays I'd like to see that rethought. There is more emphasis on people doing custom spins (since livecd-creator makes it easy) and I think anaconda fixes for stable releases have a lot more value now than they did in the past. However, I am not sure what the resource situation is. The anaconda guys seem to have been doing a lot of scrambling to get ready for F11. And there appears to be a lot of work on anaconda being done for F12. I would have thought that Anaconda should be designed so that it was as Fedora distribution neutral as possible, with any special distribution bits separated out. This aids maintenance, reliability etc etc ... If that is/was the case then very little extra resources would be required to keep a F11 anaconda maintained ... Purely from a publicity viewpoint, the main feelings of a distribution come from reviewers and initial users when they first install it. Their views come from how easy and well the installation went. From this perspective alone I think it should be a high priority to fix any core Anaconda issues and ship an updated ISO release (say F11.1) ASAP. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F11: kill -9 doesn't work
On 07/26/2009 12:46 AM, Alan Cox wrote: On Sat, 25 Jul 2009 22:24:57 +0100 Terry Barnabyter...@beam.ltd.uk wrote: On 07/25/2009 09:03 PM, Tom Horsley wrote: On Sat, 25 Jul 2009 20:57:14 +0100 Terry Barnaby wrote: In my eyes as an old Unix developer standards are slipping ... I dunno. Perhaps the oldest code in Unix is the code that generates corefile, and you've never been able to kill -9 that once a process starts coredumping multiple gigabytes over a slow NFS link. I wish they'd put a check in there :-). At least that would finish eventually and the system would continue running :) Linux fixed that one. You can also core dump to dump directory, or through a core dumper helper application. I must admit the state of the Fedora 11 release has pushed me further to the point of view that we need a sea change in OS/programming design. Things seem to have got over complicated and convoluted with to many undocumented layers and many ways of doing the same thing adding to the complexity. The state of a Linux release to the end user (and developer) does not seem to have improved much in the last 4 years. It seems, to me, that a plateau has been reached, with many changes occurring, but things not improving Mind you it does look visually different (if you like that sort of thing) :) -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F11 + XFCE stability vs F10 + Gnome?
On 07/26/2009 10:54 AM, John Austin wrote: On Sun, 2009-07-26 at 18:46 +1000, Philip Rhoades wrote: People, I upgraded from F10 + Gnome to F11 + XFCE and found that I am getting fairly frequent screen lockups which require a remote shutdown and at least on one occasion required a power reset. I am having heat problems though so I am not sure if the problems are related to the upgrade or deteriorating hardware. Does anyone know of stability problems with XFCE? Thanks, Phil. -- Philip Rhoades GPO Box 3411 Sydney NSW 2001 Australia E-mail: p...@pricom.com.au Mine has been very stable but I did a clean install not upgrade Linux naxos 2.6.29.6-213.fc11.x86_64 John There are a few graphics driver issues in F11 due to the large changes going on in X-Windows currently that can lock up the XServer. Different graphics cards are affected more than others. Certainly I have lockups with some ATI cards ... Terry -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F11: kill -9 doesn't work
On 07/24/2009 10:40 PM, Bill Davidsen wrote: Terry Barnaby wrote: On 07/22/2009 02:07 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote: On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 01:02:09PM +0100, Terry Barnaby wrote: Hi, I have noticed on several occasions, that running kill -9pid on a GUI 3D process that is locked at 100% CPU usage (X-Server 100% also) does not work. The 100% lockup I'm sure is due to the currently buggy 3D support (ATI in my case), but I am surprised that I cannot kill either the GUI or X processes. Only a reboot appears to work. Has something changed here ?? If you provide more details, such as the actual process you're running, people might be able to try to duplicate the problem. I've never seen an occasion where kill -9 didn't work, but that doesn't mean it's not possible with some horribly written code. The system in question is a dual Xeon system running Fedora-11 with all updates to 2009-07-22. Graphics board is an ATI RV280 [Radeon 9200 PRO]. I have some applications installed from rpmfusion including paraview. Currently if I run paraview, X goes to 100% and I can no longer operate the system via mouse/keyboard. Via a network login I can killall -9 X but that does nothing to X. I have also tried killing paraview in the same way with no effect (possibly after trying to kill X). I hope this is a typo, process X is long gone, the X process is called Xorg now. I assume you had a finger check and actually killed the real X process. On F11 Xorg is hard linked to X and X is the program started. So in ps listings the XServer process is named X and to kill it with killall you need to do a killall -9 X ... -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F11: kill -9 doesn't work
On 07/25/2009 12:12 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote: On Saturday 25 July 2009 08:52:43 Terry Barnaby wrote: On 07/24/2009 10:40 PM, Bill Davidsen wrote: Terry Barnaby wrote: On 07/22/2009 02:07 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote: On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 01:02:09PM +0100, Terry Barnaby wrote: Hi, I have noticed on several occasions, that running kill -9pid on a GUI 3D process that is locked at 100% CPU usage (X-Server 100% also) does not work. The 100% lockup I'm sure is due to the currently buggy 3D support (ATI in my case), but I am surprised that I cannot kill either the GUI or X processes. Only a reboot appears to work. Has something changed here ?? If you provide more details, such as the actual process you're running, people might be able to try to duplicate the problem. I've never seen an occasion where kill -9 didn't work, but that doesn't mean it's not possible with some horribly written code. The system in question is a dual Xeon system running Fedora-11 with all updates to 2009-07-22. Graphics board is an ATI RV280 [Radeon 9200 PRO]. I have some applications installed from rpmfusion including paraview. Currently if I run paraview, X goes to 100% and I can no longer operate the system via mouse/keyboard. Via a network login I can killall -9 X but that does nothing to X. I have also tried killing paraview in the same way with no effect (possibly after trying to kill X). I hope this is a typo, process X is long gone, the X process is called Xorg now. I assume you had a finger check and actually killed the real X process. On F11 Xorg is hard linked to X and X is the program started. So in ps listings the XServer process is named X and to kill it with killall you need to do a killall -9 X ... Or is it the other way around? :-) I don't have F11 handy here, but on F10: $ ll /usr/bin/X* lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 4 2009-06-20 04:04 X - Xorg -rws--x--x 1 root root 1844872 2009-05-25 00:45 Xorg clearly says that X is the link to Xorg, which is the actual binary. Maybe this is different in F11, but I don't see why would it be changed. However, $ ps aux | grep X root 3383 6.3 27.6 1097836 568064 tty1 Ss+ Jul24 132:32 /usr/bin/X - br -nolisten tcp :0 vt1 -auth /var/run/xauth/A:0-4v23CU means that ps lists out the name of the *link* rather than the name of the actual binary. What I would do is prefer kill over killall, like $ kill -9 3383 since PID is always unique. All that said, forcibly killing a locked-up X usually *doesn't* give you back control over the system, since main things that get locked up along with X are graphics card, keyboard and mouse drivers. And those are typically part of the kernel, and cannot be killed just so easy. Also, one cannot expect that -9 killing of X would gracefully reset all these drivers, and my experience is that they remain hosed until a reboot. What I believe the OP issue is about, it is not X that is locked up, it is the radeon driver itself. I don't know if this is a kernel module and if it could be reinitiated with modprobe or something similar, but my experience is that if it locks up, nothing short of reboot can help. HTH, :-) Marko Yes, Xorg is the original binary which ever way you name the links :) I know in this case the lock up has probably has happened due to a bug in the Radeon DRI graphics driver, but all kernel code should be written so that a pending kill signal should terminate any loops and thence the process. I don't don't consider it acceptable that you can't kill a process, even when in the kernel and then have to reboot to recover. In my eyes as an old Unix developer standards are slipping ... Cheers Terry -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F11: kill -9 doesn't work
On 07/25/2009 09:03 PM, Tom Horsley wrote: On Sat, 25 Jul 2009 20:57:14 +0100 Terry Barnaby wrote: In my eyes as an old Unix developer standards are slipping ... I dunno. Perhaps the oldest code in Unix is the code that generates corefile, and you've never been able to kill -9 that once a process starts coredumping multiple gigabytes over a slow NFS link. I wish they'd put a check in there :-). At least that would finish eventually and the system would continue running :) -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: will we ever have radeon drivers that aren't crap?
I would like to add my voice to the plea for ATI graphics board drivers that work. After n years using Linux, it seems that in the past 5 years standards have been dropping fast. For me the F11 release is the worst yet. Far to many serious bugs and problems for something called a major distribution. Far to frontier for my tastes with to much style over function. After that rant, does anyone know if the latest kernel/DRM/XOrg code from git repositories is better than the current releases in F11 ? I have been hoping for updated packages, but nothing has appeared so far ... Terry -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: update for thunderbird on f11 ?
On 07/24/2009 05:24 AM, g wrote: Mail Llists wrote: Anyone know when the newer thunderbird (b3) will make its way to updates-testing or updates on F11 ? before you go updating to thunderbird 3.x.bn, you should be sure that you want to get something that is broken. i follow support-thunderbird list and i do hate to say it, but there are a lot of bugs that need to be fix. you can check these pages to search for 3.x bugs and problems; http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.support.thunderbird/topics http://groups.google.com/groups/dir?sel=usenet%3Dmozilla.support do be sure before you try to load and use. Unfortunately F11 has thunderbird 3.0.b2 which has these bugs (and more) ! So we are wanting something with less bugs ASAP. Is there an F11 packaged version of Thunderbird 2.x anywhere so we could, at least, get a stable mail reader ? Terry -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: update for thunderbird on f11 ?
On 07/24/2009 10:20 AM, Frank Murphy wrote: On 24/07/09 09:31, Terry Barnaby wrote: On 07/24/2009 05:24 AM, g wrote: snip Unfortunately F11 has thunderbird 3.0.b2 which has these bugs (and more) ! So we are wanting something with less bugs ASAP. Is there an F11 packaged version of Thunderbird 2.x anywhere so we could, at least, get a stable mail reader ? Terry yum erase thunderbird Download F10 thunderbird from one of the F10 Mirrors and install using yum localinstall edit /etc/yum.conf exclude=thunderbird after installing F10 verion (to prevent auto update of TB) regards, Frank Thanks Frank, I wasn't sure if the F10 packages would be compatible enough with the changes in F11. I think my yum exclude= line might get a bit longer :) Cheers Terry -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
F11: kill -9 doesn't work
Hi, I have noticed on several occasions, that running kill -9 pid on a GUI 3D process that is locked at 100% CPU usage (X-Server 100% also) does not work. The 100% lockup I'm sure is due to the currently buggy 3D support (ATI in my case), but I am surprised that I cannot kill either the GUI or X processes. Only a reboot appears to work. Has something changed here ?? Cheers Terry -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F11: kill -9 doesn't work
On 07/22/2009 02:07 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote: On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 01:02:09PM +0100, Terry Barnaby wrote: Hi, I have noticed on several occasions, that running kill -9pid on a GUI 3D process that is locked at 100% CPU usage (X-Server 100% also) does not work. The 100% lockup I'm sure is due to the currently buggy 3D support (ATI in my case), but I am surprised that I cannot kill either the GUI or X processes. Only a reboot appears to work. Has something changed here ?? If you provide more details, such as the actual process you're running, people might be able to try to duplicate the problem. I've never seen an occasion where kill -9 didn't work, but that doesn't mean it's not possible with some horribly written code. The system in question is a dual Xeon system running Fedora-11 with all updates to 2009-07-22. Graphics board is an ATI RV280 [Radeon 9200 PRO]. I have some applications installed from rpmfusion including paraview. Currently if I run paraview, X goes to 100% and I can no longer operate the system via mouse/keyboard. Via a network login I can killall -9 X but that does nothing to X. I have also tried killing paraview in the same way with no effect (possibly after trying to kill X). I know 3D is horribly broken in F11 :( as well as many other things, but I would have thought that kill -9 should still work ... Cheers Terry -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F11: kill -9 doesn't work
On 07/22/2009 03:23 PM, Tom Horsley wrote: On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 15:01:50 +0100 Terry Barnaby wrote: I know 3D is horribly broken in F11 :( as well as many other things, but I would have thought that kill -9 should still work ... Not if it is stuck inside the kernel, kill -9 only kills things as they come out of the kernel. Kernel code should be written so that it aborts any possible infinite loop when signals are awaiting processing. At least the drivers I have written do (I hope :) )... -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: F11: kill -9 doesn't work
On 07/22/2009 03:32 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote: On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 10:23:46AM -0400, Tom Horsley wrote: On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 15:01:50 +0100 Terry Barnaby wrote: I know 3D is horribly broken in F11 :( as well as many other things, but I would have thought that kill -9 should still work ... Not if it is stuck inside the kernel, kill -9 only kills things as they come out of the kernel. And since the OP indicated he was using the ATI driver, I'd say this might be a classic case study in why proprietary, closed-source drivers are bad from the user's perspective too, not just the distro's. I am using the standard OpenSource XOrg ATI driver radeon with the appropriate DRM/Mesa bits as per a standard F11 release. I have three other systems with F11 on them, some various ATI chipsets and some Intel, all of these have 3D issues mainly major ones with F11. Certainly, in my opinion, F11 not suitable for 3D apps at the moment ... -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
F11: ATI Graphics Drivers and 3D
Fedora 11 seems to have major problems with ATI graphics cards and 3D. I have two systems with ATI graphics. One is a RV280 [Radeon 9200 PRO] and one is and ATI Mobility Radeon X300. I am trying to run Blender and Paraview. Both of these are subject to major 3D display errors (missing popup windows etc) and X-Server hangs (sometimes X Server in 100% loop and kill -9 has no effect). These worked on Fedora 8 Ok although I did need to use the ATI driver for the Radeon X300 to get decent performance. I have tried nomodeset on the kernel command line to no avail. Is there any recommendations to getting later drivers and do people know where most faults lie: kernel, DRM, X-Driver ? Cheers Terry -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Help: F11 anaconda doesn't see my hard drives
On 06/30/2009 01:07 AM, Andrew Parker wrote: On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 9:10 PM, Sam Varshavchikmr...@courier-mta.com wrote: Anaconda is barfing when I try to upgrade my existing F10. The machine has an IDE drive that contains a single Windows partitions, and two SCSI drives, hanging off an Adaptec 29320 HBA, with F10 on both drives in a RAID-1 configuration. When Anaconda gets to the checking storage phase, it spins for a while, then proceeds immediately to do a new install. The partitioning screen has only /dev/sda listed, which is the existing Windows partition. /dev/sdb and /dev/sdc, the two SCSI drives, are not shown. HOWEVER: When I flip over to ALT-F2, fdisk /dev/sdb and fdisk /dev/sdc read the partition table of the two SCSI drives. So, what I have is: 1) The kernel sees the SCSI drives 2) On some other ALT-F screen I see all the soothing messages from the md subsystem concerning registering various md personalities. However, 3) mdadm isn't running 4) Anaconda sees neither the softraid partitions, nor the actual underlying /dev/sd? devices at all. You may want to bugzilla this. Anaconda had all sorts of storage changes during f11 and had numerous problems. I believe it was (one of?) the reasons that F11 slipped. A few days before the f11 release anaconda was trying to resize one of my partitions that wasn't even being used in the install. I had a major problem with installing on a system with Raid partitions as well, due to my use of a kickstart install. This is noted in the Install notes I know. Will a fixed anaconda package be release soon to fix these issues so we can roll our own fixed F11 ? -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
F11: The PHP distributed with F11 does not have imap_open
Hi the PHP (5.2.9) distributed with F11 does not appear to have the imap_open function. Is this in a separate package that needs to be installed ? -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Where are the Fedora 8 binary and source packages
The Fedora 8 binary and source packages seem to have gone from http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/releases/ Have they been moved elsewhere ? I need the sources for some packages to do some mods to some Fedora 8 systems ... Cheers Terry -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Where are the Fedora 8 binary and source packages
Sharpe, Sam J wrote: Terry Barnaby wrote: The Fedora 8 binary and source packages seem to have gone from http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/releases/ Have they been moved elsewhere ? I need the sources for some packages to do some mods to some Fedora 8 systems ... From: http://www.mirrorservice.org/sites/download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/releases/8/README ATTENTION == The contents of this directory have been moved to our archives available at: http://archives.fedoraproject.org/pub/archive/fedora/ If you are having troubles finding something there please stop by #fedora-admin on irc.freenode.net irc://irc.freenode.net So you need to go here: http://archives.fedoraproject.org/pub/archive/fedora/linux/releases/8/ Thanks ! -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
