Re: F40 Final test request: NVIDIA RTX 3000 GPUs
Neal Gompa composed on 2024-04-11 11:49 (UTC-0400): > Could you post a link to the bug report in this thread? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2274490 -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata -- ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Fedora 39 to 40 upgrade experience
Ian Laurie composed on 2024-02-15 18:05 (UTC+1100): > (2) Password needed to be updated as per what happened with Rawhide a > few weeks ago ~ login warning about my password expiring (it was set to > never expire). I'm guessing a file format changed somewhere? I've done at least 3 upgrades where password will expire in 0 days is resulting. Is a fix known? Rebooting hasn't done it. Also, xdriinfo has been getting uninstalled, so I wonder what else is disappearing. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata -- ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: xdriinfo disappeared
Yanko Kaneti composed on 2024-02-06 07:13 (UTC+0200): > On Mon, 2024-02-05 at 22:59 -0500, Felix Miata wrote: >> I just did a system-upgrade from 39 to Rawhide. In the process, >> /usr/bin/xdriinfo >> disappeared. dnf finds no package named xdriinfo. > Your dnf cache is probably stale. > # dnf info xdriinfo > Available Packages > Name : xdriinfo > Version : 1.0.7 > Release : 2.fc40 > Architecture : x86_64 > Size : 21 k > Source : xdriinfo-1.0.7-2.fc40.src.rpm > Repository : rawhide Very stale, as in empty of all the main packages, even though I had run dnf makecache. It turned out that the system-upgrade left the rawhide repo disabled, and I never thought to look until a few minutes ago. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata -- ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
xdriinfo disappeared
I just did a system-upgrade from 39 to Rawhide. In the process, /usr/bin/xdriinfo disappeared. dnf finds no package named xdriinfo. # rpm -q --changelog glx-utils | head -22 * Thu Jan 25 2024 Fedora Release Engineering - 9.0.0-6 - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_40_Mass_Rebuild * Sun Jan 21 2024 Fedora Release Engineering - 9.0.0-5 - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_40_Mass_Rebuild * Tue Oct 03 2023 Erico Nunes - 9.0.0-4 - Split xdriinfo into its own package - Remove xdriinfo additional source build and autotools dependencies # Where from standard repos can I get the xdriinfo utility? Must I copy the binary from F39 to F40? (It does work.) Is there something else to perform the same task in Rawhide? -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata -- ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
why is my ESP filesystem getting mounted to /efi/???
# inxi -S System: Host: ab560 Kernel: 6.4.16-200.fc38.x86_64 arch: x86_64 bits: 64 Console: pty pts/1 Distro: Fedora release 39 (Thirty Nine) # rpm -qa | grep grub # grep -w /efi /proc/mounts systemd-1 /efi autofs rw,relatime,fd=52,pgrp=1,timeout=120,minproto=5,maxproto=5,direct,pipe_ino=24799 0 0 /dev/nvme0n1p1 /efi vfat rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,nosymfollow,fmask=0077,dmask=0077,codepage=437,iocharset=ascii,shortname=mixed,errors=remount-ro 0 0 # tree /efi/ /efi/ ├── EFI │ ├── BOOT │ │ ├── BOOTX64.EFI │ │ ├── fbx64.efi │ │ ├── grubx64.efi │ │ └── mt74x64.efi │ ├── opensusetw │ │ └── grubx64.efi │ └── tubuntu ├── grub2 │ ├── customAB250-17.cfg │ └── custom.cfg ├── MemTest86.log ├── mt74x64.efi └── mt83x64.efi 11 directories, 10 files # efibootmgr BootCurrent: Timeout: 1 seconds BootOrder: ,0001 Boot* opensusetw HD(1,GPT,5b33...,0x800,0xa)/File(\EFI\OPENSUSETW\GRUBX64.EFI) Boot0001* UEFI OS HD(1,GPT,5b33...,0x800,0xa)/File(\EFI\BOOT\BOOTX64.EFI)424f # grep -E 'efi|boot|esp' /etc/fstab #LABEL=TM8P01ESP/boot/efi vfatcodepage=4370 0 # This is a multiboot PC. Only one bootloader is necessary. It isn't Fedora on this one. I noticed existence of /efi/ shortly after last dnf upgrade, looked at its content, thought it must have been an errant backup of some kind, moved the content elsewhere as just-in-case before removing it all, and sure enough, no more booting possible from NVME until after restoring from the backup and recreating the required EFI boot entry. Why was/is the ESP mounted anywhere when there is/was no fstab entry for it? Why does /efi/ exist? I added a new noauto fstab entry for the ESP to a unique location not within /boot/ and deleted /efi/, with the result that it stays unmounted, and /efi/ stays absent. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Feedback F38 Beta
Kamil Paral composed on 2023-04-03 05:16 (UTC-0400): > old sixpack13 wrote: >> dnf remove kernel-core >> doesn't remove the directory for that kernel under /lib/modules/ > Please report a bug against kernel here: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/ Kernel-core is not the source of very much /usr/lib/modules/ content: # rpm -ql kernel-6.2.2-301.fc38 | grep modul | wc -l 0 # rpm -ql kernel-core-6.2.2-301.fc38 | grep modul | wc -l 5 # rpm -ql kernel-modules-6.2.2-301.fc38 | grep modul | wc -l 2147 # rpm -ql kernel-modules-core-6.2.2-301.fc38 | grep modul | wc -l 2908 # Did one or more of the other three kernel packages for the selected version to remove remain installed? -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
rpm very noisy in f38
Is anyone using rpm besides dnf and me? It has gotten very noisy: # rpm -qa | grep intel error: rpmdbNextIterator: skipping h# 2 Header V3 RSA/SHA256 Signature, key ID 81b46521: BAD Header SHA1 digest: OK error: rpmdbNextIterator: skipping h# 13 Header V4 DSA/SHA1 Signature, key ID 8898875c: BAD Header SHA1 digest: OK ... error: rpmdbNextIterator: skipping h# 75 Header V4 RSA/SHA256 Signature, key ID 2ab131c6: BAD Header SHA256 digest: OK Header SHA1 digest: OK error: rpmdbNextIterator: skipping h# 76 Header V4 RSA/SHA256 Signature, key ID 2ab131c6: BAD Header SHA256 digest: OK Header SHA1 digest: OK xorg-x11-drv-intel-2.99.917-55.20210115.fc38.x86_64 intel-gpu-firmware-20230210-147.fc38.noarch # Bug searches for rpmdbNextIterator came up empty. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
f37/f38 "systemd still uses the old version"
# mount mount: (hint) your fstab has been modified, but systemd still uses the old version; use 'systemctl daemon-reload' to reload. mount: (hint) your fstab has been modified, but systemd still uses the old version; use 'systemctl daemon-reload' to reload. mount: (hint) your fstab has been modified, but systemd still uses the old version; use 'systemctl daemon-reload' to reload. mount: (hint) your fstab has been modified, but systemd still uses the old version; use 'systemctl daemon-reload' to reload. # This recently started in F37 and continues with upgrades to F38. I make /any/ change to fstab, then reboot, and next attempt to mount anything manually that was nofail or noauto in fstab, or had been mounted and I wish to remount, produces the above messages, no matter how many boots have occurred since the actual fstab edit. It used to be that a reboot constituted a systemctl daemon-reload, but that seems to have disappeared. I found nothing on point in bugzilla. How does it track what the old fstab contained, or that it changed when any change occurred one or morer boots ago? -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: How do I upgrade from F37 to Branched (F38)?
Scott Beamer composed on 2023-02-12 18:11 (UTC-0800): > I just now did a fresh install of the latest branched version, and the > repos are still pointing to rawhide. > I'm gonna let it go for now. None of this is on a production machine, > anyway. I just did a system-upgrade to 38 branch on another PC. When it was all over, I tried dnf makecache followed by dnf upgrade. The proposal was to upgrade 6 fedora* packages to 39-0.1 versions. For now I've simply added fedora-re*39* to exclude= in dnf.conf. # dnf repolist enabled repo id repo name fedora Fedora rawhide - x86_64 fedora-cisco-openh264 Fedora rawhide openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64 updates Fedora rawhide - x86_64 - Updates updates-testing Fedora rawhide - x86_64 - Test Updates # rpmqa fedora-re error: rpmdbNextIterator: skipping h# 4 Header V4 DSA/SHA1 Signature, key ID 8898875c: BAD Header SHA1 digest: OK fedora-release-38-0.23.noarch fedora-release-common-38-0.23.noarch fedora-release-identity-basic-38-0.23.noarch fedora-repos-38-0.4.noarch fedora-repos-rawhide-38-0.4.noarch # grep RETT /etc/os-release PRETTY_NAME="Fedora Linux 38 (Rawhide Prerelease)" # -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: How do I upgrade from F37 to Branched (F38)?
Scott Beamer composed on 2023-02-12 15:09 (UTC-0800): > Felix Miata wrote: >> Scott Beamer composed on 2023-02-12 09:22 (UTC-0800): >>> My attempts to upgrade landed me in Rawhide instead of Branched. >> My last one, on a Core2Duo, did too, but I caught it right away and fixed >> the repo >> configs with dnf config-manager IIRC followed by simply dnf upgrade >> --releasever=38 --skip-broken. There was one new package that makes kernel >> locking >> more complicated. > Can you elaborate on what you did? Not with any more detail than contained in the relevant period in .bash_history. A *lot* has transpired in the mean time. dnf clean all #1676142230 dfh / #1676142333 dnfpre.sh38 #1676142492 dfh / #1676142521 time dnf system-upgrade --releasever=38 --skip-broken #1676142531 time dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=38 --skip-broken #1676142723 time dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=38 --skip-broken --best #1676142788 dnf upgrade plasma-workspace plasma-workspace-common #1676142801 dnf upgrade --releasever=38 plasma-workspace plasma-workspace-common #1676143115 dfh #1676143128 dnf clean packages #1676143131 dfh / #1676143184 time dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=38 --skip-broken --best #1676143420 rpm -e --nodeps geoclue2 xdg-desktop-portal #1676143443 time dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=38 --skip-broken --best #1676144651 dfh #1676144672 dnf system-upgrade reboot #1676145175 journalctl -b -1 #1676145224 time dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=38 --skip-broken --best #1676145333 dnf system-upgrade reboot #1676145815 rpmqa fc37 | wc -l #1676145823 rpmqa fc38 | wc -l #1676145834 lr /boot #1676145894 rpmqa fc39 | wc -l #1676145909 dnf repolist enabled #1676145926 dnf config-manager --set-disabled rawhide #1676145949 dnf config-manager --set-enabled fedora updates updates-testing #1676145958 dnf repolist all #1676145975 rpmqa fedora #1676146046 dnf install --releasever=38 fedora-release fedora-release-common fedora-release-identity-basic fedora-repos fedora-gpg-keys #1676146075 dnf downgrade --releasever=38 fedora-release fedora-release-common fedora-release-identity-basic fedora-repos fedora-gpg-keys #1676146091 dnf repolist all #1676146103 rpmqa fc39 #1676146297 dnf clean all #1676146303 dnf makecache #1676146574 time dnf upgrade #1676146608 time dnf upgrade --releasever=38 #1676146959 rpmqa fc38 #1676146964 rpmqa fc39 #1676146968 rpmqa fc37 #1676147014 rpmqa odem #1676147028 rpm -e ModemManager-glib #1676147036 rpm -e ModemManager-glib geoclue2 #1676147045 rpm -e ModemManager-glib geoclue2 xdg-desktop-portal #1676147057 rpm -e ModemManager-glib geoclue2 xdg-desktop-portal xdg-desktop-portal-gtk #1676147200 Reboot #1676145815 rpmqa fc37 | wc -l #1676145823 rpmqa fc38 | wc -l #1676145834 lr /boot #1676145894 rpmqa fc39 | wc -l #1676145909 dnf repolist enabled #1676145926 dnf config-manager --set-disabled rawhide #1676145949 dnf config-manager --set-enabled fedora updates updates-testing #1676145958 dnf repolist all #1676145975 rpmqa fedora #1676146046 dnf install --releasever=38 fedora-release fedora-release-common fedora-release-identity-basic fedora-repos fedora-gpg-keys #1676146075 dnf downgrade --releasever=38 fedora-release fedora-release-common fedora-release-identity-basic fedora-repos fedora-gpg-keys #1676146091 dnf repolist all #1676146103 rpmqa fc39 #1676146297 dnf clean all #1676146303 dnf makecache #1676146574 time dnf upgrade #1676146608 time dnf upgrade --releasever=38 #1676146959 rpmqa fc38 #1676146964 rpmqa fc39 #1676146968 rpmqa fc37 # # cat /usr/local/bin/dnfpre.sh38 #!/bin/bash time dnf upgrade --releasever=38 dnf* rpm* libsol* glib* systemd* fedor* dracu* hawk* # alias | grep rpm alias rpmqa='rpm -qa | sort | grep $*' alias rpmqf='rpm -qf ' # alias | grep df alias df='df --exclude-type=tmpfs --exclude-type=devtmpfs --exclude-type=cgroup ' alias dfh='df -h ' -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: How do I upgrade from F37 to Branched (F38)?
Scott Beamer composed on 2023-02-12 09:22 (UTC-0800): > My attempts to upgrade landed me in Rawhide instead of Branched. My last one, on a Core2Duo, did too, but I caught it right away and fixed the repo configs with dnf config-manager IIRC followed by simply dnf upgrade --releasever=38 --skip-broken. There was one new package that makes kernel locking more complicated. # pinxi -Saz --zl --hostname System: Host: big41 Kernel: 6.1.10-200.fc37.x86_64 arch: x86_64 bits: 64 compiler: gcc v: 2.38-25.fc37 parameters: ro root=LABEL= ipv6.disable=1 net.ifnames=0 mitigations=auto consoleblank=0 Desktop: KDE Plasma v: 5.26.90 tk: Qt v: 5.15.8 wm: kwin_x11 vt: 7 dm: 1: KDM 2: XDM Distro: Fedora release 38 (Rawhide) -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Troubleshooting live boot on an Intel DH87RL
Brandon Nielsen via test composed on 2022-12-21 15:02 (UTC-0600): > Suggestions welcome! If your ultimate goal is F37 installation and no F37 media will boot, try booting installation media's kernel and initrd using an already working Grub, preferably those from the netinst .iso. NET install initialized from Grub is virtually the only installation method I use when Grub is already on the computer. I haven't had occasion to try a fresh installation since long before the change to Grub for installation media, as I'm normally content to upgrade using dnf. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Is KDE Plasma 5.26 going to make it into F37 final?
Scott Beamer composed on 2022-10-28 16:26 (UTC-0700): > I've been using it for several days now (I have the updates-testing repo > enabled) in F37 and it seems to be running pretty smoothly. > However, I just installed the F37 KDE spin in a VM by itself to see what > was up, and Plasma hasn't been updated to 5.26 yet. KDE released it on > 11 October. > Just wondering... You're not using multiple displays, right? Multiple displays have exhibited a multiplicity of problems for a long time. Attempts to solve these in 5.26 have apparently made the problem worse for more people than it was made better for. They're now hoping real fixes will be in 5.27. I don't think they've hooked onto a workable plan as yet. Duplicate upstream bug reports are numerous, probably well into triple digits if those not yet recognized as such yet are counted. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: [f37] (hint) your fstab has been modified, but systemd still uses...
Robert Nichols composed on 2022-09-18 21:52 (UTC-0500): > Probably an issue with your hardware clock kept in local time and the system > not yet adjusting the system clock to UTC during the boot sequence. See > <https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/us...@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/R7XOTBPLSLTLNYBEHRPE3SNPHZ3URU3O/> > and the accompanying thread. > Seems you're right. It's gone now. :) -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[f37] (hint) your fstab has been modified, but systemd still uses...
# mountsrv mount: (hint) your fstab has been modified, but systemd still uses the old version; use 'systemctl daemon-reload' to reload. mount: (hint) your fstab has been modified, but systemd still uses the old version; use 'systemctl daemon-reload' to reload. mount: (hint) your fstab has been modified, but systemd still uses the old version; use 'systemctl daemon-reload' to reload. mount: (hint) your fstab has been modified, but systemd still uses the old version; use 'systemctl daemon-reload' to reload. mountsrv is a shell alias to mount 4 noauto nfs mounts that I have used in fstabs since around when nfs V4 went mainstream. Nothing in fstab has been changed WRT nfs mounts. The only changes to fstab are: 1-because of cloning 36 so that the clone could be upgraded to 37 while keeping 36 intact, with only change being related to the / filesystem's new device name, UUID and LABEL post-cloning; and 2-an extra mount during system-upgrade process, for a filesystem mounted to /var/lib/dnf/system-upgrade to prevent exhaustion of freespace by downloading all before installing any. Running systemctl daemon-reload doesn't change anything apparent, or stop the "hints" from recurring after each reboot. Is this a bug? BZ search for "daemon-reload" turned up nothing looking similar. Is there some required new fstab construct I haven't heard about? -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: rpm -ivh kernel installation put no vmlinuz* in /boot/
Felix Miata composed on 2022-08-12 02:41 (UTC-0400): > Felix Miata composed on 2022-08-07 04:06 (UTC-0400): >> Felix Miata composed on 2022-08-03 04:20 (UTC-0400): >>> # time rpm -ivh kernel-core-5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64.rpm >>> kernel-modules-5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64.rpm >>> Verifying... # >>> [100%] >>> Preparing... # >>> [100%] >>> Updating / installing... >>>1:kernel-core-5.19.0-65.fc37 # [ >>> 50%] >>>2:kernel-modules-5.19.0-65.fc37# >>> [100%] >>> cp: cannot stat '/lib/modules/5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64/bls.conf': No such file >>> or directory >>> sed: can't read >>> /boot/loader/entries/11352b14084942c18a21a5586db0b5b3-0-rescue.conf: No >>> such file or directory >>> warning: %posttrans(kernel-core-5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64) scriptlet failed, >>> exit status 2 > ... >>> As before, with my manual adjusting done, 5.19 is working as expected. > ... >> I have more PCs left on which to upgrade a 36 to 37 if more need for this >> thread. > Another fresh system-upgrade from 36 to 37 resulted in no new kernel in > /boot/, > just like in the OP, on yet another host: > # inxi -SMC --vs > inxi 3.3.20-00 (2022-07-27) > System: > Host: ara88 Kernel: 5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64 arch: x86_64 bits: 64 > Console: pty pts/0 Distro: Fedora release 37 (Thirty Seven) > Machine: > Type: Desktop Mobo: ASRock model: FM2A88X Extreme6+ serial: E80-38024200616 > UEFI: American Megatrends v: P4.20 date: 01/13/2016 > CPU: > Info: quad core model: AMD A10-7850K Radeon R7 12 Compute Cores 4C+8G > bits: 64 type: MT MCP cache: L2: 4 MiB > Speed (MHz): avg: 1700 min/max: 1700/3700 cores: 1: 1700 2: 1700 3: 1700 > 4: 1700 And another: # inxi -SMC --vs inxi 3.3.20-00 (2022-07-27) System: Host: ab85m Kernel: 5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64 arch: x86_64 bits: 64 Desktop: KDE Plasma v: 5.25.4 Distro: Fedora release 37 (Thirty Seven) Machine: Type: Desktop System: ASUS product: All Series v: N/A serial: N/A Mobo: ASUSTeK model: B85M-E v: Rev X.0x serial: MB-1234567890 UEFI: American Megatrends v: 3602 date: 04/04/2018 CPU: Info: dual core model: Intel Pentium G3220 bits: 64 type: MCP cache: L2: 512 KiB Speed (MHz): avg: 952 min/max: 800/3000 cores: 1: 1104 2: 800 rpm kernel installation doesn't put anything in /boot/ except for initramfs: # ls -gG /boot/*5.19* -rw--- 1 21049097 Aug 19 12:28 /boot/initramfs-5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64.img -rwxr-xr-x 1 12261008 Aug 1 09:52 /boot/vmlinuz-5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64 -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: rpm -ivh kernel installation put no vmlinuz* in /boot/ WFM-not
Felix Miata composed on 2022-08-07 04:06 (UTC-0400): > Felix Miata composed on 2022-08-03 04:20 (UTC-0400): >> # time rpm -ivh kernel-core-5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64.rpm >> kernel-modules-5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64.rpm >> Verifying... # >> [100%] >> Preparing... # >> [100%] >> Updating / installing... >>1:kernel-core-5.19.0-65.fc37 # [ >> 50%] >>2:kernel-modules-5.19.0-65.fc37# >> [100%] >> cp: cannot stat '/lib/modules/5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64/bls.conf': No such file >> or directory >> sed: can't read >> /boot/loader/entries/11352b14084942c18a21a5586db0b5b3-0-rescue.conf: No such >> file or directory >> warning: %posttrans(kernel-core-5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64) scriptlet failed, >> exit status 2 ... >> As before, with my manual adjusting done, 5.19 is working as expected. ... > I have more PCs left on which to upgrade a 36 to 37 if more need for this > thread. Another fresh system-upgrade from 36 to 37 resulted in no new kernel in /boot/, just like in the OP, on yet another host: # inxi -SMC --vs inxi 3.3.20-00 (2022-07-27) System: Host: ara88 Kernel: 5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64 arch: x86_64 bits: 64 Console: pty pts/0 Distro: Fedora release 37 (Thirty Seven) Machine: Type: Desktop Mobo: ASRock model: FM2A88X Extreme6+ serial: E80-38024200616 UEFI: American Megatrends v: P4.20 date: 01/13/2016 CPU: Info: quad core model: AMD A10-7850K Radeon R7 12 Compute Cores 4C+8G bits: 64 type: MT MCP cache: L2: 4 MiB Speed (MHz): avg: 1700 min/max: 1700/3700 cores: 1: 1700 2: 1700 3: 1700 4: 1700 -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: rpm -ivh kernel installation put no vmlinuz* in /boot/ WFM
Felix Miata composed on 2022-08-03 04:20 (UTC-0400): > # time rpm -ivh kernel-core-5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64.rpm > kernel-modules-5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64.rpm > Verifying... # [100%] > Preparing... # [100%] > Updating / installing... >1:kernel-core-5.19.0-65.fc37 # [ 50%] >2:kernel-modules-5.19.0-65.fc37# [100%] > cp: cannot stat '/lib/modules/5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64/bls.conf': No such file > or directory > sed: can't read > /boot/loader/entries/11352b14084942c18a21a5586db0b5b3-0-rescue.conf: No such > file or directory > warning: %posttrans(kernel-core-5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64) scriptlet failed, exit > status 2 Repeated on another host. Error messages differed, and so did end result - no unexpected absences in /boot. Errors were about depmod unknown sound symbols: ...kunit_do_failed_assertion ...__kunit_test_suites_exit ...__kunit_test_suites_init ...kunit_binary_assert_format > As before, with my manual adjusting done, 5.19 is working as expected. No need to adjust /boot this time. I have more PCs left on which to upgrade a 36 to 37 if more need for this thread. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: rpm -ivh kernel installation put no vmlinuz* in /boot/
Felix Miata composed on 2022-08-02 18:35 (UTC-0400): > Adam Williamson composed on 2022-08-02 14:10 (UTC-0700): >> On Tue, 2022-08-02 at 15:20 -0400, Felix Miata wrote: >>> Adam Williamson composed on 2022-08-02 11:23 (UTC-0700): >>>> On Mon, 2022-08-01 at 11:02 -0400, Felix Miata wrote: >>>>> Is this normal procedure now in rawhide? >>>>> I copied vmlinuz directly from the rpm to /boot/ and renamed it >>>>> vmlinuz-5.19.0-0.rc8.20220729git6e2c0490769e.62.fc37.x86_64, >>>>> though I could have symlinked its location in the /lib/modules tree. It >>>>> works. >>>> kernel is a metapackage that doesn't contain any files, the actual main >>>> parts of the kernel are in kernel-core. Is that what you meant? >>> I haven't installed "kernel" in over a year. I haven't been able to >>> determine any purpose it serves that is actually needed. What I ran was: >>> time rpm -ivh >>> kernel-core-5.19.0-0.rc8.20220729git6e2c0490769e.62.fc37.x86_64 >>> kernel-modules-5.19.0-0.rc8.20220729git6e2c0490769e.62.fc37.x86_64 >> OK. Well, it should have wound up putting the file in place, I think. I >> think it's not directly installed, but put in place by the %posttrans >> script, which does this (from the current package): >> rm -f /var/lib/rpm-state/kernel/installing_core_5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64 >> /bin/kernel-install add 5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64 >> /lib/modules/5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64/vmlinuz || exit $? >> did you get any scriptlet failures or anything? > I don't remember seeing anything to indicate failure at the time. String > vmlinuz > does not appear in /var/log/messages from yesterday, or in last 6 iterations > of > journal. :p Looks like my internal RAM failed. Different MBR host (fi965), newer kernel, same errant behavior, but error messages did result: # time rpm -ivh kernel-core-5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64.rpm kernel-modules-5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64.rpm Verifying... # [100%] Preparing... # [100%] Updating / installing... 1:kernel-core-5.19.0-65.fc37 # [ 50%] 2:kernel-modules-5.19.0-65.fc37# [100%] cp: cannot stat '/lib/modules/5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64/bls.conf': No such file or directory sed: can't read /boot/loader/entries/11352b14084942c18a21a5586db0b5b3-0-rescue.conf: No such file or directory warning: %posttrans(kernel-core-5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64) scriptlet failed, exit status 2 real2m45.397s user2m25.506s sys 0m26.617s # ls -Gg /boot/*5.19* -rw--- 1 15292124 Aug 3 03:57 /boot/initramfs-5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64.img # ls -Gg /boot/*5.1* -rw--- 1 6256078 Jul 22 10:21 /boot/System.map-5.18.13-200.fc36.x86_64 -rw-r--r-- 1 247453 Jul 22 10:21 /boot/config-5.18.13-200.fc36.x86_64 -rw--- 1 17206976 Aug 3 02:51 /boot/initramfs-5.18.13-200.fc36.x86_64.img -rw--- 1 15292124 Aug 3 03:57 /boot/initramfs-5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64.img -rwxr-xr-x 1 12187888 Jul 22 10:21 /boot/vmlinuz-5.18.13-200.fc36.x86_64 -rwxr-xr-x 1 12261008 Aug 1 09:52 /boot/vmlinuz-5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64 # efibootmgr -bash: efibootmgr: command not found # So $SUMMARY isn't quite on target. Kernel installation with rpm only puts an initrd in /boot/. As before, with my manual adjusting done, 5.19 is working as expected. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: rpm -ivh kernel installation put no vmlinuz* in /boot/
Adam Williamson composed on 2022-08-02 14:10 (UTC-0700): > On Tue, 2022-08-02 at 15:20 -0400, Felix Miata wrote: >> Adam Williamson composed on 2022-08-02 11:23 (UTC-0700): >>> On Mon, 2022-08-01 at 11:02 -0400, Felix Miata wrote: >>>> Is this normal procedure now in rawhide? >>>> I copied vmlinuz directly from the rpm to /boot/ and renamed it >>>> vmlinuz-5.19.0-0.rc8.20220729git6e2c0490769e.62.fc37.x86_64, >>>> though I could have symlinked its location in the /lib/modules tree. It >>>> works. >>> kernel is a metapackage that doesn't contain any files, the actual main >>> parts of the kernel are in kernel-core. Is that what you meant? >> I haven't installed "kernel" in over a year. I haven't been able to >> determine any purpose it serves that is actually needed. What I ran was: >> time rpm -ivh >> kernel-core-5.19.0-0.rc8.20220729git6e2c0490769e.62.fc37.x86_64 >> kernel-modules-5.19.0-0.rc8.20220729git6e2c0490769e.62.fc37.x86_64 > OK. Well, it should have wound up putting the file in place, I think. I > think it's not directly installed, but put in place by the %posttrans > script, which does this (from the current package): > rm -f /var/lib/rpm-state/kernel/installing_core_5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64 > /bin/kernel-install add 5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64 > /lib/modules/5.19.0-65.fc37.x86_64/vmlinuz || exit $? > did you get any scriptlet failures or anything? I don't remember seeing anything to indicate failure at the time. String vmlinuz does not appear in /var/log/messages from yesterday, or in last 6 iterations of journal. :p -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: rpm -ivh kernel installation put no vmlinuz* in /boot/
Adam Williamson composed on 2022-08-02 11:23 (UTC-0700): > On Mon, 2022-08-01 at 11:02 -0400, Felix Miata wrote: >> Is this normal procedure now in rawhide? >> I copied vmlinuz directly from the rpm to /boot/ and renamed it >> vmlinuz-5.19.0-0.rc8.20220729git6e2c0490769e.62.fc37.x86_64, >> though I could have symlinked its location in the /lib/modules tree. It >> works. > kernel is a metapackage that doesn't contain any files, the actual main > parts of the kernel are in kernel-core. Is that what you meant? I haven't installed "kernel" in over a year. I haven't been able do determine any purpose it serves that is actually needed. What I ran was: time rpm -ivh kernel-core-5.19.0-0.rc8.20220729git6e2c0490769e.62.fc37.x86_64 kernel-modules-5.19.0-0.rc8.20220729git6e2c0490769e.62.fc37.x86_64 -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
rpm -ivh kernel installation put no vmlinuz* in /boot/
Is this normal procedure now in rawhide? I copied vmlinuz directly from the rpm to /boot/ and renamed it vmlinuz-5.19.0-0.rc8.20220729git6e2c0490769e.62.fc37.x86_64, though I could have symlinked its location in the /lib/modules tree. It works. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Rocket Lake graphics with >1 displays
Do you have a Rocket Lake motherboard with B560, H570, Z590 or other _5__ series Intel chipset, with CPU's IGP you are now using with only one display, and would like to use it with more than one display, but it won't boot with more than one display connected? It is known there are at least two Asus and two ASRock motherboard models that have not been able to boot with two displays connected. Where there are four, there are probably more. A solution was found and upstreamed to kernel 5.17 just days ago. It's likely not to get backported to F35's 5.16 unless there is a showing of more than a small handful of users affected by this. Bug reporting the fix: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/4762 Known failing motherboard models: Asus B560M-A Asus TUF GAMING Z590-PLUS WIFI ASRock B560 Steel Legend ASRock H570M-ITX/ac If you have another that is affected, please let its model number be known. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: absent nomodeset, 11th Gen Intel Rocket Lake FCLGA1200 + b560 chipset hard lockup attempting boot
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/4762 created. Felix Miata composed on 2021-12-13 01:15 (UTC-0500): > No plymouth, so screen clears scrolling boot messages, then 4 new lines, last > being: > Reached target Basic System. > Absent remote login, reset button is required to resume activity of any kind. > > Is this a known problem solvable by some kernel cmdline option? F35, > Tumbleweed > and Debian 11 with backport 5.14 kernel all do the same thing. > > # inxi -Cyz > CPU: > Info: 6-Core model: 11th Gen Intel Core i5-11400 bits: 64 type: MT MCP > cache: L2: 3 MiB > Speed: 2985 MHz min/max: 800/4400 MHz Core speeds (MHz): 1: 2494 2: 2388 > 3: 3985 4: 3584 5: 2238 6: 2466 7: 3530 8: 3026 9: 3369 10: 3373 11: 2570 > 12: 2319 > # inxi -GMSayz > System: > Kernel: 5.16.0-0.rc4.20211207gitcd8c917a56f2.30.fc36.x86_64 x86_64 bits: 64 > compiler: gcc v: 2.37-22.fc36 > parameters: BOOT_IMAGE=/boot/vmlinuz root=LABEL= noresume audit=0 > ipv6.disable=1 net.ifnames=0 consoleblank=0 nomodeset 3 > Console: pty pts/0 DM: SDDM Distro: Fedora release 36 (Rawhide) > Machine: > Type: Desktop System: ASUS product: N/A v: N/A serial: N/A > Mobo: ASUSTeK model: PRIME B560M-A v: Rev 1.xx serial: > UEFI: American Megatrends v: 1203 date: 10/27/2021 > Graphics: > Device-1: Intel RocketLake-S GT1 [UHD Graphics 730] vendor: ASUSTeK > driver: N/A alternate: i915 bus-ID: 00:02.0 chip-ID: 8086:4c8b > class-ID: 0300 > Display: server: X.org 1.20.11 driver: loaded: modesetting > alternate: fbdev,vesa > Message: Advanced graphics data unavailable for root. > > Using nomodeset, vttys all work in F35. With 5.16rc4 in Rawhide, vttys and X > are > all black screen. Searching BZ I found nothing about Rocket Lake, RocketLake, > i5-11400 or "11th Gen". Same lack of hits on bugzilla.kernel.org. > > I reported this bug yesterday against Leap 15.4alpha installer: > https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1193640 > It got moved to kernel. Need I report on BRC, or is there a workaround Google > hasn't coughed up for me?-- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
absent nomodeset, 11th Gen Intel Rocket Lake FCLGA1200 + b560 chipset hard lockup attempting boot
No plymouth, so screen clears scrolling boot messages, then 4 new lines, last being: Reached target Basic System. Absent remote login, reset button is required to resume activity of any kind. Is this a known problem solvable by some kernel cmdline option? F35, Tumbleweed and Debian 11 with backport 5.14 kernel all do the same thing. # inxi -Cyz CPU: Info: 6-Core model: 11th Gen Intel Core i5-11400 bits: 64 type: MT MCP cache: L2: 3 MiB Speed: 2985 MHz min/max: 800/4400 MHz Core speeds (MHz): 1: 2494 2: 2388 3: 3985 4: 3584 5: 2238 6: 2466 7: 3530 8: 3026 9: 3369 10: 3373 11: 2570 12: 2319 # inxi -GMSayz System: Kernel: 5.16.0-0.rc4.20211207gitcd8c917a56f2.30.fc36.x86_64 x86_64 bits: 64 compiler: gcc v: 2.37-22.fc36 parameters: BOOT_IMAGE=/boot/vmlinuz root=LABEL= noresume audit=0 ipv6.disable=1 net.ifnames=0 consoleblank=0 nomodeset 3 Console: pty pts/0 DM: SDDM Distro: Fedora release 36 (Rawhide) Machine: Type: Desktop System: ASUS product: N/A v: N/A serial: N/A Mobo: ASUSTeK model: PRIME B560M-A v: Rev 1.xx serial: UEFI: American Megatrends v: 1203 date: 10/27/2021 Graphics: Device-1: Intel RocketLake-S GT1 [UHD Graphics 730] vendor: ASUSTeK driver: N/A alternate: i915 bus-ID: 00:02.0 chip-ID: 8086:4c8b class-ID: 0300 Display: server: X.org 1.20.11 driver: loaded: modesetting alternate: fbdev,vesa Message: Advanced graphics data unavailable for root. Using nomodeset, vttys all work in F35. With 5.16rc4 in Rawhide, vttys and X are all black screen. Searching BZ I found nothing about Rocket Lake, RocketLake, i5-11400 or "11th Gen". Same lack of hits on bugzilla.kernel.org. I reported this bug yesterday against Leap 15.4alpha installer: https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1193640 It got moved to kernel. Need I report on BRC, or is there a workaround Google hasn't coughed up for me? -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: system-upgrade blocked by grubby/grub2-tools-minimal
Chris Murphy composed on 2021-10-27 19:40 (UTC-0400): > Adam Williamson wrote: >> On Wed, 2021-10-27 at 02:32 -0400, Felix Miata wrote: >>> # rpm -qa | egrep 'grub|prober|shim' >>> # >>> This F34 installation has no need of any bootloader. Yet: >>> # dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=35 --skip-broken --allowerasing >>> --best >>> ... >>> Error: >>> Problem: package grubby-8.40-55.fc35.x86_64 requires grub2-tools-minimal, >>> but >>> none of the providers can be installed >>> - conflicting requests >>> - package grub2-tools-minimal-1:2.06-6.fc35.x86_64 is filtered out by >>> exclude >>> filtering >> Do you have soft dependencies enabled? Nothing on my installed system >> requires grubby, but two things recommend it: crypto-policies-scripts >> and kexec-tools . If soft deps are enabled, either of those could be >> pulling it in. > grubby is in @core in comps > Does this translate to I have no option to not let it be installed? -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
system-upgrade blocked by grubby/grub2-tools-minimal
# rpm -qa | egrep 'grub|prober|shim' # This F34 installation has no need of any bootloader. Yet: # dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=35 --skip-broken --allowerasing --best ... Error: Problem: package grubby-8.40-55.fc35.x86_64 requires grub2-tools-minimal, but none of the providers can be installed - conflicting requests - package grub2-tools-minimal-1:2.06-6.fc35.x86_64 is filtered out by exclude filtering # Does anyone know why F35 demands installation of grub2-tools-minimal and grubby, while F34 didn't? -- Evolution as taught in public schools is, like religion, based on faith, not based on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: [Proposal] The dual monitor set-up criterion (Is "dual head" redrafted)
Lukas Ruzicka composed on 2021-04-14 18:02 (UTC+0200): > *On computers with a possibility to connect an external monitor (e.g. two > monitors on a desktop and one external monitor on a laptop)... > "Desktop" to me implies not server, not tower, not mini-tower, not micro. Strike "possibility". In use must be the use case, so: * On computers using two displays, dual video outputs on a common PC, or a connected external display with a laptop display... -- Evolution as taught in public schools, like religion, is based on faith, not on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: f33 packages in F34?
Samuel Sieb composed on 2021-03-31 20:44 (UTC-0700): > Felix Miata wrote: >> Of 2298 installed packages, 456 are still .fc33. Can that be right at this >> stage >> of development? I found and removed several that I found more than one >> installed >> version of, not necessarily one each of f33 and f34. e.g. both 7.5-26 and >> 7.5-30 >> of f34 xorg-x11-fonts-misc, and 2.37-15 and 2.37-16 of f34 >> dejavu-sans-mono-fonts, >> remain installed ATM. > Looking through the repo I see quite a few fc33 packages. However, > having multiple versions of the same packages sounds like something went > wrong. Try running "dnf distro-sync". I'm drawing a blank on how or when this happened, and was drawing a blank on distro-sync. :P Before distro-sync would start I had to lock sudo and force remove iptables-legac*. The overall result gained little freespace, leaving 1260 installed packages, so down about 1,000. Most screen output during the process was delete failed due to file not found. fc33 package count dropped to 6. It still boots, and Plasma runs too. Thanks! -- Evolution as taught in public schools, like religion, is based on faith, not on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
f33 packages in F34?
Of 2298 installed packages, 456 are still .fc33. Can that be right at this stage of development? I found and removed several that I found more than one installed version of, not necessarily one each of f33 and f34. e.g. both 7.5-26 and 7.5-30 of f34 xorg-x11-fonts-misc, and 2.37-15 and 2.37-16 of f34 dejavu-sans-mono-fonts, remain installed ATM. -- Evolution as taught in public schools, like religion, is based on faith, not on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: [Proposal] The dual head set-up criterion
Lukas Ruzicka composed on 2021-03-30 13:22 (UTC+0200): > *On computers with dual video cards (or with external video output) the > system must be able to display the video content on each connected device. Above to me is rather ambiguous. Laptops generally have one external output only. Traditional PCs only have external outputs. One or more may be motherboard outputs. One or more may be on one or more graphics "expansion" cards. A PC may have both expansion and motherboard outputs. Docking stations may be employed, confusing the concepts of outputs even more. Better would be language of connected displays in lieu of video outputs or "cards". If the criteria were to be implemented, as others have mentioned, blocking would have to be limited to two displays, however connected, on account of limited facility to test more than two, and the many possible permutations of connectivity. -- Evolution as taught in public schools, like religion, is based on faith, not on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: Trying to rename enp5s0 to eth0 fails
George R Goffe via test composed on 2020-12-26 17:39 (UTC): > I don't any instructions in your post. Felix Miata composed on 2020-12-26 02:45 (UTC-0500): >> No problem doing it my way: >> # uname -r >> 5.10.0-0.rc6.20201204git34816d20f173.92.fc34.x86_64 >> # cat /proc/cmdline >> ... net.ifnames=0 ... ^ >> # ls -Gg /etc/udev/rules.d/ >> total 0 >> # ip a >> 1: lo: mtu 65536 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN group >> default >> qlen 1000 >> link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00 >> inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host lo >> valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever >> 2: eth0: mtu 1500 qdisc fq_codel state UP >> group >> default qlen 1000 >> link/ether xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff >> altname enp0s31f6 >> inet 192.168.xxx.xxx/24 brd 192.168.xxx.xxx scope global noprefixroute >> eth0 >> valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever The above shows configuration and some consequences of using option #3 at the bottom of: <https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/PredictableNetworkInterfaceNames/> That's all I do, though I do disable ipv6, but that has nothing to do with having eth0 assigned to the NIC. The kernel does all the work based upon that cmdline option. George, I got your email from 2020-12-25 01:32 (UTC), and sent you a reply, but yahoo.com and earthlink.net do not play nice together. Email between the two very often disappears into the ether. -- Evolution as taught in public schools, like religion, is based on faith, not on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: kernels taking seriously long time to install
Chris Murphy composed on 2020-12-25 02:58 (UTC-0700): > Felix Miata wrote: >> Chris Murphy composed on 2020-12-24 23:44 (UTC-0700): ... >>> If you aren't seeing those indications: Do you have any 3rd party >>> modules that depend on dkms? Are you running a 5.10 series kernel at >>> the time, and is sysroot btrfs? [2] >> Neither. > Does top show depmod and weak-modules while installing? Very much. -- Evolution as taught in public schools, like religion, is based on faith, not on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: kernels taking seriously long time to install
Chris Murphy composed on 2020-12-24 23:44 (UTC-0700):
> Felix Miata wrote:
>> Since I've been seeing it on other installations, I timed this one:
>> real7m31s
>> user7m8.9s
>> sys 0m30.2s
> I started seeing it with the early 5.9-rc's. But haven't seen it since
> release versions. In my case top shows depmod and weak-modules; and
> many small files being created and destroyed in a loop. [1] But
> haven't seen it in a while or with any of the 5.10 or 5.11 kernels.
> If you aren't seeing those indications: Do you have any 3rd party
> modules that depend on dkms? Are you running a 5.10 series kernel at
> the time, and is sysroot btrfs? [2]
Neither.
> [1]
> Install fatrace and run it with sudo. It works on any file system but
> it doesn't show file sizes, just path to file.
First try on a different F33 host, installing 5.9.15 while running 5.8.18, the
file generated was 41,057K. o_O This one completed in a reasonable short time,
so
I cloned it and system-upgraded to Rawhide with the kernel packages locked. When
complete, I unlocked the kernel packages and did 'time dnf upgrade' on tty3
right
after starting 'fatrace -c -t -o outfile' running on tty4, which installed the
same 5.10rc6 kernel as timed in OP:
real6m59s
user6m33s
sys 0m29s
# uname -r
5.9.15-200.fc33.x86_64
# inxi -CSy1
System:
Host: ab85m
Kernel: 5.9.15-200.fc33.x86_64 x86_64
bits: 64
Console: tty 3
Distro: Fedora release 34 (Rawhide)
CPU:
Info: Dual Core
model: Intel Pentium G3220
bits: 64
type: MCP
L2 cache: 3 MiB
Speed: 2278 MHz
min/max: 800/3000 MHz
Core speeds (MHz):
1: 2278
2: 2294
# df /
Filesystem 1K-blocksUsed Available Use% Mounted on
/dev/sda14 8092736 5732939 1946102 75% /
# hdparm -t /dev/sda14
/dev/sda14:
Timing buffered disk reads: 1286 MB in 3.00 seconds = 428.06 MB/sec
The fatrace log is 249,166K. o_O
What next?
--
Evolution as taught in public schools, like religion,
is based on faith, not on science.
Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!
Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/
___
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Trying to rename enp5s0 to eth0 fails
George R Goffe via test composed on 2020-12-25 01:32 (UTC):
> I have been using this process to rename the NIC of a system:
> 1) add net.ifnames=0 biosdevname=0 to the GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX in
> /etc/default/grub
> 2) grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub2/grub.cfg
> 3) copy this file to /etc/udev/rules.d/99-rename-to-eth0.rules
> contents:
> SUBSYSTEM=="net", ACTION=="add", DRIVERS=="?*",
> ATTR{address}=="54:04:a6:10:61:87", ATTR{dev_id}=="0x0", ATTR{type}=="1",
> KERNEL=="eth*", NAME="eth0"
> This was working just fine but since the fresh install of FC34 x86_64 from
> Fedora-Everything-netinst-x86_64-Rawhide-20201213.n.0.iso this procedure no
> longer
> works. eth0 for ipv6 looks like it's working but eth0 for ipv4 init fails to
> produce a usable network connection.
> Is this a known bug or a George misteak?
> Any help/hints/tips/suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
No problem doing it my way:
# uname -r
5.10.0-0.rc6.20201204git34816d20f173.92.fc34.x86_64
# cat /proc/cmdline
... net.ifnames=0 ...
# ls -Gg /etc/udev/rules.d/
total 0
# ip a
1: lo: mtu 65536 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN group
default
qlen 1000
link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00
inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host lo
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
2: eth0: mtu 1500 qdisc fq_codel state UP
group
default qlen 1000
link/ether xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
altname enp0s31f6
inet 192.168.xxx.xxx/24 brd 192.168.xxx.xxx scope global noprefixroute eth0
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
--
Evolution as taught in public schools, like religion,
is based on faith, not on science.
Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!
Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/
___
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
kernels taking seriously long time to install
Since I've been seeing it on other installations, I timed this one: real7m31s user7m8.9s sys 0m30.2s # inxi -CSy1 System: Host: ab250 Kernel: 5.9.15-200.fc33.x86_64 x86_64 bits: 64 Console: tty 3 Distro: Fedora release 34 (Rawhide) CPU: Info: Dual Core model: Intel Pentium G4600 bits: 64 type: MT MCP L2 cache: 3 MiB Speed: 800 MHz min/max: 800/3600 MHz Core speeds (MHz): 1: 800 2: 800 3: 800 4: 800 # hdparm -t /dev/nvme0n1p18 /dev/nvme0n1p18: Timing buffered disk reads: 3658 MB in 3.00 seconds = 1218.97 MB/sec # df / Filesystem 1K-blocksUsed Available Use% Mounted on /dev/nvme0n1p18 8094112 3116090 4560230 41% / Is this happening to everyone? -- Evolution as taught in public schools, like religion, is based on faith, not on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: amdgpu DDX: (EE) AIGLX error: dlopen of /usr/lib64/dri/swrast_dri.so failed
Samuel Sieb composed on 2020-10-11 21:18 (UTC-0700): > Felix Miata wrote: >> [ 9.122] (EE) AIGLX error: dlopen of /usr/lib64/dri/swrast_dri.so failed >> (/usr/lib64/dri/swrast_dri.so: cannot open shared object file: No such file >> or directory) > I forgot one thing. What does "rpm -qV mesa-dri-drivers" show? That's > the package that provides the library. Null. It and mesa-filesystem were not installed. Installing made Xorg work as expected. The qV still returns null. 'rpm -qv mesa-dri-drivers' returns 20.2.0-2. -- Evolution as taught in public schools, like religion, is based on faith, not on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: amdgpu DDX: (EE) AIGLX error: dlopen of /usr/lib64/dri/swrast_dri.so failed
Samuel Sieb composed on 2020-10-11 13:02 (UTC-0700):
> Felix Miata wrote:
>> Is X crashing for everyone because of $SUBJECT? My search foo turned up
>> nothing on Bugzilla. How can I find out why the lib is missing? X works
>> fine using modesetting DDX instead of amdgpu DDX.
> First off, if it's trying to load that module, something has already
> failed. You never want to see that used other than in a VM and you
> might even be able to avoid it there too.
> Why are you trying to use the amdgpu driver instead of modesetting?
> modesetting is almost certainly what you want.
It's a test box. Occasionally I want to compare a default to an optional.
> If you're going to provide logs, you can't filter on EE or you're
> removing most of the useful information.
http://fm.no-ip.com/Tmp/Linux/Xorg/Log/Fail/xorg.E.log-ara88-f33-amdgpu
> Why do you have so many graphics related kernel parameters? AMD
> graphics should work out of the box with no configuration needed.
It's a test box. It's easier to delete unwanted common parameters than to
remember
the names and add them in when needed. vga= is fallback better than 80x25 when
KMS
is broken. video= is better than booting first, then reconfiguring console font,
then booting again to enjoy legible vtty text. radeon disable/amdgpu enable is
required on Sea Islands when amdgpu DDX is wanted.
No such problem in Tumbleweed:
System:
Host: ara88 Kernel: 5.8.14-1-default x86_64 bits: 64 compiler: gcc v: 10.2.1
parameters: BOOT_IMAGE=/boot/vmlinuz root=LABEL=zd8p07stw noresume
ipv6.disable=1 net.ifnames=0 mitigations=auto consoleblank=0
radeon.cik_support=0 amdgpu.cik_support=1 video=1024x768@60
video=1440x900@60 drm.debug=0x1e log_buf_len=1M 5
Desktop: Trinity R14.0.8 tk: Qt 3.5.0 info: kicker wm: Twin 3.0 dm: TDM
Distro: openSUSE Tumbleweed 20201009
Graphics:
Device-1: AMD Kaveri [Radeon R7 Graphics] vendor: ASRock driver: amdgpu
v: kernel alternate: radeon bus ID: 00:01.0 chip ID: 1002:1313
Display: x11 server: X.Org 1.20.9 driver: amdgpu
unloaded: fbdev,modesetting,vesa alternate: ati display ID: :0 screens: 1
Screen-1: 0 s-res: 2560x1440 s-dpi: 120 s-size: 541x304mm (21.3x12.0")
s-diag: 621mm (24.4")
Monitor-1: DisplayPort-0 res: 2560x1440 hz: 60 dpi: 109
size: 598x336mm (23.5x13.2") diag: 686mm (27")
OpenGL: renderer: AMD KAVERI (DRM 3.38.0 5.8.14-1-default LLVM 10.0.1)
v: 4.6 Mesa 20.1.8 direct render: Yes
--
Evolution as taught in public schools, like religion,
is based on faith, not on science.
Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!
Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/
___
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
amdgpu DDX: (EE) AIGLX error: dlopen of /usr/lib64/dri/swrast_dri.so failed
Is X crashing for everyone because of $SUBJECT? My search foo turned up nothing on Bugzilla. How can I find out why the lib is missing? X works fine using modesetting DDX instead of amdgpu DDX. # inxi -SMGIay System: Host: ara88 Kernel: 5.8.14-300.fc33.x86_64 x86_64 bits: 64 compiler: gcc v: 2.35-10.fc33) parameters: BOOT_IMAGE=/boot/vmlinuz root=LABEL=zd8p16f33 noresume audit=0 ipv6.disable=1 net.ifnames=0 mitigations=auto consoleblank=0 radeon.cik_support=0 amdgpu.cik_support=1 video=1024x768@60 video=1440x900@60 5 Console: tty 3 DM: SDDM Distro: Fedora release 33 (Thirty Three) Machine: Type: Desktop Mobo: ASRock model: FM2A88X Extreme6+ serial: E80-38024200616 UEFI: American Megatrends v: P4.20 date: 01/13/2016 Graphics: Device-1: AMD Kaveri [Radeon R7 Graphics] vendor: ASRock driver: amdgpu v: kernel alternate: radeon bus ID: 00:01.0 chip ID: 1002:1313 Display: server: X.org 1.20.8 driver: amdgpu unloaded: modesetting alternate: ati,fbdev,vesa tty: 180x56 Message: Advanced graphics data unavailable in console for root. Info:...inxi: 3.1.07 # grep EE /var/log/Xorg.0.log (WW) warning, (EE) error, (NI) not implemented, (??) unknown. [ 9.012] (EE) Failed to load module "ati" (module does not exist, 0) [ 9.013] (EE) Failed to load module "fbdev" (module does not exist, 0) [ 9.013] (EE) Failed to load module "vesa" (module does not exist, 0) [ 9.121] (II) Initializing extension MIT-SCREEN-SAVER [ 9.122] (EE) AIGLX error: dlopen of /usr/lib64/dri/swrast_dri.so failed (/usr/lib64/dri/swrast_dri.so: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory) [ 9.122] (EE) AIGLX error: unable to load driver swrast [ 9.122] (EE) GLX: could not load software renderer [ 9.160] (EE) [ 9.160] (EE) Backtrace: [ 9.160] (EE) 0: /usr/libexec/Xorg (ErrorFSigSafe+0xd9) [0x561f83832809] [ 9.161] (EE) 1: /lib64/libpthread.so.0 (funlockfile+0x60) [0x7f23c850c23f] [ 9.161] (EE) 2: /lib64/libc.so.6 (gsignal+0x145) [0x7f23c8365bc5] [ 9.161] (EE) 3: /lib64/libc.so.6 (abort+0x116) [0x7f23c834e8a4] [ 9.162] (EE) 4: /lib64/libc.so.6 (__assert_fail_base.cold+0xf) [0x7f23c834e789] [ 9.162] (EE) 5: /lib64/libc.so.6 (__assert_fail+0x46) [0x7f23c835dfc6] [ 9.162] (EE) unw_get_proc_name failed: no unwind info found [-10] [ 9.162] (EE) 6: /usr/lib64/xorg/modules/drivers/amdgpu_drv.so (?+0x0) [0x7f23c7a6d330] [ 9.162] (EE) unw_get_proc_name failed: no unwind info found [-10] [ 9.162] (EE) 7: /usr/lib64/xorg/modules/drivers/amdgpu_drv.so (?+0x0) [0x7f23c7a6d610] [ 9.162] (EE) unw_get_proc_name failed: no unwind info found [-10] [ 9.162] (EE) 8: /usr/lib64/xorg/modules/drivers/amdgpu_drv.so (?+0x0) [0x7f23c7a71a10] [ 9.162] (EE) unw_get_proc_name failed: no unwind info found [-10] [ 9.162] (EE) 9: /usr/lib64/xorg/modules/drivers/amdgpu_drv.so (?+0x0) [0x7f23c7a7afd0] [ 9.162] (EE) unw_get_proc_name failed: no unwind info found [-10] [ 9.162] (EE) 10: /usr/lib64/xorg/modules/drivers/amdgpu_drv.so (?+0x0) [0x7f23c7a7a310] [ 9.162] (EE) 11: /usr/libexec/Xorg (MapWindow+0x229) [0x561f836f8699] [ 9.163] (EE) 12: /usr/libexec/Xorg (miPolyFillRect+0xb89) [0x561f836b8f09] [ 9.163] (EE) 13: /lib64/libc.so.6 (__libc_start_main+0xf2) [0x7f23c83501a2] [ 9.163] (EE) 14: /usr/libexec/Xorg (_start+0x2e) [0x561f836b934e] [ 9.163] (EE) [ 9.163] (EE) [ 9.163] (EE) Caught signal 6 (Aborted). Server aborting -- Evolution as taught in public schools, like religion, is based on faith, not on science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Testing with NVMe
pmkel...@frontier.com composed on 2020-04-04 10:13 (UTC-0400): > One thing that seems rather puzzling is that NVMe is offered in three > different connection configurations. PCI-E, USB (with a USB connector), > and SSD via SATA (with an SATA connector. Since multichannel PCI-E is > very much faster that either USB or SATA I don't really understand why > the USB and SATA options are offered. It seems a bit like having a car > that's designed and built for racing and only driving it on city streets. You're right. That's an apt description of having PCIeX4 capability and putting a SATA stick in it. I didn't find out the difference until after I had bought two SATA M.2 sticks for motherboards with PCIeX4 capability. What you get though is backwards compatibility and flexibility, since motherboard M.2 sockets are rather more limited in supply than SATA ports. M.2 vs NVME: What's the difference? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJCHx7mZEKo 9 minutes https://www.ureach.eu/index.php/en/newsroom/item/291-cheetah-or-kitten https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/XHAAAOSw2dBdkCHK/s-l1600.jpg -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Memtest86+
Brandon Nielsen composed on 2020-03-31 09:05 (UTC-0500): > Recently I've had cause to run memtest on some relatively modern systems > (Haswell, Haswell refresh, and Kaby Lake R). On all three systems the > memtest86+ provided with the Fedora Workstation Live media failed. > On the Haswell and Haswell refresh machines it froze shortly after > starting. It didn't matter if the test was run in 'Safe Mode', or with SMP. > On the Kaby Lake R machine it causes the machine to reboot before > memtest86+ launches. > It works fine on an older Wolfdale Core 2 Duo. > I've tried this with both the Workstation Live 31 and a 32 Beta image. > Both verified. > Has anyone else seen this? Should there be a test case? Should it just > be dropped since memtest86+ appears to be dead upstream, and doesn't > support UEFI (and possibly doesn't work)? I long ago switched to free version of https://www.memtest86.com/ for anything with DDR4 or UEFI. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: criterion proposal: prevent services timing out on system shutdown
Richard Ryniker composed on 2020-03-17 14:33 (UTC-0400): > Is shutdown in three minutes instead of three seconds an aggravation > for the user who wants to use a new kernal or another operating > system? Yes. When the UPS says the battery is exhausted, must shutdown now, it's more than just an aggravation. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Testing request: F30/F31 dnf updates for upgrading to F32
Samuel Sieb composed on 2020-03-11 00:41 (UTC-0700): > Felix Miata wrote: >> I tried pulling the 31 to 32 trigger, but see this: >> ... >> vim-minimal >> Resetting modules: >> dwm >> Transaction summary >> ... >> Install 19 >> Upgrade 1169 >> Downgrade33 >> Total download size: 909M >> DNF will only download... > That looks fine to me, where do you think the problem is? From Adam's description I thought no modules were supposed to get reset, and I don't know what module dwm is about. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Testing request: F30/F31 dnf updates for upgrading to F32
Adam Williamson composed on 2020-03-10 17:15 (UTC-0700): > So we have F30 and F31 updates that need testing: > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-02ee4b1a1c (F30) > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-717d521d35 (F31) > These are intended to fix problems when upgrading to F32 caused by > modules doing stuff they shouldn't; they do this by resetting all > modules as part of the upgrade. We need folks to test that upgrading to > F32 after installing these updates works OK. > To test, *first* install the updates on F30/F31, *then* run an upgrade > to F32 with `dnf system-upgrade` (see > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/dnf-system-upgrade/ ). > Of course, since F32 is pre-Beta ATM, don't do this on important or > production systems unless you're really sure you want to run a pre- > release on them! > If the upgrade works OK and you don't see any module-related weirdness, > please +1 the update. If the upgrade has issues, don't -1 the update > right away as the issues might be unrelated to it; please post here and > we'll try and figure out the problem. I tried pulling the 31 to 32 trigger, but see this: ... vim-minimal Resetting modules: dwm Transaction summary ... Install 19 Upgrade 1169 Downgrade 33 Total download size: 909M DNF will only download... -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Error: Failed to download metadata for repo 'updates-testing': Cannot prepare internal mirrorlist: file "repomd.xml" was not found in metalink
Samuel Sieb composed on 2019-10-29 17:47 (UTC-0700): > Felix Miata wrote: >> I've been wondering a long time when that would happen. When did 32bit repos >> actually go? Neither that URL nor the bug it refers to indicate a date >> AFAICT. > Targeted release: Fedora 31 Ambiguous. 2019-10-31 would answer the question, if 2019-10-31 were the official F31 release date, and that's when those repos ceased to be available. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Error: Failed to download metadata for repo 'updates-testing': Cannot prepare internal mirrorlist: file "repomd.xml" was not found in metalink
Samuel Sieb composed on 2019-10-29 17:00 (UTC-0700): > Felix Miata wrote: >> repeatedly results from: >> dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=31 >> from a freshly upgraded F30-32. After $SUBJECT 2-3 times I tried disabling >> updates-testing, then updates-testing and updates, but no change in behavior. > By "F30-32", do you mean a 32-bit install? I did miss all such discussion. Whatever doesn't show up on the kde list or this list I don't see unless via search result. > If so, did you miss all the > discussion about 32-bit repos going away? > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Noi686Repositories I've been wondering a long time when that would happen. When did 32bit repos actually go? Neither that URL nor the bug it refers to indicate a date AFAICT. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Error: Failed to download metadata for repo 'updates-testing': Cannot prepare internal mirrorlist: file "repomd.xml" was not found in metalink
repeatedly results from: dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=31 from a freshly upgraded F30-32. After $SUBJECT 2-3 times I tried disabling updates-testing, then updates-testing and updates, but no change in behavior. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: libgit2-0.28* are inexplicably excluded in F31
Adam Williamson composed on 2019-10-28 18:25 (UTC-0700): > On Mon, 2019-10-28 at 18:37 -0400, Felix Miata wrote: >> which prevents installation of kf5-ktexteditor, and consequently >> plasma-workspace. >> There are no exclusions in dnf.conf. What could be doing the excluding? > Modularity. Post the output of 'dnf module list libgit2', please. > Thanks! # dnf module list libgit2 Fedora 31 - x86_64 - Test Updates [=== ] --- B/s | 0 B --:-- ETA Fedora 31 - x86_64 - Test Updates [=== ] --- B/s | 0 B --:-- ETA Fedora 31 - x86_64 - Test Updates 29 kB/s | 12 kB 00:00 Fedora 31 - x86_64 - Updates [ ===] --- B/s | 0 B --:-- ETA Fedora 31 - x86_64 - Updates 69% [- ] 32 kB/s | 9.8 kB 00:00 ETA Fedora 31 - x86_64 - Updates 46 kB/s | 14 kB 00:00 Fedora 31 - x86_64 [ === ] --- B/s | 0 B --:-- ETA Fedora 31 - x86_64 [ === ] --- B/s | 0 B --:-- ETA Fedora 31 - x86_64 27 kB/s | 12 kB 00:00 @modulefailsafe NameStream ProfilesSummary libgit2 0.27 [e] Library implementation of Git Hint: [d]efault, [e]nabled, [x]disabled, [i]nstalled # -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: libgit2-0.28* are inexplicably excluded in F31
Samuel Sieb composed on 2019-10-28 16:12 (UTC-0700): > Felix Miata wrote: >> which prevents installation of kf5-ktexteditor, and consequently >> plasma-workspace. >> There are no exclusions in dnf.conf. What could be doing the excluding? > Can you include the output of this? There was an upgrade issue with the > libgit2 module that has been hacked around, but once in F31, there > shouldn't be any further issue. # dnf install plasma-workspace Last metadata expiration check: 0:14:08 ago on Mon 28 Oct 2019 07:16:55 PM EDT. Error: Problem: conflicting requests - package plasma-workspace-5.16.5-1.fc31.i686 requires libKF5TextEditor.so.5, but none of the providers can be installed - package plasma-workspace-5.16.5-1.fc31.x86_64 requires libKF5TextEditor.so.5()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package kf5-ktexteditor-5.61.0-1.fc31.i686 requires libgit2.so.28, but none of the providers can be installed - package kf5-ktexteditor-5.61.0-1.fc31.x86_64 requires libgit2.so.28()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package libgit2-0.28.3-1.fc31.i686 is excluded - package libgit2-0.28.3-1.fc31.x86_64 is excluded (try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages) # dnf install plasma-workspace --skip-broken Last metadata expiration check: 0:14:26 ago on Mon 28 Oct 2019 07:16:55 PM EDT. Dependencies resolved. Problem: package plasma-workspace-5.16.5-1.fc31.x86_64 requires libKF5TextEditor.so.5()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - package kf5-ktexteditor-5.61.0-1.fc31.x86_64 requires libgit2.so.28()(64bit), but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install the best candidate for the job - package libgit2-0.28.3-1.fc31.x86_64 is excluded Package Architecture Version Repository Size Skipping packages with broken dependencies: kf5-ktexteditor x86_64 5.61.0-1.fc31 fedora 2.6 M plasma-workspace x86_64 5.16.5-1.fc31 updates-testing 4.8 M Transaction Summary Skip 2 Packages Nothing to do. Complete! # exit -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
libgit2-0.28* are inexplicably excluded in F31
which prevents installation of kf5-ktexteditor, and consequently plasma-workspace. There are no exclusions in dnf.conf. What could be doing the excluding? -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: The operation would result in removing the following protected packages: kernel-core, systemd
Adam Williamson composed on 2019-10-24 11:10 (UTC-0700): > On Thu, 2019-10-24 at 11:07 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote: >> Felix Miata wrote: >> > $SUBJECT is the output. >> No, it's not. dnf prints out a lot more than that and to find out >> what's happening, we need to see it. How to find what you want I don't know. $SUBJECT is all that was on the screen after the confirmation to proceed line. http://fm.no-ip.com/Tmp/Linux/F/gx62b-f31jrnl.tgz has /var/log/journal. http://fm.no-ip.com/Tmp/Linux/F/gx62b-f31dnflogs.tgz has /var/log/dnf.log*. http://fm.no-ip.com/Tmp/Linux/F/gx62b-f31dnfdnf.tgz has /var/lib/dnf*. > I mean, excluding the kernel from the transaction is already kinda out > of bounds. Just don't do that. :P The new kernel gets used during the upgrade? If not, why should it be out of bounds? It used to work. The "old" kernel 5.3.7-200.fc30 installed minutes earlier remains installed, and boots. I wouldn't expect 5.3.7-301.fc31 to be materially different. I'm in the habit of deciding precisely if and when to install a new kernel. They consume a lot of disk space, precious at time when dnf is filling up the filesystem with rpms. That time is usually after there are no other updates/upgrades left to do, as a separate transaction, very often done without the help of dnf, having been downloaded in advance elsewhere via upgrade from a different host, saving precious bandwidth. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: The operation would result in removing the following protected packages: kernel-core, systemd
Adam Williamson composed on 2019-10-24 11:10 (UTC-0700): > On Thu, 2019-10-24 at 11:07 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote: >> Felix Miata wrote: >> > $SUBJECT is the output. >> No, it's not. dnf prints out a lot more than that and to find out >> what's happening, we need to see it. How to find what you want I don't know. $SUBJECT is all that was on the screen after the confirmation to proceed line. http://fm.no-ip.com/Tmp/Linux/F/gx62b-f31jrnl.tgz has /var/log/journal. http://fm.no-ip.com/Tmp/Linux/F/gx62b-f31dnflogs.tgz has /var/log/dnf.log*. http://fm.no-ip.com/Tmp/Linux/F/gx62b-f31dnfhist.tgz has /var/lib/dnf*. > I mean, excluding the kernel from the transaction is already kinda out > of bounds. Just don't do that. :P The new kernel gets used during the upgrade? If not, why should it be out of bounds? It used to work. The "old" kernel 5.3.7-200.fc30 installed minutes earlier remains installed, and boots. I wouldn't expect 5.3.7-301.fc31 to be materially different. I'm in the habit of deciding precisely if and when to install a new kernel. They consume a lot of disk space, precious at time when dnf is filling up the filesystem with rpms. That time is usually after there are no other updates/upgrades left to do, as a separate transaction, very often done without the help of dnf, having been downloaded in advance elsewhere via upgrade from a different host, saving precious bandwidth. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: The operation would result in removing the following protected packages: kernel-core, systemd
Samuel Sieb composed on 2019-10-24 08:15 (UTC-0700): > Felix Miata wrote: >> This has been rather routine here in recent weeks trying to system-upgrade >> to f31 >> from a freshly upgraded f30. This is with/without allowerasing and/or best >> and/or >> skip-broken options. Does it happen to others? Is there a known workaround? >> Is >> there a way to get dnf to report what's trying to cause kernel and/or systemd >> removal? The only workaround I've found is to not exclude kernel*, which >> used to >> be an easy way to gain some freespace back from filling / with 100% of rpms >> downloaded in advance. With a fresh new kernel, there's no rush to have a >> nearly >> identical kernel available right away. On my systems, it won't get used on >> first >> post-upgrade boot anyway (booting the symlink to the most recent kernel, >> which the >> upgrade doesn't touch). > You need to include the command you're running and the output from dnf > for this to be useful. $SUBJECT is the output. Commands included: dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=31 dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=31 --allowerasing dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=31 --allowerasing --best dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=31 --allowerasing --skip-broken dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=31 --allowerasing --skip-broken --best -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
The operation would result in removing the following protected packages: kernel-core, systemd
This has been rather routine here in recent weeks trying to system-upgrade to f31 from a freshly upgraded f30. This is with/without allowerasing and/or best and/or skip-broken options. Does it happen to others? Is there a known workaround? Is there a way to get dnf to report what's trying to cause kernel and/or systemd removal? The only workaround I've found is to not exclude kernel*, which used to be an easy way to gain some freespace back from filling / with 100% of rpms downloaded in advance. With a fresh new kernel, there's no rush to have a nearly identical kernel available right away. On my systems, it won't get used on first post-upgrade boot anyway (booting the symlink to the most recent kernel, which the upgrade doesn't touch). -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: incomplete kernel installation
Samuel Sieb composed on 2019-10-21 08:14 (UTC-0700): > Then you've got some other problem with /boot because: Until I found https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1687266 I didn't know about, or have installed, grubby-deprecated. :p -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: incomplete kernel installation
Samuel Sieb composed on 2019-10-20 23:33 (UTC-0700): > Felix Miata wrote: >> This just happened in system-update 30>31 on MBR host p5bse. It's been >> happening >> in F29, F30 and F31 on some systems, but not others, and I can't tell why the >> difference. Initramfs gets properly built, but none of the rest of the new >> kernel's files land in /boot/. I have to put them there manually out of the >> appropriate kernel-core rpm. >> Both DNF and rpm directly produce the same failure trying to add a new >> kernel. > Is there an error message or something in the logs? Nothing that seemed relevant to a kernel installation or initramfs build. >> Grub is not installed in Fedora, though grubby, grub2-tools, grub2-common and >> grub2-tools-minimal are. Booting is done via master bootloader not involving >> Fedora in any way. I don't know what must be requiring these packages, or >> why. > Master bootloader? grub2 is installed by default. Waste of time, space and bandwidth to have it. This is multiboot. On p5bse F31 is on sda22, f30 on sda18 and f29 on sda21, among many others, >30 root partitions. >> It does seem odd that the kernel-core package's files whose destination is >> /boot/ >> are located in /lib/modules// in the rpm rather than /boot/. > What files are those? The vmlinuz and initramfs files are in /boot in > the rpm. Viewed in mc-4.8.23, kernel-core-5.3.7-300.fc31.x86_64.rpm has no /boot/ in CONTENTS.cpio but does have these in /lib/modules//: .vmlinuz.hmac System.map config vmlinuz That's where I copy them from (using mc) after the normal (rpm/dnf) installation fails to put them in /boot/ during whatever process(es) produces the initramfs in /boot/. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
incomplete kernel installation
This just happened in system-update 30>31 on MBR host p5bse. It's been happening in F29, F30 and F31 on some systems, but not others, and I can't tell why the difference. Initramfs gets properly built, but none of the rest of the new kernel's files land in /boot/. I have to put them there manually out of the appropriate kernel-core rpm. Both DNF and rpm directly produce the same failure trying to add a new kernel. Grub is not installed in Fedora, though grubby, grub2-tools, grub2-common and grub2-tools-minimal are. Booting is done via master bootloader not involving Fedora in any way. I don't know what must be requiring these packages, or why. It does seem odd that the kernel-core package's files whose destination is /boot/ are located in /lib/modules// in the rpm rather than /boot/. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Upgrade F30-->F31 failing. Were to get more info?
Ed Greshko composed on 2019-10-17 17:58 (UTC+0800): > FWIW, I'm using > dnf --skip-broken --allowerasing system-upgrade download --releasever=31 > I suppose it is possible I'm hitting a bad mirror? This may be the same problem my last few tries to upgrade. I removed kde*, kf5* and plasm*, upgraded, then reinstalled KDE after the upgrade. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
dnf system-upgraded from 30 to 31 produces useless Konsole in Plasma
Konsole window opens with toolbar, but there's no I/O pane to type in, just a lot of menubar background color. In IceWM session Konsole works normally. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Upgrading from F30 to F31 beta reboot issue
Rodger Etz composed on 2019-10-03 20:15 (UTC): > Tried that, but it leads to dependency probs that cannot be solved by > --allowerasing or --skip-broken. Another thing I do when such problems arise is remove the offending packages, upgrade, then add them back afterward. Typically this means dnf remove kf5* kde* plasm* *breez*. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Upgrading from F30 to F31 beta reboot issue
Rodger Etz composed on 2019-10-03 19:11 (UTC): > So it seems Alan and myself have got some rare dependency condition. > Still need to find out what exactly triggers it and how to solve it. > Will open a bug tomorrow, if nobody beats me to it. Likely you can work around the problem via exclude= in dnf.conf for the checksum problem packages to get upgraded to f31, and deal with those skipped packages later. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora 31 Upgrade Test Day is underway
Adam Williamson composed on 2019-09-24 08:19 (UTC-0700): > On Tue, 2019-09-24 at 00:52 -0400, Felix Miata wrote: >> I tried dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=31 from F30 with every >> options >> combination I could come up with, but the result was always the same: >> Error: >> Problem: The operation would result in removing the following protected >> packages: >> kernel-core, systemd >> It reports nothing about why. >> My exclude= line >> flatpak* espea* mariadb* kde* q* kf* x* >> The last four are about reducing the freespace exhaustion caused by >> downloading >> everything in advance. The others are semi-permanent, apparent system depends >> never purposely used. > Well, the most obvious thing to try is removing that exclude= line. > Then at least if you don't get the error, you know what the problem is: > you're excluding something you shouldn't be excluding. I was tired, and gave up suffling through different exclusion combinations. Tonight I tried a more logical pattern and found out shell expansion was part of the problem. So instead of excluding KDE I removed it, abandoned excluding q*, then succeeded download phase with this exclusion combination: flatpak* espea* mariadb* kernel* linux-f* Host g5eas freespace after download and transaction check was 29%, after reboot & upgrade, which went surprisingly quickly, 31%, but with unreachable fixed IP network, and a bunch of errors in dnf.log that don't look like have anything to do with my exclusions: ... 2019-09-25T02:25:19Z DDEBUG Extra commands: ['system-upgrade', 'upgrade'] 2019-09-25T02:25:19Z DEBUG Unknown configuration value: failovermethod=priority in /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora-modular.repo; Configuration: OptionBinding with id "failovermethod" does not exist 2019-09-25T02:25:19Z DEBUG Unknown configuration value: failovermethod=priority in /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora-modular.repo; Configuration: OptionBinding with id "failovermethod" does not exist 2019-09-25T02:25:19Z DEBUG Unknown configuration value: failovermethod=priority in /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora-modular.repo; Configuration: OptionBinding with id "failovermethod" does not exist 2019-09-25T02:25:19Z DEBUG Unknown configuration value: failovermethod=priority in /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora-updates-modular.repo; Configuration: OptionBinding with id "failovermethod" does not exist 2019-09-25T02:25:19Z DEBUG Unknown configuration value: failovermethod=priority in /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora-updates-modular.repo; Configuration: OptionBinding with id "failovermethod" does not exist 2019-09-25T02:25:19Z DEBUG Unknown configuration value: failovermethod=priority in /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora-updates-modular.repo; Configuration: OptionBinding with id "failovermethod" does not exist 2019-09-25T02:25:19Z DEBUG Unknown configuration value: failovermethod=priority in /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora-updates.repo; Configuration: OptionBinding with id "failovermethod" does not exist 2019-09-25T02:25:19Z DEBUG Unknown configuration value: failovermethod=priority in /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora-updates.repo; Configuration: OptionBinding with id "failovermethod" does not exist 2019-09-25T02:25:19Z DEBUG Unknown configuration value: failovermethod=priority in /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora-updates.repo; Configuration: OptionBinding with id "failovermethod" does not exist 2019-09-25T02:25:19Z DEBUG Unknown configuration value: failovermethod=priority in /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora.repo; Configuration: OptionBinding with id "failovermethod" does not exist 2019-09-25T02:25:19Z DEBUG Unknown configuration value: failovermethod=priority in /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora.repo; Configuration: OptionBinding with id "failovermethod" does not exist 2019-09-25T02:25:19Z DEBUG Unknown configuration value: failovermethod=priority in /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora.repo; Configuration: OptionBinding with id "failovermethod" does not exist ... 2019-09-25T02:25:21Z DEBUG repo: using cache for: updates 2019-09-25T02:25:32Z DEBUG --> Finished dependency resolution 2019-09-25T02:25:32Z DDEBUG timer: depsolve: 4194 ms 2019-09-25T02:25:32Z INFO Dependencies resolved. 2019-09-25T02:25:33Z WARNING Problem 1: cannot install both icewm-1.6.1-10.fc31.x86_64 and icewm-1.3.8-16.fc29.x86_64 - package icewm-clearlooks-1.3.8-16.fc29.noarch requires icewm = 1.3.8-16.fc29, but none of the providers can be installed - conflicting requests - problem with installed package icewm-clearlooks-1.3.8-16.fc29.noarch Problem 2: cannot install both icewm-1.6.1-10.fc31.x86_64 and icewm-1.3.8-16.fc29.x86_64 - package icewm-data-1.6.1-10.fc31.noarch requires icewm = 1.6.1-10.fc31, but none of the provide
Re: Fedora 31 Upgrade Test Day is underway
Sumantro Mukherjee composed on 2019-09-23 15:39 (UTC+0530): > Today is Fedora 31 Upgrade Test Day, as we are nearing the release, you can > help > us by testing if everything upgrades successfully from Fedora 29 and Fedora > 30 over > to Fedora 31. All you need is are images and instructions laid down on the > wiki page[0]. > As usual, we have it on #fedora-test-day on Freenode > [0] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2019-09-23_F31_Upgrade_Test_Day I tried dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=31 from F30 with every options combination I could come up with, but the result was always the same: Error: Problem: The operation would result in removing the following protected packages: kernel-core, systemd It reports nothing about why. My exclude= line flatpak* espea* mariadb* kde* q* kf* x* The last four are about reducing the freespace exhaustion caused by downloading everything in advance. The others are semi-permanent, apparent system depends never purposely used. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ 2019-09-24T04:35:29Z DDEBUG Cleaning up. 2019-09-24T04:36:02Z INFO --- logging initialized --- 2019-09-24T04:36:02Z DDEBUG timer: config: 4 ms 2019-09-24T04:36:02Z DEBUG Loaded plugins: builddep, changelog, config-manager, copr, debug, debuginfo-install, download, generate_completion_cache, needs-restarting, playground, repoclosure, repodiff, repograph, repomanage, reposync, system-upgrade 2019-09-24T04:36:02Z DEBUG DNF version: 4.2.8 2019-09-24T04:36:02Z DDEBUG Command: dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=31 --setopt=keepcache=1 --skip-broken --allowerasing 2019-09-24T04:36:02Z DDEBUG Installroot: / 2019-09-24T04:36:02Z DDEBUG Releasever: 31 2019-09-24T04:36:02Z DEBUG cachedir: /var/cache/dnf 2019-09-24T04:36:02Z DDEBUG Base command: system-upgrade 2019-09-24T04:36:02Z DDEBUG Extra commands: ['system-upgrade', 'download', '--refresh', '--releasever=31', '--setopt=keepcache=1', '--skip-broken', '--allowerasing'] 2019-09-24T04:36:02Z DEBUG Unknown configuration value: failovermethod=priority in /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora-modular.repo; Configuration: OptionBinding with id "failovermethod" does not exist 2019-09-24T04:36:02Z DEBUG Unknown configuration value: failovermethod=priority in /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora-modular.repo; Configuration: OptionBinding with id "failovermethod" does not exist 2019-09-24T04:36:02Z DEBUG Unknown configuration value: failovermethod=priority in /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora-modular.repo; Configuration: OptionBinding with id "failovermethod" does not exist 2019-09-24T04:36:02Z DEBUG Unknown configuration value: failovermethod=priority in /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora-updates-modular.repo; Configuration: OptionBinding with id "failovermethod" does not exist 2019-09-24T04:36:02Z DEBUG Unknown configuration value: failovermethod=priority in /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora-updates-modular.repo; Configuration: OptionBinding with id "failovermethod" does not exist 2019-09-24T04:36:02Z DEBUG Unknown configuration value: failovermethod=priority in /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora-updates-modular.repo; Configuration: OptionBinding with id "failovermethod" does not exist 2019-09-24T04:36:02Z DEBUG Unknown configuration value: failovermethod=priority in /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora-updates.repo; Configuration: OptionBinding with id "failovermethod" does not exist 2019-09-24T04:36:02Z DEBUG Unknown configuration value: failovermethod=priority in /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora-updates.repo; Configuration: OptionBinding with id "failovermethod" does not exist 2019-09-24T04:36:02Z DEBUG Unknown configuration value: failovermethod=priority in /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora-updates.repo; Configuration: OptionBinding with id "failovermethod" does not exist 2019-09-24T04:36:02Z DEBUG Unknown configuration value: failovermethod=priority in /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora.repo; Configuration: OptionBinding with id "failovermethod" does not exist 2019-09-24T04:36:02Z DEBUG Unknown configuration value: failovermethod=priority in /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora.repo; Configuration: OptionBinding with id "failovermethod" does not exist 2019-09-24T04:36:02Z DEBUG Unknown configuration value: failovermethod=priority in /etc/yum.repos.d/fedora.repo; Configuration: OptionBinding with id "failovermethod" does not exist 2019-09-24T04:36:04Z DEBUG reviving: 'updates' can be revived - metalink checksums match. 2019-09-24T04:36:04Z DEBUG updates: using metadata from Tue 20 Feb 2018 02:18:14 PM EST. 2019-09-24T04:36:07Z DEBUG reviving: 'fedora' can be revived - metalink checksums match. 2019-09-24T04:36:07Z DEBUG fedora: using metadata from Mon 23
module_platform_id is now required to perform system upgrade
Subject is from: https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=DNF_system_upgrade&action=history I tried following the parent page's instructions to go from 28 to 29 on 32 bit host gx28b. To do so, I cloned F28 to the partition that was the former home of F26, adjusted UUID, volume label, bootloader and fstab accordingly, ensured dnf.conf did not include keepcache=1, then proceeded to upgrade the clone. This was the result: # df Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Version /dev/sda94843161 3710349887020 81% F21 /dev/sda15 4843161 3576096 1021273 78% F27 /dev/sda14 4843161 3709028888341 81% F28 /dev/sda84843161 4643059 0 100% F29 I did it all over again but without module_platform_id=29. Results were much better: # df # (after booting each of 27, 28 & 29 and running 'dnf clean all') Filesystem 1K-blocksUsed Available Use% OS Kernels Installed /dev/sda94843161 3137042 1460327 69% F21 3.17.1 3.18.7 3.19.7 4.1.13 /dev/sda15 4843161 3410471 1186898 75% F27 4.16.5 4.18.16 /dev/sda14 4843161 3498666 1098703 77% F28 4.16.5 4.18.16 5.0.5 /dev/sda84843161 3809541787828 83% F29 4.18.16 5.0.5 Much better, but am I the only one noticing system bloat that isn't attributable to kernel bloat? Is module_platform_id actually required for upgrading from F28 to F29? Is the Wiki wrong? -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=30 errors
Brandon Johnson composed on 2019-04-01 17:00 (UTC-0400): > Was a bug ever opened for this? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1667300 -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: "Basic graphics mode" feature and criterion discussion
Adam Williamson composed on 2019-03-26 11:38 (UTC-0700): To be clear, this is about DDX drivers, not kernel drivers, right? Seeing "driver" used willy nilly in discussing video issues and configuration is confusing. > ...when a *new* graphics card comes out, one that the > nouveau driver doesn't actually work with right away, when you try and > boot any Linux on a system with that card, nouveau will still get > loaded and *try* to work. This may not end well (though I don't have > direct experience with this case, so I don't know whether there are > other fallback paths... Wasn't this part of the instigation for the creation of the /other/ DDX driver, the generic one that works with all the big three/four GPUs, AMD/ATI, Intel and NVidia, and maybe the minor players too, the now upstream default, the one that isn't a separate DDX package, instead included in the Xorg server package (where does it come from when running Wayland?): modesetting? Except for brief tests, and for hardware too old for its support, I keep /none/ of the optional DDX packages installed, relying on the modesetting DDX. Except for the bugs in downstream reports eventually leading to https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/issues/542 the modesetting DDX has been bulletproof for me. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: dnf upgrade dnf massacred dnf
Adam Williamson composed on 2019-03-21 12:23 (UTC-0700): > Did you check librepo? Nothing appeared to suggest any such package exists, but it &/or its python3-librepo sibling was indeed the solution. Thank you! :-D > This kind of piecemeal updating is not supported, so it doesn't really > affect the release process. All the recommended update methods for > Fedora involve updating all packages together. I don't see that I have any choice. Atomic simply doesn't fit my long ago established allocation and usage systems. Fedora is the only place that tries to force it. I have to work around that as best I can. It's often easier to start over with a restore than to fix when a workaround breaks something. Other distros with the same space allocation work fine without atomic, the Debians in particular, which might have a stricter working definition of requires/depends than anything else. It's tough to tell for sure, since I never use Plasma on them, while on Fedora I mainly use Plasma. The following is fairly typical of the more than two dozen multiboot PCs I have hosting 3-4 each of of Fedora releases among the rest: # inxi -GxxSM System:Host: fi965 Kernel: 5.0.0-300.fc30.x86_64 x86_64 bits: 64 compiler: gcc v: 9.0.1 Desktop: KDE Plasma 5.15.2 tk: Qt 5.11.3 wm: kwin_x11 dm: KDM Distro: Fedora release 30 (Thirty) Machine: Type: Desktop Mobo: ASUSTeK model: P5B-Deluxe v: Rev 1.xx serial: MB-1234567890 BIOS: American Megatrends v: 1238 date: 09/30/2008 CPU: Dual Core: Intel Core2 6700 type: MCP arch: Core Merom speed: 1600 MHz min/max: 1596/2660 MHz Graphics: Device-1: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD/ATI] RV620 PRO [Radeon HD 3470] vendor: Dell driver: radeon v: kernel bus ID: 01:00.0 chip ID: 1002:95c0 Display: x11 server: Fedora Project X.org 1.20.4 driver: modesetting unloaded: fbdev,vesa alternate: ati compositor: kwin_x11 resolution: 2560x1440~60Hz, 1920x1200~60Hz OpenGL: renderer: AMD RV620 (DRM 2.50.0 / 5.0.0-300.fc30.x86_64 LLVM 8.0.0) v: 3.3 Mesa 19.0.0-rc6 compat-v: 3.0 direct render: Yes # xrandr | head Screen 0: minimum 320 x 200, current 2560 x 2640, maximum 8192 x 8192 DP-1 connected primary 2560x1440+0+1200 (normal left inverted right x axis y axis) 598mm x 336mm 2560x1440 59.95*+ 74.92 1920x1440 75.00 1856x1392 75.00 1920x1080 74.9160.0050.0059.94 1920x1080i60.0050.0059.94 1680x1050 59.95... # fdisk -l | grep sd | egrep -v 'ectors|xtended' | wc -l 67 # df (annotated/edited; RAID components, FAT & HPFS/NTFS excluded) Filesystem 1K-blocks Available Use% MntPt Kernels Desktop /dev/sda12 1393322529715 60% /usr/local /dev/sda94436818 3545513 20% /home /dev/sda36 5655815 2795732 48% *mga5 4 KDE4 /dev/sda21 5655815 2734714 50% *s114 2 KDE3 /dev/sda25 5655815 2709062 50% *deb9 2 TDE /dev/sda18 5655815 2414686 56% *debsid 3 TDE /dev/sda27 5655815 1988455 63% *debA 4 TDE /dev/sda30 5655815 1979298 64% *mga6 5 Plasma /dev/sda15 5655815 1891477 65% *mga7 2 Plasma /dev/sda26 5655815 1882791 65% *ub16 2 TDE /dev/sda31 5655815 1542603 72% *s151 3 TDE /dev/sda16 5655815 1506737 72% *s123 2 Plasma /dev/sda17 5655815 1496116 73% *s122 2 KDE3 /dev/sda14 4843161 1077295 77% *f216 Plasma /dev/sda13 5655815 1080529 80% *f285 Plasma /dev/sda23 5655815778192 86% *stw5 3 Plasma /dev/sda22 5655815764241 86% *s132 3 Plasma /dev/sda20 5655815739231 87% / # F30 2 Plasma /dev/sda29 5655815667030 88% *f294 Plasma /dev/sda19 5655815616446 89% *s150 6 TDE /dev/sda32 5655815470891 92% *s423 8 TDE /dev/sda10 5655815296899 95% *stw5 KDE3 /dev/sda87281115 1765402 75% *s131 4 KDE3 /dev/sda33 154925412 103521408 34% *isos 4843161 = 4800.6 MiB (legacy from before 32bit to 64 bit changeover) 5655815 = 5600.8 MiB (begun when switching to 64 bit) 7281115 = 7201.0 MiB (special case for hosting stable release with extra apps) -- Evolution as taught in public schools is faith in supposition, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: dnf upgrade dnf massacred dnf
Adam Williamson composed on 2019-03-21 10:28 (UTC-0400): > On Thu, 2019-03-21 at 04:45 -0400, Felix Miata wrote: >> Host fi965 >> happened again :~( > Well, people did make some suggestions before - notably including > libdnf, which you don't seem to have done this time. Why didn't you try > that? I tried what I was able to figure out given the limited instructions > If it worked it would have suggested some kind of not- > sufficiently-strict dep between dnf and libdnf is likely the problem. I tried package version matching for *dnf* and found no differences between what was on mirrors and what was installed. There are/were about 3-4 sets of versions among the dozen or so packages. I agree this must be some kind of failed dep problem. It's quite disconcerting seeing it happen right after announcing a fresh F30 testing request. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is 5/6 unprovable supposition, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: dnf upgrade dnf massacred dnf
Host fi965 happened again :~( Felix Miata composed on 2019-03-11 02:26 (UTC-0400): > Not enough freespace to download everything in advance and install/upgrade > 1100+ packages before > deleting everything. So after set-disabled rawhide and rawhide-modular I did > my usual attempt to > bunch packages via .bash_history: > # dnf update dnf* rpm* system* libsol* hawke* glibc* fedor* bash-completion > util-linux grub2-common > grubby dracu* > Apparently something about python3.7 is missing or broken, because now any > dnf command I attempt to > proceed with (install|upgrade|update) produces "Unknown option". dnf > makecache produces a blitz of > python errors: > Traceback (most recent call last): > File "/usr/bin/dnf", line 58, in > main.user_main(sys.argv[1:], exit_code=True) > File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/dnf/cli/main.py", line 193, in > user_main > errcode = main(args) > File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/dnf/cli/main.py", line 64, in main > return _main(base, args, cli_class, option_parser_class) > File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/dnf/cli/main.py", line 99, in _main > return cli_run(cli, base) > File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/dnf/cli/main.py", line 115, in cli_run > cli.run() > File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/dnf/cli/cli.py", line 1108, in run > return self.command.run() > File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/dnf/cli/commands/makecache.py", line > 50, in run > return self.base.update_cache(timer) > File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/dnf/base.py", line 360, in update_cache > (is_cache, expires_in) = r._metadata_expire_in() > File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/dnf/repo.py", line 585, in > _metadata_expire_in > self._repo.loadCache(False) > File "/usr/lib64/python3.7/site-packages/libdnf/repo.py", line 506, in > loadCache > return _repo.Repo_loadCache(self, throwExcept) > RuntimeError: Unknown option > # dnf install icewm > Unknown option > Error: Unknown option > # > Bugzilla's scripting has evolved to make it virtually useless for searches > that don't return either > nothing or hundreds of hits. > Anyone know whether this is a known problem fixable with rpm, or is going to > require complete > restore from backup or fresh installation? -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=30 errors
Felix Miata composed on 2019-01-12 22:24 (UTC-0400):
> Output messages (partial, typed):
> []
> Preparing:
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> file /usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/dnf/yum/rpmtrans.py, line 260 in
> callback
> self._elemProgress(key,amount)
> ...line 303, in _elemProgress
> transaction_list=self._extract_cbkey(key)
> ...line 244, in _extract_cbkey
> raise RuntimeError("TransactionItem not found for key: %s % cbkey)
> RuntimeError: Transaction not found for key: rtkit
>
> Complete!
> Download complete! Use 'dnf system-upgrade reboot' to start the upgrade
> [/]
Same thing happened again. Host big31.
> dnf system-upgrade reboot seems to be proceeding normally. :-p
again
> install 9
29
> upgrade 655
1198
> downgrade 9
10
> Total size: 724M...
1.0 G
F30 boots, apparently normally. Disk space consumption on / rose 8.5%.
--
Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science.
Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!
Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/
___
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
dnf upgrade dnf massacred dnf
Not enough freespace to download everything in advance and install/upgrade 1100+ packages before deleting everything. So after set-disabled rawhide and rawhide-modular I did my usual attempt to bunch packages via .bash_history: # dnf update dnf* rpm* system* libsol* hawke* glibc* fedor* bash-completion util-linux grub2-common grubby dracu* Apparently something about python3.7 is missing or broken, because now any dnf command I attempt to proceed with (install|upgrade|update) produces "Unknown option". dnf makecache produces a blitz of python errors: Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/bin/dnf", line 58, in main.user_main(sys.argv[1:], exit_code=True) File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/dnf/cli/main.py", line 193, in user_main errcode = main(args) File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/dnf/cli/main.py", line 64, in main return _main(base, args, cli_class, option_parser_class) File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/dnf/cli/main.py", line 99, in _main return cli_run(cli, base) File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/dnf/cli/main.py", line 115, in cli_run cli.run() File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/dnf/cli/cli.py", line 1108, in run return self.command.run() File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/dnf/cli/commands/makecache.py", line 50, in run return self.base.update_cache(timer) File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/dnf/base.py", line 360, in update_cache (is_cache, expires_in) = r._metadata_expire_in() File "/usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/dnf/repo.py", line 585, in _metadata_expire_in self._repo.loadCache(False) File "/usr/lib64/python3.7/site-packages/libdnf/repo.py", line 506, in loadCache return _repo.Repo_loadCache(self, throwExcept) RuntimeError: Unknown option # dnf install icewm Unknown option Error: Unknown option # Bugzilla's scripting has evolved to make it virtually useless for searches that don't return either nothing or hundreds of hits. Anyone know whether this is a known problem fixable with rpm, or is going to require complete restore from backup or fresh installation? -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: no network after dnf system-upgrade
Samuel Sieb composed on 2019-01-05 23:29 (UTC-0800): > Felix Miata wrote: >> I tried 3 times according to >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DNF_system_upgrade, >> from F29 configured with fixed IP, using --releasever=30, getting slightly >> different >> results each time, but always with no working network as a result, systemctl >> reporting no service network, and ip a reporting eth0 unconfigured. So on >> this last > You don't want to use NetworkManager? > The initscripts package that contains the "network" initscript is gone > in F30. I don't know if it was moved, but it's most likely just gone now. >> I tried to chroot from F29. I got in, but attempting to ping generates >> system error. > What error? Just that there is no active network interface? >> Dmesg produces nothing useful. Journal is empty. > dmesg will only show you the messages from the F29 boot. >> Is the following no more valid?: >> mount f30 targetpartition /mnt >> mount -o bind /dev /mnt/dev >> mount -o bind /sys /mnt/sys >> mount -o bind /proc /mnt/proc >> chroot /mnt >> Any suggestions what might generate successful upgrade or a way to repair the >> latest? Is it too early to be using --releasever=30? > Use the netinst boot image and use the rescue option. That will mount > all the necessary mount points and let you chroot. Install NetworkManager. This just happened again, except that I went from 28 to 29. I then chrooted from the old 28 to 29 to "Install NetworkManager", and have no network, with same message as booting 29 directly: [on vtty4] # dnf install NetworkManager ... You can remove cached packages by executing 'dnf clean packages'. Error: Error downloading packages: Curl error (6): Couldn't resolve host name for https://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/meta... # ping www.google.com ping: www.google.com: System error Network works normally in F28 (vtty2,3). Ping pings, etc. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=30 errors
Output messages (partial, typed):
[]
Preparing:
Traceback (most recent call last):
file /usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/dnf/yum/rpmtrans.py, line 260 in callback
self._elemProgress(key,amount)
...line 303, in _elemProgress
transaction_list=self._extract_cbkey(key)
...line 244, in _extract_cbkey
raise RuntimeError("TransactionItem not found for key: %s % cbkey)
RuntimeError: Transaction not found for key: rtkit
Complete!
Download complete! Use 'dnf system-upgrade reboot' to start the upgrade
[/]
dnf system-upgrade reboot seems to be proceeding normally. :-p
install 9
upgrade 655
downgrade 9
Total size: 724M...
--
Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science.
Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!
Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/
___
test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: no network after dnf system-upgrade
Samuel Sieb composed on 2019-01-05 23:52 (UTC-0800): > Felix Miata wrote: >> Samuel Sieb composed on 2019-01-05 23:29 (UTC-0800): >>> You don't want to use NetworkManager? >> There's nothing to manage. Setup fixed IP when initialized. Never has reason >> to be >> changed. It's a test installation on a test PC. > NetworkManager handles that just fine as well. It's pretty light > weight. I believe there's even a mode for one shot setup and quit. On 4th try the upgrade worked. Systemctl status network is generated even though Network Manager and network-scripts are both installed. :-) >>> The initscripts package that contains the "network" initscript is gone >>> in F30. I don't know if it was moved, but it's most likely just gone now. >> http://mirrors.us.kernel.org/fedora/development/rawhide/Everything/x86_64/os/Packages/n/network-scripts-10.01-1.fc29.x86_64.rpm >> sort of suggests not. It contains /etc/rc.d/init.d/ -rwxr-xr-x 1 8353 Aug 6 >> 07:06 network > Not sure what you're trying to point out there. network-scripts is a > subpackage of initscripts which is gone in F30. Do you see a > network-scripts package for F30? I never found a 30 on mirrors.kernel.org. I just assumed whatever is on rawhide would be the same or close enough. >>>> I tried to chroot from F29. I got in, but attempting to ping generates >>>> system error. >>> What error? Just that there is no active network interface? >> Simply system error, no details, no clues. > What is the actual text of the message? I already wrote 50% or more of the one line error message. I don't remember whether it was 3 words or 4, but system error were two. >>>> Any suggestions what might generate successful upgrade or a way to repair >>>> the >>>> latest? Is it too early to be using --releasever=30? >>> Use the netinst boot image and use the rescue option. That will mount >>> all the necessary mount points and let you chroot. Install NetworkManager. >> Which netinst image? Does it matter which version? How is NM to be used on a >> system with no X? > I don't think it matters which netinst. I usually use the Everything one. > NetworkManager has no relation to X and doesn't need graphical tools. > You can edit the ifcfg files yourself or use nmcli. It is compatible > with the ifcfg files for the network initscript. Moot at this point, but good to know for next time. :-) The actual cause almost certainly has roots in my attempt to streamline the workaround for the upgrade process filling up / with downloaded packages and being unable to proceed. I had previously used dnf to eliminate kde*, kf5* and plasma*. Apparently it took out NM stuff without my noticing. This time I temporarily moved /var to a separate filesystem. -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: no network after dnf system-upgrade
Samuel Sieb composed on 2019-01-05 23:29 (UTC-0800): Thanks much for fast reply! > Felix Miata wrote: >> I tried 3 times according to >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DNF_system_upgrade, >> from F29 configured with fixed IP, using --releasever=30, getting slightly >> different >> results each time, but always with no working network as a result, systemctl >> reporting no service network, and ip a reporting eth0 unconfigured. So on >> this last > You don't want to use NetworkManager? There's nothing to manage. Setup fixed IP when initialized. Never has reason to be changed. It's a test installation on a test PC. > The initscripts package that contains the "network" initscript is gone > in F30. I don't know if it was moved, but it's most likely just gone now. http://mirrors.us.kernel.org/fedora/development/rawhide/Everything/x86_64/os/Packages/n/network-scripts-10.01-1.fc29.x86_64.rpm sort of suggests not. It contains /etc/rc.d/init.d/ -rwxr-xr-x 1 8353 Aug 6 07:06 network >> I tried to chroot from F29. I got in, but attempting to ping generates >> system error. > What error? Just that there is no active network interface? Simply system error, no details, no clues. >> Dmesg produces nothing useful. Journal is empty. > dmesg will only show you the messages from the F29 boot. >> Is the following no more valid?: >> mount f30 targetpartition /mnt >> mount -o bind /dev /mnt/dev >> mount -o bind /sys /mnt/sys >> mount -o bind /proc /mnt/proc >> chroot /mnt >> Any suggestions what might generate successful upgrade or a way to repair the >> latest? Is it too early to be using --releasever=30? > Use the netinst boot image and use the rescue option. That will mount > all the necessary mount points and let you chroot. Install NetworkManager. Which netinst image? Does it matter which version? How is NM to be used on a system with no X? -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
no network after dnf system-upgrade
I tried 3 times according to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DNF_system_upgrade, from F29 configured with fixed IP, using --releasever=30, getting slightly different results each time, but always with no working network as a result, systemctl reporting no service network, and ip a reporting eth0 unconfigured. So on this last I tried to chroot from F29. I got in, but attempting to ping generates system error. Dmesg produces nothing useful. Journal is empty. Is the following no more valid?: mount f30 targetpartition /mnt mount -o bind /dev /mnt/dev mount -o bind /sys /mnt/sys mount -o bind /proc /mnt/proc chroot /mnt Any suggestions what might generate successful upgrade or a way to repair the latest? Is it too early to be using --releasever=30? -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Grub's HTTP installation initialization failing
rdsos reports: http://fm.no-ip.com/Tmp/Linux/F/rdsosreport-f29-k8mmv-20181106a.txt http://fm.no-ip.com/Tmp/Linux/F/rdsosreport-f29-k8mmv-20181106b.txt I'm trying to install without using OM or stick, loading installation vmlinuz, initrd.img and install.img via Grub, following the instructions on https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora/f28/install-guide/advanced/Boot_Options/ I've been able to manage this many times in the past, but something I'm apparently not grokking has changed. Can anyone spot what I'm doing wrong or missing with this cmdline that's producing the critical errors Network is unreachable Warning: no suitable images in the latter rdsosreport? inst.stage2=hd:/dev/sda12:/squashfs.img inst.repo=http://mirrors.us.kernel.org/fedora/releases/29/Everything/x86_64/os ip=192.168.2.42::192.168.2.1:255.255.255.0:k8mmv:eth0:none nameserver=8.8.4.4 ipv6.disable=1 net.ifnames=0 selinux=0 "resolution=1024x768" video=1024x768 audit=0 readonly=1 vga=791 nofirewire -- Evolution as taught in public schools is religion, not science. Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: proposal: drop optical media from release criteria
Harold Dost composed on 2018-09-20 22:35 (UTC-0400): > Is having this as a test criteria *that* burdensome? Similar to another > blocker that was being proposed, maybe it's not something that _must_ be > tested, but if it's known to be broken that it should block a final. +1 -- "Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Whatever else you get, get wisdom." Proverbs 4:7 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: proposal: drop optical media from release criteria
Matthew Miller composed on 2018-09-20 14:16 (UTC-0400): > On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 01:49:20PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: >> Justification: >> http://newsthump.com/2018/05/21/man-decides-to-keep-box-of-cables-hes-has-since-2002-for-another-year/ > More seriously: I don't think there are any systems in the audiences > targeted by our release-blocking deliverables which are not better served by > booting from USB media. FWIW, context, and acknowledging release criteria is not same thing as purging functionality: 1-a non-zero number of PCs remaining in service here cannot boot from USB (actual quantity impractical to ascertain among the large total number) 2-all (probably) PCs in service here have working OM drives (some have floppy drives, among which one booted from less than a month ago) 3-OM are cheap and easy to buy in required capacities; USB are expensive both in purchase cost and space waste 4-OM have plenty room to write a legible content catalog, USB the opposite 5-OM are physically easy to library, USB the opposite (disparate shapes and sizes, with no purpose-made storage containers) 6-I bought two 5.25" DVD writers since the first of this month 7-I have yet to install any OS from USB media Newer does not equate to better. IOW, USB media is a considerable PITA compared to OM. -- "Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Whatever else you get, get wisdom." Proverbs 4:7 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Are non-sse2 CPUs officially dead on F29?
Sérgio Basto composed on 2018-09-20 04:39 (UTC+0100): > On Wed, 2018-09-19 at 22:50 -0400, Felix Miata wrote: >> Non-sse2 > what is your non-sse2 [1] ? Pentium 3 (Produced > from early 1999 to 2003) ? or pentium 2 ? > In July of 2016 , we talked about enable or disable sse2 capabalities on i686 > for x264 [2] > On Tuesday, 26 July kwizart test it on KVM guest with pentium 2 cpu emulated > , you may read in thread in Pentium 3 code works > an in pentium 2 code doesn't work but also doesn't crash > I vote in enable sse2 , and not support Pentium 2 or 3 , why not but an > non-sse2 kernel in a copr repo for example ? . processor : 0 vendor_id : AuthenticAMD cpu family : 6 model : 8 model name : AMD Sempron(tm) 2800+ stepping: 1 cpu MHz : 1996.334 cache size : 256 KB fdiv_bug: no hlt_bug : no f00f_bug: no coma_bug: no fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 1 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 mmx fxsr sse syscall mp mmxext 3dnowext 3dnow up bogomips: 3992.66 clflush size: 32 cache_alignment : 32 address sizes : 34 bits physical, 32 bits virtual power management: ts PC hard locked up after just past halfway done, so I gave up trying. -- "Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Whatever else you get, get wisdom." Proverbs 4:7 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Are non-sse2 CPUs officially dead on F29?
Non-sse2 won't work on openSUSE Tumbleweed, but does on Debian next (10/Buster). I have a 28 attempting to dnf upgrade to 29, but I'm seeing a ton of entries filling up /var/lib/systemd/coredump, 197 files and still counting. :-( -- "Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Whatever else you get, get wisdom." Proverbs 4:7 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
segfaulting F28 Xorg i686
Does anyone have a working Xorg on i686? I've tried a few, radeon & intel gfx. No luck. -- "Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Whatever else you get, get wisdom." Proverbs 4:7 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
upstream bug exists in F28
What's the best way to get an upstream Xorg bug on Fedora's radar if an existing bug doesn't seem to be indentifiable? File a bug anyway? https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104993 X server aborts when Composite extension is disabled These could be same, but I can't tell: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?chfieldfrom=7m&chfieldto=Now&classification=Fedora&component=xorg-x11&component=xorg-x11-server&f1=longdesc&list_id=8626918&longdesc=funlockfile&longdesc_type=allwordssubstr&o1=notsubstring&product=Fedora&query_format=advanced&v1=intel.so Host at immediate issue here has hd5450 Radeon. -- "Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Whatever else you get, get wisdom." Proverbs 4:7 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: kernel update process (failure)
Chris Murphy composed on 2018-04-04 10:44 (UTC-0600): > Felix Miata wrote: >> Felix Miata composed on 2018-04-04 01:35 (UTC-0400): >>> I just tried updating a 32bit F28, starting with and F27 installation. No >>> problem, except, it's content to keep the only installed kernel, 4.14.11. >>> Neither dnf update nor dnf install seem to think there is anything newer >>> available. >> dnf install kernel-core kernel-modules worked. If there was an announcement >> of >> kernel name change for i686, I missed it. :-p > There were kernel packing changes between kernels 4.14 and 4.15. You > should have been on 4.15 before the update to Fedora 28. Fedora 28 is > on kernel 4.16. > You should file a bug. Maybe not. What happened was I cloned 27 to another partition in order to update it to 28 - in mid-January - but I didn't update the clone at the time. So the update to 28 didn't follow procedure, wasn't updated to current before the switch to 28, thus missing updating 27 kernel from 4.14 to 4.15. -- "Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Whatever else you get, get wisdom." Proverbs 4:7 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: kernel update process (failure)
Felix Miata composed on 2018-04-04 01:35 (UTC-0400): > I just tried updating a 32bit F28, starting with and F27 installation. No > problem, except, it's content to keep the only installed kernel, 4.14.11. > Neither dnf update nor dnf install seem to think there is anything newer > available. dnf install kernel-core kernel-modules worked. If there was an announcement of kernel name change for i686, I missed it. :-p -- "Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Whatever else you get, get wisdom." Proverbs 4:7 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
kernel update process (failure)
I just tried updating a 32bit F28, starting with and F27 installation. No problem, except, it's content to keep the only installed kernel, 4.14.11. Neither dnf update nor dnf install seem to think there is anything newer available. -- "Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Whatever else you get, get wisdom." Proverbs 4:7 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: kernel update process (failure)
Ed Greshko composed on 2018-03-21 20:25 (UTC+0800): > I know this isn't strictly a "test" question. But I think maybe more folks > with > greater insight my be lurking here. > In troubleshooting a kernel update issue on the user's list it was finally > determined > that if one erased "grubby" the kernel would not get upgraded properly. RPM > would > show the new kernel installed but it would not be in the boot menu and the > needed > files would not be in /boot. There is a scriplet error, but it is called > "nonfatal". cf. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1530555 dnf update fails to move new vmlinuz and initramfs to /boot/ on installations requiring no installed bootloader > I feel this to be a bugzilla. So, my question is, should kernel-core require > /sbin/new-kernel-pkg or should it be a "protected" package in the dnf > configuration? > Or something else? -- "Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Whatever else you get, get wisdom." Proverbs 4:7 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: dnf system upgrade, grub2
Chris Murphy composed on 2017-11-11 14:17 (UTC-0700): > Felix Miata wrote: >> dnf upgrade --releasever=27 > I do not grok that command, for upgrades (F26 -> F27) you use > something like this: > $ sudo dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever 27 > And by default this includes --distro-sync option per documentation: > https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf-plugins-extras/blob/master/doc/system-upgrade.rst >> That was after attempted versionlocking, but apparently there's no way to >> lock >> out unwanted packages with dnf anything like there is in Debian or Mageia >> (unintuitive, manually edited configfile) and openSUSE (simple: zypper al >> ). > I think what you want is to switch repos and then just distrosync to > change (upgrade) the versions of packages that you have, rather than > switching to a new version of the *product*. If you want Fedora > Workstation upgraded via system-upgrade or Software Update, I'm pretty > sure the design is you get everything you would have gotten had you > clean installed that version *plus* any extras you've previously > installed yourself. It was late and I was tired. The above command I wrote was a considerable over-simplification of what I actually did, on a host last updated around 4 months ago. Here's the relevant .bash_history excerpt: dnf remove kernel-core-4.11.0 dnf versionlock add mc dnf clean all df / man dnf dnf update --releasever=27 dnf* rpm* system* libsol* hawke* fedor* glibc* dnf update --releasever=27 --allowerasing kd* kf* q* plas* x* gl* y* z* dnf update --releasever=27 --allowerasing m* n* o* r* s* t* u* v* w* dnf update a* b* c* d* e* f* g* h* i* j* rpmqa grub dnf remove grubby dnf versionlock add grub2-common dnf update a* b* c* d* e* f* g* h* i* j* dnf versionlock add grub2-tools-minimal rpmqa prober dnf remove os-prober dnf update a* b* c* d* e* f* g* h* i* j* dnf versionlock add grubby dnf versionlock --help dnf update a* b* c* d* e* f* g* h* i* j* dnf update p* dnf update rpmqa grub* dnf remove grub2-common grub2-tools-minimal grubby os-prober I've yet to *find* a simple way to upgrade Fedora that doesn't hit https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1032541 (fill / with rpms and refuse to continue for lack of room). That in conjunction with: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1420743 "@>96DPI Gecko browsers no longer utilize KDE's desktop font configuration since built with GTK3" and https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-general-1/grub-legacy-delay-of-more-than-2-minutes-loading-initrd-from-ext4-filesystem-4175599620/ "Grub Legacy: delay of more than 2 minutes loading initrd from EXT4 filesystem" (latest F25, F26 and F27 kernels, and Tumbleweed's, on last night's testing host big41, suffer this) and having been hit by Hurricanes Hermine and Irma and consequent lack of free time, has considerably reduced incentive and ability to contribute. [1] rpmqa is a generic alias for 'rpm -qa | sort | grep ' -- "Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Whatever else you get, get wisdom." Proverbs 4:7 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: dnf system upgrade, grub2
Chris Murphy composed on 2017-11-11 13:39 (UTC-0700): > Felix Miata wrote: >> Must be more than one problem with grub dependencies. Every one of my >> (BIOS/MBR-only) F26 to F27 upgrades added grub packages, without any >> complaints, >> even though no F26 grub* rpms were installed, needed or wanted. :-( > That is expected because grub2 is one of the packages found in the > Fedora Workstation group, and a system upgrade is does distrosync by > default. One of the upgrade requirements for the various "products" in > Fedora is that the upgraded system is the same as an installation of > Fedora Workstation. Sounds even more broken, as all I did in both is: dnf upgrade --releasever=27 That was after attempted versionlocking, but apparently there's no way to lock out unwanted packages with dnf anything like there is in Debian or Mageia (unintuitive, manually edited configfile) and openSUSE (simple: zypper al ). -- "Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Whatever else you get, get wisdom." Proverbs 4:7 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: dnf system upgrade, grub2
Chris Murphy composed on 2017-11-11 12:35 (UTC-0700): > Chris Murphy wrote: >> $ sudo dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=27 >> Error: >> Problem: package grub2-efi-modules-1:2.02-0.40.fc26.x86_64 requires >> grub2-tools = 1:2.02-0.40.fc26, but none of the providers can be >> installed >> - grub2-tools-1:2.02-0.40.fc26.x86_64 does not belong to a >> distupgrade repository >> - problem with installed package grub2-efi-modules-1:2.02-0.40.fc26.x86_64 > Looks like a bug with grub2 package: > The system with the problem has these packages: > grub2-tools-2.02-0.40.fc26.x86_64 > grub2-2.02-0.40.fc26.x86_64 > grub2-efi-2.02-0.40.fc26.x86_64 > grub2-efi-modules-2.02-0.40.fc26.x86_64 > The system without the problem has these packages: > grub2-efi-2.02-0.40.fc26.x86_64 > grub2-tools-2.02-0.40.fc26.x86_64 > But in order to get dnf system-upgrade to proceed, I had to remove > both grub2 and grub2-efi-modules packages. Must be more than one problem with grub dependencies. Every one of my (BIOS/MBR-only) F26 to F27 upgrades added grub packages, without any complaints, even though no F26 grub* rpms were installed, needed or wanted. :-( > See also: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1502312 > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491624 > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506704- "Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Whatever else you get, get wisdom." Proverbs 4:7 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: How to change that list subsciption?
Marcin Zajączkowski composed on 2017-10-18 01:56 (UTC+0200): > That may be not the best place, however, I have a problem with changing the > delivery options for that mailing list. > I've been long subscribed to that list, but I had mail delivery disabled. I > cannot find old mailman interface and in the new one > (https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test.lists.fedoraproject.org/) I > cannot create an account as "We are sorry, but the sign up is currently > closed.". I would like to enable delivery to mail mailbox. How can I do > that? Always hard for me to figure out too. :-( Try: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/accounts/per-subscription-preferences/ -- "Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Whatever else you get, get wisdom." Proverbs 4:7 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: F27 kernel installation big time waster
Ahmad Samir composed on 2017-10-08 14:35 (UTC+0200): > Felix Miata wrote: >> FWIW in case it could matter, grub* and os-prober are not installed. >> I've tried 5 times to dnf install 4.13.4-300.fc27.x86_64 on host p5bse, once >> thru 'dnf update', and 4 more times either dnf reinstall or delete first then >> install. Each time goes through the motions without changing anything in >> /boot/ >> except for the timestamps on the loader and subdirs. The new >> kernel >> and initrd do get produced in the tree. rpm query has shown >> success >> each time. dnf.rpm.log shows non-fatal POSTTRANS scriptlet failures the >> first 2 >> times, but not the last 3 times. I don't see any details on what is actually >> failing in any of the logs. >> Trying to install kernel, core and modules directly with rpm produces a >> broken >> pipe cat write error, but otherwise no better result than dnf. >> Manually copying and renaming the kernel and initrd from to /boot/ >> produces normally booting and running 4.13.4 kernel. >> Anyone else experiencing this? > Sounds like this issue: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1475565 I don't see any mention there that the new vmlinuz <4.13.4> is not installed at the default location. I do see mention there of grubby, which I would expect to be irrelevant on my grub2-free (multiboot) installations. -- "Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Whatever else you get, get wisdom." Proverbs 4:7 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
F27 kernel installation big time waster
FWIW in case it could matter, grub* and os-prober are not installed. I've tried 5 times to dnf install 4.13.4-300.fc27.x86_64 on host p5bse, once thru 'dnf update', and 4 more times either dnf reinstall or delete first then install. Each time goes through the motions without changing anything in /boot/ except for the timestamps on the loader and subdirs. The new kernel and initrd do get produced in the tree. rpm query has shown success each time. dnf.rpm.log shows non-fatal POSTTRANS scriptlet failures the first 2 times, but not the last 3 times. I don't see any details on what is actually failing in any of the logs. Trying to install kernel, core and modules directly with rpm produces a broken pipe cat write error, but otherwise no better result than dnf. Manually copying and renaming the kernel and initrd from to /boot/ produces normally booting and running 4.13.4 kernel. Anyone else experiencing this? -- "Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Whatever else you get, get wisdom." Proverbs 4:7 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: dnf segfaulting on 32-bit
Felix Miata composed on 2017-07-21 03:12 (UTC-0400): > On Intel P4 host gx280 with 2GB RAM tonight this happened about 2/3 through > dnf > update on both F25 and F26 installations, F26 the latter. Last package's > scriptlet completed for udisks2. Last line before segfault is upgrading > gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free. Prior to 'dnf update' on both I had run 'dnf > update > dnf* rpm* glib* drac* libso* hawk* syste* fedo*. In F25 with <70 packages left > to update I rebooted and restarted dnf update only to have it eventually claim > completion without ever actually installing the kernel to /boot, though the > rpm > DB claimed it was installed. I reinstalled the kernel and it runs Plasma, but > I > wonder what else didn't get completely installed. Distro-sync wouldn't run due > to some missing dependant rpm I don't remember. Looking at the journal on F26 > suggests that dnf may have been interrupted by some cron job, and there's > this: > Jul 21 02:18:18 gx280 kernel: dnf[5909]: segfault at ae738a35 ip b573218e sp > bfe6d090 error 4 in libdb-5.3.so (deleted)[b55f2000+1d1000] Is there a known procedure for avoiding this on installations last updated several months ago? -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: dnf segfaulting on 32-bit
Samuel Sieb composed on 2017-07-22 09:58 (UTC-0700): > Felix Miata wrote: >> What I wish is to limit the search to bugs filed against F25 or F26, so I >> goto >> the "Version:" select list only to find it contains approximately 2,053 >> selections from which to choose (I saved >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/query.cgi >> to disk and found the options to begin on line 1268 and end on line 5273). >> That >> many selections are totally unwieldy in a box that shows only 6 selections >> at a >> time, particularly since that list contains a mixture of alpha-numeric and >> numbers-only selections of unknown sort state (A=a, B=b, etc., or not) and I >> don't know whether I'm looking for 26, F26 or f26. > After you've picked Fedora as the product, click the refresh > versions/releases/milestones button. Then you'll find only the Fedora > release numbers in the version list. O_O A: Who would know such a button exists? :-p Work-flow as I've described: 1-select product 2-select component 3-scroll window down so that version/milestone/target lists are fully visible 4-what refresh button? 5-continue selecting restraints 6-enter search terms in summary and/or comments and/or other 7-Go Don't you think such a (*unique to BRC* AFAIK) button belongs in the same page view as the objects to which it applies? B: It seems like having made product and component selections the version list would be refreshed automatically. :-( -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: dnf segfaulting on 32-bit
Samuel Sieb composed on 2017-07-21 21:40 (UTC-0700): > Felix Miata wrote: >> My BRC searches have a habit of either timing out or producing mostly >> summaries >> with what to me is incomprehensible babble, and that only after great >> difficulty >> finding one or more Fedora versions to actually select from its endless >> version >> select list. Once classification Fedora is selected, that select list ought >> to >> drop precipitously below 100 to choose from. > I think you're making this more complicated than you need to. I'm > assuming you're using the advanced search. Select "Fedora" in the Did that. > Classification list, select "Fedora" in the Product list, then if you Forgot that, but, doing it didn't change the problem > want to search in specific packages, pick the Components you want. Then > you can put your search terms in the search box and go. What I wish is to limit the search to bugs filed against F25 or F26, so I goto the "Version:" select list only to find it contains approximately 2,053 selections from which to choose (I saved https://bugzilla.redhat.com/query.cgi to disk and found the options to begin on line 1268 and end on line 5273). That many selections are totally unwieldy in a box that shows only 6 selections at a time, particularly since that list contains a mixture of alpha-numeric and numbers-only selections of unknown sort state (A=a, B=b, etc., or not) and I don't know whether I'm looking for 26, F26 or f26. I've been doing Bugzilla searches since registering on bugzilla.mozilla.org in 2001. bugzilla.redhat.com is consistently the most difficult BZ installation I routinely need to use, mainly because of huge "select" lists, "Version:", "Product" and "Component" in particular. >> Where does one find errata that closed bugs for yet-to-be releases refer to? >> e.g. >> libdb: Assumes that internal condition variable layout never changes >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394862 > I have no idea what you're asking here. Can you explain in more detail? Bug 1394862's status is CLOSED ERRATA. According to http://www.dictionary.com/browse/errata?s=t errata means: "1.plural of erratum. 2.a list of errors and their corrections inserted, usually on a separate page or slip of paper, in a book or other publication; corrigenda." Knowing that definition, I expect a web search to find me a list describing something about the state of whatever package, applicable to the not yet released Fedora 26, contains a fix for that bug, but searching found me no such list. :-( https://bugzilla.redhat.com/page.cgi?id=fields.html#bug_status states a bug with status ERRATA has a fix that "is available", but I suspect that for this bug and many others, such status has been applied prematurely/prospectively, confirming propriety of some kind of available status list. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: dnf segfaulting on 32-bit
Samuel Sieb composed on 2017-07-21 13:43 (UTC-0700): > Felix Miata wrote: >> On F26 as soon as I sent my OP I rebooted, did dnf clean all, rpm >> --rebuilddb, >> dnf update, dnf distro-sync, then shut down and went to bed. Distro-sync did >> nothing but remove 225 packages. >> I did similar with F25, but don't remember particulars other than it reacted >> differently to a similar sequence of events, most of which are in my OP. > Maybe you could make it clearer what you are asking then. The subject > is about dnf segfaulting, but it sounds now like you are asking > something else and I don't understand what it is that you are trying to > find out. That anyone answered my OP at all pretty much answered my question implied, "is this a problem familiar to anyone here"? :-) My BRC searches have a habit of either timing out or producing mostly summaries with what to me is incomprehensible babble, and that only after great difficulty finding one or more Fedora versions to actually select from its endless version select list. Once classification Fedora is selected, that select list ought to drop precipitously below 100 to choose from. Where does one find errata that closed bugs for yet-to-be releases refer to? e.g. libdb: Assumes that internal condition variable layout never changes https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394862 The string errata is not present on https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Project_Wiki or https://getfedora.org/ or http://fedoraplanet.org/ -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: dnf segfaulting on 32-bit
Adam Williamson composed on 2017-07-21 12:28 (UTC-0700): > On Fri, 2017-07-21 at 08:54 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote: >> Felix Miata wrote: ... >> > Jul 21 02:18:18 gx280 kernel: dnf[5909]: segfault at ae738a35 ip b573218e >> > sp >> > bfe6d090 error 4 in libdb-5.3.so (deleted)[b55f2000+1d1000] >> This could the libdb/glibc problem. Try running "rm /var/lib/rpm/__*" >> and then "rpm --rebuilddb" and see if that fixes it. > Note that apparently manually rebuilding the DB can result in it having > the wrong SELinux label, so you should also run this afterwards (as > root): > restorecon -RFv /var/lib/rpm Even when selinux=0? -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: dnf segfaulting on 32-bit
Samuel Sieb composed on 2017-07-21 08:54 (UTC-0700): > Felix Miata wrote: >> On Intel P4 host gx280 with 2GB RAM tonight this happened about 2/3 through >> dnf >> update on both F25 and F26 installations, F26 the latter. Last package's >> scriptlet completed for udisks2. Last line before segfault is upgrading >> gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free. Prior to 'dnf update' on both I had run 'dnf >> update >> dnf* rpm* glib* drac* libso* hawk* syste* fedo*. In F25 with <70 packages >> left >> to update I rebooted and restarted dnf update only to have it eventually >> claim >> completion without ever actually installing the kernel to /boot, though the >> rpm >> DB claimed it was installed. I reinstalled the kernel and it runs Plasma, >> but I >> wonder what else didn't get completely installed. Distro-sync wouldn't run >> due >> to some missing dependant rpm I don't remember. Looking at the journal on F26 >> suggests that dnf may have been interrupted by some cron job, and there's >> this: >> Jul 21 02:18:18 gx280 kernel: dnf[5909]: segfault at ae738a35 ip b573218e sp >> bfe6d090 error 4 in libdb-5.3.so (deleted)[b55f2000+1d1000] > This could the libdb/glibc problem. Try running "rm /var/lib/rpm/__*" > and then "rpm --rebuilddb" and see if that fixes it. On F26 as soon as I sent my OP I rebooted, did dnf clean all, rpm --rebuilddb, dnf update, dnf distro-sync, then shut down and went to bed. Distro-sync did nothing but remove 225 packages. I did similar with F25, but don't remember particulars other than it reacted differently to a similar sequence of events, most of which are in my OP. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
dnf segfaulting on 32-bit
On Intel P4 host gx280 with 2GB RAM tonight this happened about 2/3 through dnf update on both F25 and F26 installations, F26 the latter. Last package's scriptlet completed for udisks2. Last line before segfault is upgrading gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free. Prior to 'dnf update' on both I had run 'dnf update dnf* rpm* glib* drac* libso* hawk* syste* fedo*. In F25 with <70 packages left to update I rebooted and restarted dnf update only to have it eventually claim completion without ever actually installing the kernel to /boot, though the rpm DB claimed it was installed. I reinstalled the kernel and it runs Plasma, but I wonder what else didn't get completely installed. Distro-sync wouldn't run due to some missing dependant rpm I don't remember. Looking at the journal on F26 suggests that dnf may have been interrupted by some cron job, and there's this: Jul 21 02:18:18 gx280 kernel: dnf[5909]: segfault at ae738a35 ip b573218e sp bfe6d090 error 4 in libdb-5.3.so (deleted)[b55f2000+1d1000] -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
