window focus in F40
Hi, I'm running F40 with wayland. Is there any command wich is setting the the window focus to the mouse pointer location automatically when hovering over a group of windows? Fedora release 40 (Forty) 6.8.1-300.fc40.x86_64 Joachim Backes https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- Fedora release 40 (Forty) 6.8.1-300.fc40.x86_64 Joachim Backes https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- ___ 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
update of instatalles F40 Beta fails
Hi guys! I upgraded my F39 (Workstation) to the most recent F40 Beta without any problems. Now, I tried to perform an update of this F40 by dnf, but this process fails with ot lot of failures. For details, see the attached file Kind Regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 40 (Forty) 6.8.1-300.fc40.x86_64 Joachim Backes https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ Updating Subscription Management repositories. Unable to read consumer identity This system is not registered with an entitlement server. You can use subscription-manager to register. Last metadata expiration check: 1:30:52 ago on Sun Mar 24 09:22:41 2024. Dependencies resolved. Problem: package deepin-dock-onboard-plugin-5.5.81-3.fc40.x86_64 from @System requires deepin-dock(x86-64) = 5.5.81-3.fc40, but none of the providers can be installed - cannot install both deepin-dock-5.5.81-4.fc40.x86_64 from updates-testing and deepin-dock-5.5.81-3.fc40.x86_64 from @System - cannot install both deepin-dock-5.5.81-4.fc40.x86_64 from updates-testing and deepin-dock-5.5.81-3.fc40.x86_64 from fedora - cannot install the best update candidate for package deepin-dock-onboard-plugin-5.5.81-3.fc40.x86_64 - cannot install the best update candidate for package deepin-dock-5.5.81-3.fc40.x86_64 Package ArchVersion RepositorySize Upgrading: elfutils-debuginfod-client i6860.191-4.fc40fedora39 k elfutils-libelf i6860.191-4.fc40fedora 216 k elfutils-libs i6860.191-4.fc40fedora 293 k libgomp i68614.0.1-0.12.fc40updates-testing 344 k libusb1 i6861.0.27-1.fc40 fedora79 k xz-develx86_64 5.6.0-3.fc40updates-testing 67 k xz-libs i6865.6.0-3.fc40updates-testing 122 k Skipping packages with conflicts: (add '--best --allowerasing' to command line to force their upgrade): deepin-dock x86_64 5.5.81-4.fc40 updates-testing 1.3 M Transaction Summary Upgrade 7 Packages Skip 1 Package Total size: 1.1 M Is this ok [y/N]: y Downloading Packages: [SKIPPED] elfutils-debuginfod-client-0.191-4.fc40.i686.rpm: Already downloaded [SKIPPED] elfutils-libelf-0.191-4.fc40.i686.rpm: Already downloaded [SKIPPED] elfutils-libs-0.191-4.fc40.i686.rpm: Already downloaded [SKIPPED] libusb1-1.0.27-1.fc40.i686.rpm: Already downloaded [SKIPPED] libgomp-14.0.1-0.12.fc40.i686.rpm: Already downloaded [SKIPPED] xz-devel-5.6.0-3.fc40.x86_64.rpm: Already downloaded [SKIPPED] xz-libs-5.6.0-3.fc40.i686.rpm: Already downloaded Running transaction check Transaction check succeeded. Running transaction test The downloaded packages were saved in cache until the next successful transaction. You can remove cached packages by executing 'dnf clean packages'. Error: Transaction test error: file /usr/share/locale/de/LC_MESSAGES/elfutils.mo from install of elfutils-libelf-0.191-4.fc40.i686 conflicts with file from package elfutils-libelf-0.190-6.fc40.x86_64 file /usr/share/locale/en@boldquot/LC_MESSAGES/elfutils.mo from install of elfutils-libelf-0.191-4.fc40.i686 conflicts with file from package elfutils-libelf-0.190-6.fc40.x86_64 file /usr/share/locale/en@quot/LC_MESSAGES/elfutils.mo from install of elfutils-libelf-0.191-4.fc40.i686 conflicts with file from package elfutils-libelf-0.190-6.fc40.x86_64 file /usr/share/locale/es/LC_MESSAGES/elfutils.mo from install of elfutils-libelf-0.191-4.fc40.i686 conflicts with file from package elfutils-libelf-0.190-6.fc40.x86_64 file /usr/share/locale/ja/LC_MESSAGES/elfutils.mo from install of elfutils-libelf-0.191-4.fc40.i686 conflicts with file from package elfutils-libelf-0.190-6.fc40.x86_64 file /usr/share/locale/pl/LC_MESSAGES/elfutils.mo from install of elfutils-libelf-0.191-4.fc40.i686 conflicts with file from package elfutils-libelf-0.190-6.fc40.x86_64 file /usr/share/locale/uk/LC_MESSAGES/elfutils.mo from install of elfutils-libelf-0.191-4.fc40.i686 conflicts with file from package elfutils-libelf-0.190-6.fc40.x86_64 file /usr/share/licenses/xz-libs/COPYING from install of xz-libs-5.6.0-3.fc40.i686 conflicts with file from package xz-libs-5.4.6-1.fc40.x86_64 file /usr/share/doc/libgomp/ChangeLog.bz2 from install of libgomp-14.0.1-0.12.fc40.i686 conflicts with file from package libgomp-14.0.1-0.7.fc40.x86_64 file /usr/share/info/libgomp.info.gz from install of libgomp-14.0.1-0.12.fc40.i686 conflicts with file from package libgomp-14.0.1-0.7.fc40.x86_64 file /usr
Re: kernel-6.1.9 (from KOJI) does not boot by default to runlevel 5 boots to runlevel 3
On 2/3/23 12:49, Joachim Backes wrote: Anybody experienced this too: I Installed kernel-6.1.9 from KOJI. But this Kernel offers a GRUB boot menu with runlevel 3 by default and not 5 (as previously offered in elder Kernels such asl 6.1.7 or 6.1.8, so I have to change mannually each GRUB boot menu from 3 to 5 before booting into a graphical runlevel) Any remedy? I opened already a BZ (2164846) for this behaviour. Regards Joachim Backes Sorry, the BZ number is 2166604. -- Fedora release 37 (Thirty Seven) Kernel-6.1.9-200.fc37.x86_64 Joachim Backes https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ 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
kernel-6.1.9 (from KOJI) does not boot by default to runlevel 5 boots to runlevel 3
Anybody experienced this too: I Installed kernel-6.1.9 from KOJI. But this Kernel offers a GRUB boot menu with runlevel 3 by default and not 5 (as previously offered in elder Kernels such asl 6.1.7 or 6.1.8, so I have to change mannually each GRUB boot menu from 3 to 5 before booting into a graphical runlevel) Any remedy? I opened already a BZ (2164846) for this behaviour. Regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 37 (Thirty Seven) Kernel-6.1.9-200.fc37.x86_64 Joachim Backes https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ 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
zram0 issue on F35 Beta
Hi, I'rm running F35 Beta, and I saw the following systemtl message concerning the zram0 device: . . . Oct 28 10:15:29 eule systemd[1]: dev-zram0.swap: Job dev-zram0.swap/start failed with result 'dependency'. Oct 28 10:15:29 eule systemd[1]: Dependency failed for Compressed Swap on /dev/zram0. Oct 28 10:15:29 eule systemd[1]: Failed to start Create swap on /dev/zram0. Oct 28 10:15:29 eule systemd[1]: systemd-zram-setup@zram0.service: Failed with result 'exit-code'. Oct 28 10:15:29 eule systemd[1]: systemd-zram-setup@zram0.service: Main process exited, code=exited, status=1/FAILURE Oct 28 10:15:29 eule zram-generator[42576]: Device or resource busy (os error 16) Oct 28 10:15:29 eule zram-generator[42576]: Caused by: Oct 28 10:15:29 eule zram-generator[42576]: Error: Failed to configure disk size into /sys/block/zram0/disksize Oct 28 10:15:29 eule systemd[1]: Starting Create swap on /dev/zram0... Oct 28 10:15:29 eule systemd[1]: Starting Hostname Service... Oct 28 10:15:29 eule audit[1]: SERVICE_START pid=1 uid=0 auid=4294967295 ses=4294967295 subj=kernel msg='unit=systemd-hostnamed> Oct 28 10:15:29 eule audit[1]: SERVICE_START pid=1 uid=0 auid=4294967295 ses=4294967295 subj=kernel msg='unit=systemd-zram-setu> . . . My current kernel is 5.14.14-300.fc35.x86_64. Somebody has similar issues? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 35 (Thirty Five) Kernel-5.14.14-300.fc35.x86_64 Joachim Backes https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ 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
Failure when upgrading from F34 to F35
Hi guys, I'm trying to test an upgrade from F34 to F35, but the step *sudo dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=35 --best --skip-broken --allowerasing* fails with the message *file /usr/lib64/libQt5Bootstrap.prl conflicts between attempted installs of qt5-qtbase-static-5.15.2-22.fc35.x86_64 and mingw64-qt5-qtbase-devel-5.15.2-5.fc35.x86_64* Somebody made similar experiences? All advices are welcome. My previous steps were *sudo dnf distro-sync** **sudo dnf upgrade --refresh ** **sudo rpm --import /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-35-primary* Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 34 (Thirty Four) Kernel-5.14.14-200.fc34.x86_64 Joachim Backes https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ 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: problems upgrading from Fedora 33 to Fedora 34
Hi Richard, thanks for your reply. What I saw, is: No kernel had been recently installed for the new system, Why? Do I have to install it manually before running the whole dnf upgrade procedure? What is your opinion? Reagrds Joachim Backes On 4/30/21 2:57 PM, Richard Ryniker wrote: After upgrade from F33 to F34, the newly-installed kernel was not the default to boot. I had to explicitly select the F34 kernel in lieu of an older F33 kernel at boot time. This was a surprise for me (I expected the last kernal installed to become the default), but it may not be germane in your situation. ___ 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 -- Fedora release 33 (Thirty Three) Kernel-5.11.17-200.fc33.x86_64 Joachim Backes https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ 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: problems upgrading from Fedora 33 to Fedora 34
On 4/30/21 1:13 PM, Thomas Mittelstaedt wrote: Have you checked the logs with journalctl? Gruß, Thomas Mittelstaedt Thank you. Is there any text in the system journal I should search for? Regards and "Danke" Joachim Backes Am 30.04.2021 12:12 schrieb Joachim Backes : Hi guys, I'm running kernel-5.11.17-200.fc33.x86_64 with my F33, and I tried to upgrade from F33 tp F34. I performed all adviced steps sucessfully, including the last download step "sudo dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=34". But nothing special happens when calling the last step "sudo dnf system-upgrade reboot": The system is booted without any message into F33 again, and I dont know, why. Anybody has an idea what to do for getting some important infos? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 33 (Thirty Three) Kernel-5.11.17-200.fc33.x86_64 Joachim Backes https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ 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 ___ 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 -- Fedora release 33 (Thirty Three) Kernel-5.11.17-200.fc33.x86_64 Joachim Backes https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ 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
problems upgrading from Fedora 33 to Fedora 34
Hi guys, I'm running kernel-5.11.17-200.fc33.x86_64 with my F33, and I tried to upgrade from F33 tp F34. I performed all adviced steps sucessfully, including the last download step "sudo dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=34". But nothing special happens when calling the last step "sudo dnf system-upgrade reboot": The system is booted without any message into F33 again, and I dont know, why. Anybody has an idea what to do for getting some important infos? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 33 (Thirty Three) Kernel-5.11.17-200.fc33.x86_64 Joachim Backes https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ 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: Upgrading from tf33 to fc34 by the dnf plugin dnf-system-upgrade
On 3/31/21 12:05 PM, Thomas Mittelstaedt wrote:
Am 31.03.2021 11:47 schrieb Joachim Backes
:
Hi,
I tried to upgrade from fc33 to fc34 BETA by usage of dnf
system-upgrade
which I did successfully
for the last 4 or 5 fedora versions by the usage of that dnf
plugin. But
for fc33, I was not successful:
The finalizing command "sudo dnf system-upgrade reboot" did a
reboot,
but without the installaton
of the by the dnf command "sudo dnf system-upgrade download
--releasever=34" downloaded pkgs.
My last fc33 kernel is 5.11.11.
Did I forget some required action[s]?
Did you look at
https://dnf-plugins-extras.readthedocs.io/en/latest/system-upgrade.html ?!
Yes, I did that (and the following)
Kind regards
Joachim Backes
Did you do a system update before upgrading?
Any help is appreciated.
Kind regards
Joachim Backes
--
Fedora release 33 (Thirty Three)
Kernel-5.11.11-200.fc33.x86_64
Joachim Backes
https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/
___
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
___
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
--
Fedora release 33 (Thirty Three)
Kernel-5.11.11-200.fc33.x86_64
Joachim Backes
https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/
___
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
Upgrading from tf33 to fc34 by the dnf plugin dnf-system-upgrade
Hi, I tried to upgrade from fc33 to fc34 BETA by usage of dnf system-upgrade which I did successfully for the last 4 or 5 fedora versions by the usage of that dnf plugin. But for fc33, I was not successful: The finalizing command "sudo dnf system-upgrade reboot" did a reboot, but without the installaton of the by the dnf command "sudo dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=34" downloaded pkgs. My last fc33 kernel is 5.11.11. Did I forget some required action[s]? Any help is appreciated. Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 33 (Thirty Three) Kernel-5.11.11-200.fc33.x86_64 Joachim Backes https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ 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: All mirror systems for update will be rejected with code 404
On 3/22/21 10:44 AM, Mark E. Fuller wrote: It's two hours later, but I am also in Germany and my full daily upgrade (sudo dnf upgrade --refresh) went through fine. Maybe try again and/or with "--refresh"? Hi Mark, thank you for your reply, but no success, same result. Trying additionally previously "dnf clean all", but without any success. Kind regards Joachim Backes On 22/03/2021 8:45, Joachim Backes wrote: Hi guys, trying this morning an udate by "sudo dnf upgrade", which will be rejected by Fedora 33 - x86_64 - Updates 42 kB/s | 6.1 kB 00:00 Fedora 33 - x86_64 - Updates 101 kB/s | 417 kB 00:04 Errors during downloading metadata for repository 'updates': - Status code: 404 for http://ftp.lip6.fr/ftp/pub/linux/distributions/fedora/updates/33/Everything/x86_64/repodata/3db1c9fe57d0b2cb34244c70c3d7c7d1d6aa06788e7edfcc29de8b50b43e4526-prestodelta.xml.gz (IP: 195.83.118.1) - Status code: 404 for http://fr2.rpmfind.net/linux/fedora/linux/updates/33/Everything/x86_64/repodata/3db1c9fe57d0b2cb34244c70c3d7c7d1d6aa06788e7edfcc29de8b50b43e4526-prestodelta.xml.gz (IP: 195.220.108.108) - Status code: 404 for http://ftp.nluug.nl/pub/os/Linux/distr/fedora/linux/updates/33/Everything/x86_64/repodata/5b3e2fd9ae9b1e492b941d8504c753d372c3ed751e47be024f654475698de8d8-filelists.xml.gz (IP: 2001:67c:6ec:221:145:220:21:40) - Status code: 404 for http://www.mirrorservice.org/sites/dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/updates/33/Everything/x86_64/repodata/df17a50f7caf174a454b885017bf2d9ded97f590795d7ade4d40c25586383e81-updateinfo.xml.xz (IP: 2001:630:341:12::184) - Status code: 404 for http://mirror.dogado.de/fedora/linux/updates/33/Everything/x86_64/repodata/3db1c9fe57d0b2cb34244c70c3d7c7d1d6aa06788e7edfcc29de8b50b43e4526-prestodelta.xml.gz (IP: 185.3.234.216) - Status code: 404 for http://ftp.nluug.nl/pub/os/Linux/distr/fedora/linux/updates/33/Everything/x86_64/repodata/daf3a1d4941c3e965acb33ca92bc106403af709224bce114bcad9ae16e2cee97-primary.xml.gz (IP: 2001:67c:6ec:221:145:220:21:40) - Status code: 404 for https://mirror.dogado.de/fedora/linux/updates/33/Everything/x86_64/repodata/3db1c9fe57d0b2cb34244c70c3d7c7d1d6aa06788e7edfcc29de8b50b43e4526-prestodelta.xml.gz (IP: 185.3.234.216) - Status code: 404 for https://mirror.sucs.org/pub/linux/fedora/updates/33/Everything/x86_64/repodata/daf3a1d4941c3e965acb33ca92bc106403af709224bce114bcad9ae16e2cee97-primary.xml.gz (IP: 137.44.10.8) - Status code: 404 for http://mirror.nonstop.co.il/fedora/linux/updates/33/Everything/x86_64/repodata/daf3a1d4941c3e965acb33ca92bc106403af709224bce114bcad9ae16e2cee97-primary.xml.gz (IP: 62.90.168.59) - Status code: 404 for http://ftp.upjs.sk/pub/fedora/linux/updates/33/Everything/x86_64/repodata/daf3a1d4941c3e965acb33ca92bc106403af709224bce114bcad9ae16e2cee97-primary.xml.gz (IP: 2001:4118:400:10::70) - Status code: 404 for http://mirrors.chroot.ro/fedora/linux/updates/33/Everything/x86_64/repodata/df17a50f7caf174a454b885017bf2d9ded97f590795d7ade4d40c25586383e81-updateinfo.xml.xz (IP: 2a05:91c0:504::178) - Status code: 404 for https://ftp.upjs.sk/pub/fedora/linux/updates/33/Everything/x86_64/repodata/5b3e2fd9ae9b1e492b941d8504c753d372c3ed751e47be024f654475698de8d8-filelists.xml.gz (IP: 2001:4118:400:10::70) - Status code: 404 for http://mirror.sucs.org/pub/linux/fedora/updates/33/Everything/x86_64/repodata/daf3a1d4941c3e965acb33ca92bc106403af709224bce114bcad9ae16e2cee97-primary.xml.gz (IP: 137.44.10.8) - Status code: 404 for https://mirror.sucs.org/pub/linux/fedora/updates/33/Everything/x86_64/repodata/5b3e2fd9ae9b1e492b941d8504c753d372c3ed751e47be024f654475698de8d8-filelists.xml.gz (IP: 137.44.10.8) - Status code: 404 for http://ftp.lip6.fr/ftp/pub/linux/distributions/fedora/updates/33/Everything/x86_64/repodata/5b3e2fd9ae9b1e492b941d8504c753d372c3ed751e47be024f654475698de8d8-filelists.xml.gz (IP: 195.83.118.1) - Status code: 404 for http://ftp.upjs.sk/pub/fedora/linux/updates/33/Everything/x86_64/repodata/5b3e2fd9ae9b1e492b941d8504c753d372c3ed751e47be024f654475698de8d8-filelists.xml.gz (IP: 2001:4118:400:10::70) - Status code: 404 for https://ftp.lip6.fr/ftp/pub/linux/distributions/fedora/updates/33/Everything/x86_64/repodata/5b3e2fd9ae9b1e492b941d8504c753d372c3ed751e47be024f654475698de8d8-filelists.xml.gz (IP: 195.83.118.1) - Status code: 404 for https://ftp.lip6.fr/ftp/pub/linux/distributions/fedora/updates/33/Everything/x86_64/repodata/daf3a1d4941c3e965acb33ca92bc106403af709224bce114bcad9ae16e2cee97-primary.xml.gz (IP: 195.83.118.1) - Status code: 404 for https://ftp.upjs.sk/pub/fedora/linux/updates/33/Everything/x86_64/repodata/daf3a1d4941c3e965acb33ca92bc106403af709224bce114bcad9ae16e2cee97-primary.xml.gz (IP: 2001:4118:400:10::70) - Status code: 404 for http://ftp.upjs.sk/pub/fedora/linux/updates/33/Everything/x86_64/repodata/3db1c9fe57d0b2cb34244c70c3d7c7d1d6
All mirror systems for update will be rejected with code 404
rrors were already tried without success backes@eule [/downloads]: Any reason for this? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 33 (Thirty Three) Kernel-5.11.7-200.fc33.x86_64 Joachim Backes https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ 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 keyboard problems
Hi guys, I upgraded almost successfully from F32 to F33, using dnf. Before the upgrade action, my Keyboard was German, with no deadkeys as option, in all Fedora versions. But now, each time I logout and relogin, my keyboard is reset to an STD US keyboard. Is this a known issue? I am running as desktop a CINNAMON desktop. How can I get rid from this problem? KInd regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 33 (Thirty Three) Kernel-5.9.1-300.fc33.x86_64 Joachim Backes https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ 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
kernel-5.7.5-200.fc32
Hi guys, what about kernel-5.7.5-200.fc32 in Koji? Since yesterday, it seems to be in building process. Anybody knows when one can expect the building completion? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 32 (Thirty Two) Kernel-5.7.4-200.fc32.x86_64 Joachim Backes https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ 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: Some issues when running cinnamon desktop with F32
On 2020-04-30 16:25, Ed Greshko wrote: On 2020-04-30 20:52, Joachim Backes wrote: In your initial post you said 1. The switchdesk gnome command offers only gnome as desktop. But setting from cinnamon to gnome will be without effect. Do you recall if it worked for you correctly in F31? Yes! I just finished the F31 install and the switchdesk GUI is offering "Xfce" and "default". Did you try to start Xfce *after additionally* restarting X11 (after switchdesk...?) I suppose I don't know what switchdesk is supposed to accomplish. After selecting Xfce in switchdesk and rebooting a login brought up Cinnamon. I had to manually select Xfce at the login screen to bring it up. This was the case in F31. In F32, there is only the option to display the password in the login screen", but no selection of the desktop! -- Fedora release 32 (Thirty Two) Kernel-5.6.8-300.fc32.x86_64 Joachim Backes https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ 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: Some issues when running cinnamon desktop with F32
On 2020-04-30 14:40, Ed Greshko wrote: On 2020-04-30 18:42, Joachim Backes wrote: On 2020-04-30 12:25, Ed Greshko wrote: On 2020-04-30 18:21, Joachim Backes wrote: On 2020-04-30 11:29, Ed Greshko wrote: On 2020-04-30 17:17, Joachim Backes wrote: Dear F32 users, After having installed F32 (previously F31 with cinnamon) , some issues: A bit of clarification please. Is this an upgrade of F31 to F32 or a new F32 install? If an upgrade, was this an F31 Cinnamon installed with added desktops? If so, which ones? a) It was an upgrade b) Previously Cinnamon was installed, additionally Xfce OK, I'll try to reproduce. It may take a bit as it is late in the day here. :-) In your initial post you said 1. The switchdesk gnome command offers only gnome as desktop. But setting from cinnamon to gnome will be without effect. Do you recall if it worked for you correctly in F31? Yes! I just finished the F31 install and the switchdesk GUI is offering "Xfce" and "default". Did you try to start Xfce *after additionally* restarting X11 (after switchdesk...?) Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 32 (Thirty Two) Kernel-5.6.8-300.fc32.x86_64 Joachim Backes https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ 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: Some issues when running cinnamon desktop with F32
On 2020-04-30 12:25, Ed Greshko wrote: On 2020-04-30 18:21, Joachim Backes wrote: On 2020-04-30 11:29, Ed Greshko wrote: On 2020-04-30 17:17, Joachim Backes wrote: Dear F32 users, After having installed F32 (previously F31 with cinnamon) , some issues: A bit of clarification please. Is this an upgrade of F31 to F32 or a new F32 install? If an upgrade, was this an F31 Cinnamon installed with added desktops? If so, which ones? a) It was an upgrade b) Previously Cinnamon was installed, additionally Xfce OK, I'll try to reproduce. It may take a bit as it is late in the day here. :-) -- Fedora release 32 (Thirty Two) Kernel-5.6.8-300.fc32.x86_64 Joachim Backes https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ 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
Some issues when running cinnamon desktop with F32
Dear F32 users, After having installed F32 (previously F31 with cinnamon) , some issues: 1. The switchdesk gnome command offers only gnome as desktop. But setting from cinnamon to gnome will be without effect 2. The login manager does no more present the selection of any installed destkop type (for example xfce aso.) 3. No new background for F32 (Cinnamon is started with F31 desktop bg 4. Thunderbird: if the main window has more new mails then its height, the slider in the presented vertical scrollbar is unvisible Anybody has similar problems? Any help will be appreciated Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 32 (Thirty Two) Kernel-5.6.8-300.fc32.x86_64 Joachim Backes https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ 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
problems to run vboxconfig [VirtualBox-6.1-6.1.4_136177_fedora31-1.x86_64] under kernel 5.6.3-300.fc31.x86_64
Hi , today I installed kernel-5.6.3-300.fc31.x86_64 (from Koji). It runs, but having the problem to get running vboxconfig (from VirtualBox-6.1-6.1.4_136177_fedora31-1.x86_64): vboxdrv.sh: Stopping VirtualBox services. vboxdrv.sh: Starting VirtualBox services. vboxdrv.sh: Building VirtualBox kernel modules. vboxdrv.sh: failed: Look at /var/log/vbox-setup.log to find out what went wrong. There were problems setting up VirtualBox. To re-start the set-up process, run /sbin/vboxconfig as root. If your system is using EFI Secure Boot you may need to sign the kernel modules (vboxdrv, vboxnetflt, vboxnetadp, vboxpci) before you can load them. No probs when using kernel-5.5.16 Anybody has experience in solving this problem? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 31 (Thirty One) Kernel-5.6.3-300.fc31.x86_64 Joachim Backes https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ 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
strange dnf message after having upgraded to libssh-0.7.5-7 from updates-testing
I upgraded libssh to libssh-0.8.0-1.fc28 using updates-testing repo. Now dnf issues additionally the message Warning: ssh still initialized; probably ssh_init() was called more than once (init count: 1) each time dnf is called. Anybody sees this too? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 28 (Twenty Eight) Kernel-4.17.14-200.fc28.x86_64 Joachim Backes https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ 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/message/YN5TLRVRQFWCCS3RJNFPZQMTGI74JSGL/
F28: problems to upgrade texlive-base from updates-testing
I did try to update texlive-base by using updates-testing repo, but without success: Last metadata expiration check: 2:16:22 ago on Thu Jun 7 10:47:01 2018. Dependencies resolved. Package Arch Version Repository Size Upgrading: texlive-base x86_64 7:20170520-34.fc28 updates-testing 930 k Transaction Summary Upgrade 1 Package Total download size: 930 k Is this ok [y/N]: y Downloading Packages: texlive-base-20170520-34.fc28.x86_64.rpm 5.1 MB/s | 930 kB 00:00 Total 1.0 MB/s | 930 kB 00:00 Running transaction check Transaction check succeeded. Running transaction test Transaction test succeeded. Running transaction Preparing: 1/1 Running scriptlet: texlive-base-7:20170520-34.fc28.x86_64 1/2 Upgrading: texlive-base-7:20170520-34.fc28.x86_64 1/2 Error unpacking rpm package texlive-base-7:20170520-34.fc28.x86_64 Error unpacking rpm package texlive-base-7:20170520-34.fc28.x86_64 error: unpacking of archive failed on file /usr/share/texmf: cpio: File from package already exists as a directory in system texlive-base-7:20170520-34.fc28.x86_64 was supposed to be installed but is not! Verifying: texlive-base-7:20170520-34.fc28.x86_64 1/2 texlive-base-7:20170520-29.fc28.x86_64 was supposed to be removed but is not! Verifying: texlive-base-7:20170520-29.fc28.x86_64 2/2 Failed: texlive-base.x86_64 7:20170520-34.fc28 Error: Transaction failed -- Fedora release 28 (Twenty Eight) Kernel-4.16.14-300.fc28.x86_64 Joachim Backes https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ Anybody sees this too? Kind regards Joachim Backes ___ 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/message/724FAEISWUTKWWDMCDWAPGKIPGQG5BIX/
Re: VirtualBox-5.2-5.2.6_120293_fedora26-1.x86_64 won't install properly under kernel-4.14.15-300.fc27.x86_64
On 01/24/18 15:21, Sérgio Basto wrote: yes , vbox 5.2.6 won't build all modules ... you need patch the kmod vbox sources [1] Is on updates-testing of F27 RPMFusion, VirtualBox-5.2.6-2.fc27 https://rpmfusion.org/Howto/VirtualBox If you try it, you need uninstall oracle rpm sources and all files left in system ... (because don't use akmods) , if you succeeded let me know to update wiki on how clean files generated by oracle scripts. Best regards, [1] https://pkgs.rpmfusion.org/cgit/free/VirtualBox-kmod.git/tree/fixes_for _4.15.v2.patch?id=9e509eaddb14831da29e8ce519e262e82a9cce45 On Wed, 2018-01-24 at 11:26 +0100, Joachim Backes wrote: Trying to install VirtualBox-5.2-5.2.6_120293_fedora26-1.x86_64.rpm (downloaded from virtualbox.org) won't run under kernel-4.14.15-300.fc27.x86_64. But the same procedure runs flawlessly under kernel-4.14.14-300.fc27.x86_64 sudo /sbin/vboxconfig vboxdrv.sh: Stopping VirtualBox services. vboxdrv.sh: Building VirtualBox kernel modules. vboxdrv.sh: Starting VirtualBox services. vboxdrv.sh: Building VirtualBox kernel modules. vboxdrv.sh: failed: modprobe vboxdrv failed. Please use 'dmesg' to find out why. dmesg|grep vbox [ 20.791165] audit: type=1130 audit(1516787818.981:81): pid=1 uid=0 auid=4294967295 ses=4294967295 msg='unit=systemd-fsck@dev-disk-by\x2dlabel-vbox comm="systemd" exe="/usr/lib/systemd/systemd" hostname=? addr=? terminal=? res=success' [ 159.762672] vboxdrv: version magic '4.14.15-300.fc27.x86_64 SMP mod_unload ' should be '4.14.15-300.fc27.x86_64 SMP mod_unload retpoline ' [ 672.246426] vboxdrv: version magic '4.14.15-300.fc27.x86_64 SMP mod_unload ' should be '4.14.15-300.fc27.x86_64 SMP mod_unload retpoline ' [ 726.090858] vboxdrv: version magic '4.14.15-300.fc27.x86_64 SMP mod_unload ' should be '4.14.15-300.fc27.x86_64 SMP mod_unload retpoline ' [ 1492.245456] vboxdrv: version magic '4.14.15-300.fc27.x86_64 SMP mod_unload ' should be '4.14.15-300.fc27.x86_64 SMP mod_unload retpoline ' [ 1545.881588] vboxdrv: version magic '4.14.15-300.fc27.x86_64 SMP mod_unload ' should be '4.14.15-300.fc27.x86_64 SMP mod_unload retpoline ' Anybody sees a solution? Kind regards Joachim Backes Hi Sergio, I could solve the Problem by upgrading to kernel-4.14.15-301.fc27.x86_64 (some things seem to be reverted). Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 27 (Twenty Seven) Kernel-4.14.15-300.fc27.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org -- Fedora release 27 (Twenty Seven) Kernel-4.14.15-301.fc27.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
VirtualBox-5.2-5.2.6_120293_fedora26-1.x86_64 won't install properly under kernel-4.14.15-300.fc27.x86_64
Trying to install VirtualBox-5.2-5.2.6_120293_fedora26-1.x86_64.rpm (downloaded from virtualbox.org) won't run under kernel-4.14.15-300.fc27.x86_64. But the same procedure runs flawlessly under kernel-4.14.14-300.fc27.x86_64 sudo /sbin/vboxconfig vboxdrv.sh: Stopping VirtualBox services. vboxdrv.sh: Building VirtualBox kernel modules. vboxdrv.sh: Starting VirtualBox services. vboxdrv.sh: Building VirtualBox kernel modules. vboxdrv.sh: failed: modprobe vboxdrv failed. Please use 'dmesg' to find out why. dmesg|grep vbox [ 20.791165] audit: type=1130 audit(1516787818.981:81): pid=1 uid=0 auid=4294967295 ses=4294967295 msg='unit=systemd-fsck@dev-disk-by\x2dlabel-vbox comm="systemd" exe="/usr/lib/systemd/systemd" hostname=? addr=? terminal=? res=success' [ 159.762672] vboxdrv: version magic '4.14.15-300.fc27.x86_64 SMP mod_unload ' should be '4.14.15-300.fc27.x86_64 SMP mod_unload retpoline ' [ 672.246426] vboxdrv: version magic '4.14.15-300.fc27.x86_64 SMP mod_unload ' should be '4.14.15-300.fc27.x86_64 SMP mod_unload retpoline ' [ 726.090858] vboxdrv: version magic '4.14.15-300.fc27.x86_64 SMP mod_unload ' should be '4.14.15-300.fc27.x86_64 SMP mod_unload retpoline ' [ 1492.245456] vboxdrv: version magic '4.14.15-300.fc27.x86_64 SMP mod_unload ' should be '4.14.15-300.fc27.x86_64 SMP mod_unload retpoline ' [ 1545.881588] vboxdrv: version magic '4.14.15-300.fc27.x86_64 SMP mod_unload ' should be '4.14.15-300.fc27.x86_64 SMP mod_unload retpoline ' Anybody sees a solution? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 27 (Twenty Seven) Kernel-4.14.15-300.fc27.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Security problem with firefox-57.0-0.8.fc26.x86_64
I'm having a problem with thw wikipedia.de website: If I try to open it, I get some warning issue: - Your connection is not secure The website tried to negotiate an inadequate level of security. wiki2.wikimedia.de uses security technology that is outdated and vulnerable to attack. An attacker could easily reveal information which you thought to be safe. The website administrator will need to fix the server first before you can visit the site. Error code: NS_ERROR_NET_INADEQUATE_SECURITY - Anybody sees this too for the German wikipedia website wikipedia.de? Kind regards Joachim Backes Fedora release 26 (Twenty Six) Kernel-4.13.10-200.fc26.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Running most recent update from updates-testing repo proposes to erase k3b (incompatibility with poppler and k3b)
Trying to run f26 update including updates-testing repo wants to uninstall k3b (Skipping packages with conflicts: (add '--best --allowerasing' to command line to force their upgrade): k3b x86_64 1:17.04.1-1.fc26 poppler x86_640.52.0-2.fc26 poppler x86_640.52.0-8.fc26 updates-testing830 k) Anybody sees this too? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 26 (Twenty Six) Kernel-4.13.5-200.fc26.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Firefox launching at maximize continually
On 06/23/17 16:53, Lawrence E Graves wrote: I am running Fedora 26 Beta and when I launch Firefox web browser, it launches full screen each time even if I unmaximize it, when I relaunch it, it launches at full screen. Is this something that has been incorporated into Fedora 26 or is there another reason for this unusual behaviour. Please advise. Hallo Lawrence, did you create a new user and then starting firefox under that userid? Same symptoms with this new user? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 26 (Twenty Six) Kernel-4.11.6-301.fc26.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
error: cannot open Packages database in /var/lib/rpm in F26 after suspend/resume
Anybody has seen this in F26: After suspending and resuming, very often is happens that dnf refuses to update or install some package: error: db5 error(5) from dbenv->open: Input/output error error: cannot open Packages index using db5 - Input/output error (5) error: cannot open Packages database in /var/lib/rpm Error: Error: rpmdb open failed Workaround: rebulding the rpm database by: removing the files /var/lib/rpm/__db* and rebuilding them by "rpm --rebuilddb". Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 26 (Twenty Six) Kernel-4.11.4-300.fc26.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-26_Beta-1.3.iso doesn't boot from usb stick
On 05/31/17 21:01, Joerg Lechner wrote: Hi Joachim, did now the full installation chain in legacy mode (mediawriter - iso - F26 Beta 1.3 build) all worked fine. If You think it's the usb stick, test with F3. If I get problems with one of my usb sticks, I make a new partition table on the stick with gparted, if gparted can not delete a fedora partition, I try a new Fedora install on this stick and interrupt this process, before the new data are written, by doing this afterwards gparted always "repaired" an usb stick which had only a SW corruption and no hardware defect. Kind regards Joerg -Ursprüngliche Mitteilung- Von: Chris Murphy <li...@colorremedies.com> An: joachim.backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de>; For testing and quality assurance of Fedora releases <test@lists.fedoraproject.org> Cc: Joerg Lechner <julech...@aol.com> Verschickt: Mi, 31. Mai 2017 19:06 Betreff: Re: Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-26_Beta-1.3.iso doesn't boot from usb stick On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 8:28 AM, Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni <mailto:joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni>-kl.de> wrote: > On 05/31/17 13:54, Joerg Lechner wrote: >> >> Hi Joachim, >> I have prepared iso s on USB sticks, both 2GB and 64GB each, the iso s - >> F26 Beta 1.3 - prepared with fedora mediawriter on F24 in UEFI mode, the iso >> s boot correctly in EFI mode as well as in Legacy mode. But so far I could >> not prepare a F26 iso running in Legacy mode, can there be a difference >> producing the iso boot medium in Legacy compared to EFI? >> Kind regards > > > Hi Joerg, > > I wrote the iso with mediawriter-4.1.0-1.fc25.x86_64 in F25 onto the USB > stick, but if booted, it hangs up during "loading initrd.img". This is before media check runs. Bootloader > load kernel, load initramfs > execute kernel > unpack initramfs > systemd runs > dracut pics up the boot param to check media > checkiso executes and checks the media So your failure is happening at the 2nd step, you're still in the bootloader. This is almost certainly a USB stick problem. I'd just write the image again and maybe it'll fix itself as a transient failure. If not, the try another stick. Hi Joerg, now I could boot from the USB stick. I think, the reason was my impatience: Loading initrd.img needed about *3 minutes* to finish, and after this, my box proceeded to the F26 Live system as expected :-) Regards Joachim Backes -- Chris Murphy -- Fedora release 25 (Twenty Five) Kernel-4.11.3-200.fc25.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-26_Beta-1.3.iso doesn't boot from usb stick
On 05/31/17 13:54, Joerg Lechner wrote: Hi Joachim, I have prepared iso s on USB sticks, both 2GB and 64GB each, the iso s - F26 Beta 1.3 - prepared with fedora mediawriter on F24 in UEFI mode, the iso s boot correctly in EFI mode as well as in Legacy mode. But so far I could not prepare a F26 iso running in Legacy mode, can there be a difference producing the iso boot medium in Legacy compared to EFI? Kind regards Hi Joerg, I wrote the iso with mediawriter-4.1.0-1.fc25.x86_64 in F25 onto the USB stick, but if booted, it hangs up during "loading initrd.img". What do you mean by "I could not prepare a F26 iso running in Legacy mode"? So, I have no explanation why the boot fails. Perhaps an USB problem? No problems if I write the iso with K3b to a DVD. This DVD boots completely without failure and without hanging up. Thank you for all your replies. Kind regards Joachim Backes -Ursprüngliche Mitteilung- Von: Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> An: Joerg Lechner <julech...@aol.com>; test <test@lists.fedoraproject.org> Verschickt: Mi, 31. Mai 2017 11:30 Betreff: Re: Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-26_Beta-1.3.iso doesn't boot from usb stick On 05/31/17 11:24, Joerg Lechner wrote: > HiJoachim, > You tried to install the iso on an 64GB usb stick? > I have just installed the beta 1.3 iso on an 2GB stick, as I do always > since F22. The Desktop installation on an 64GB usb stick (sandisk) was > ok, I am just on F26 Beta 1.3. > If it's worthwhile to test an iso on an 64GB stick, I can try this, > please let me know. > Kind regards Joerg Hi Joerg, the described boot issue is independent from the media size, the booting fails too with a 16GB sized usb stick. There was no special reason for me to use a 64GB stick (It was the only one which was available for me). Joachim > > > > -Ursprüngliche Mitteilung- > Von: Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni <mailto:joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni>-kl.de> > An: Martin Bříza <mbr...@redhat.com <mailto:mbr...@redhat.com>>; For testing and quality assurance > of Fedora releases <test@lists.fedoraproject.org <mailto:test@lists.fedoraproject.org>> > Verschickt: Mi, 31. Mai 2017 10:26 > Betreff: Re: Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-26_Beta-1.3.iso doesn't boot > from usb stick > > On 05/31/17 10:20, Martin Bříza wrote: > > On Wed, 31 May 2017 10:11:55 +0200, Joachim Backes > > <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni <mailto:joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni> <mailto:joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni>-kl.de <mailto:joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni>-kl.de?>> wrote: > > > >> Hi all, > >> > >> writing the iso to a 64gb sized usb stick with mediawriter and then > >> trying to boot, it hangs during "loading initrd.img" > >> > >> On the other hand, if writing the image to a DVD, f26 will boot. > >> > >> Anybody sees this too? > >> > >> Kind regards > >> > >> Joachim Backes > > > > Hi > > Did the media check after writing and on bootup pass or fail? > > 1. The mediacheck passed after writing the image to the usb stick. > 2. Booting the usb stick first presents, as expected, a menu for > selection of some F26 variants or memory test. > > If selecting the memory test, it will run properly, but not F26. > > Kind regards > > Joachim Backes > -- > > Fedora release 25 (Twenty Five) > Kernel-4.11.3-200.fc25.x86_64 > > > Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni <mailto:joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni> > <mailto:joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni>-kl.de <mailto:joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni>-kl.de?>> > https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ > ___ test mailing list -- > test@lists.fedoraproject.org <mailto:test@lists.fedoraproject.org> <mailto:test@lists.fedoraproject.org <mailto:test@lists.fedoraproject.org?>> To > unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org <mailto:le...@lists.fedoraproject.org> > <mailto:le...@lists.fedoraproject.org <mailto:le...@lists.fedoraproject.org?>> -- Fedora release 25 (Twenty Five) Kernel-4.11.3-200.fc25.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni <mailto:joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni>-kl.de> https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- Fedora release 25 (Twenty Five) Kernel-4.11.3-200.fc25.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-26_Beta-1.3.iso doesn't boot from usb stick
On 05/31/17 11:33, Martin Bříza wrote: On Wed, 31 May 2017 11:30:25 +0200, Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> wrote: Hi Joerg, the described boot issue is independent from the media size, the booting fails too with a 16GB sized usb stick. There was no special reason for me to use a 64GB stick (It was the only one which was available for me). Joachim If the media check passed, there should be nothing wrong with the flash drive, nor with the data written to it. There could be either a problem with your laptop's settings (EFI security) or there's something wrong with the image itself. My rather old fashioned desktop PC (no laptop) boots only by BIOS and has no EFI feature. I can't imagine that something is wrong with the image, because it boots properly if it's written to DVD! Joachim -- Fedora release 25 (Twenty Five) Kernel-4.11.3-200.fc25.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-26_Beta-1.3.iso doesn't boot from usb stick
On 05/31/17 11:24, Joerg Lechner wrote: HiJoachim, You tried to install the iso on an 64GB usb stick? I have just installed the beta 1.3 iso on an 2GB stick, as I do always since F22. The Desktop installation on an 64GB usb stick (sandisk) was ok, I am just on F26 Beta 1.3. If it's worthwhile to test an iso on an 64GB stick, I can try this, please let me know. Kind regards Joerg Hi Joerg, the described boot issue is independent from the media size, the booting fails too with a 16GB sized usb stick. There was no special reason for me to use a 64GB stick (It was the only one which was available for me). Joachim -Ursprüngliche Mitteilung- Von: Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> An: Martin Bříza <mbr...@redhat.com>; For testing and quality assurance of Fedora releases <test@lists.fedoraproject.org> Verschickt: Mi, 31. Mai 2017 10:26 Betreff: Re: Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-26_Beta-1.3.iso doesn't boot from usb stick On 05/31/17 10:20, Martin Bříza wrote: > On Wed, 31 May 2017 10:11:55 +0200, Joachim Backes > <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni <mailto:joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni>-kl.de> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> writing the iso to a 64gb sized usb stick with mediawriter and then >> trying to boot, it hangs during "loading initrd.img" >> >> On the other hand, if writing the image to a DVD, f26 will boot. >> >> Anybody sees this too? >> >> Kind regards >> >> Joachim Backes > > Hi > Did the media check after writing and on bootup pass or fail? 1. The mediacheck passed after writing the image to the usb stick. 2. Booting the usb stick first presents, as expected, a menu for selection of some F26 variants or memory test. If selecting the memory test, it will run properly, but not F26. Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 25 (Twenty Five) Kernel-4.11.3-200.fc25.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni <mailto:joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni>-kl.de> https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org <mailto:test@lists.fedoraproject.org> To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org <mailto:le...@lists.fedoraproject.org> -- Fedora release 25 (Twenty Five) Kernel-4.11.3-200.fc25.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-26_Beta-1.3.iso doesn't boot from usb stick
On 05/31/17 10:20, Martin Bříza wrote: On Wed, 31 May 2017 10:11:55 +0200, Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> wrote: Hi all, writing the iso to a 64gb sized usb stick with mediawriter and then trying to boot, it hangs during "loading initrd.img" On the other hand, if writing the image to a DVD, f26 will boot. Anybody sees this too? Kind regards Joachim Backes Hi Did the media check after writing and on bootup pass or fail? 1. The mediacheck passed after writing the image to the usb stick. 2. Booting the usb stick first presents, as expected, a menu for selection of some F26 variants or memory test. If selecting the memory test, it will run properly, but not F26. Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 25 (Twenty Five) Kernel-4.11.3-200.fc25.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-26_Beta-1.3.iso doesn't boot from usb stick
Hi all, writing the iso to a 64gb sized usb stick with mediawriter and then trying to boot, it hangs during "loading initrd.img" On the other hand, if writing the image to a DVD, f26 will boot. Anybody sees this too? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 25 (Twenty Five) Kernel-4.11.3-200.fc25.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Inconsistency in F25 between installed groups and installable groups
On 10/30/16 00:09, stan wrote: For some reason my reply didn't make it to the list. At least, I didn't receive it. So, I'm copying this back to the test list. On Sat, 29 Oct 2016 09:24:17 +0200 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> wrote: On 10/28/16 19:02, stan wrote: On Fri, 28 Oct 2016 16:26:01 +0200 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> wrote: Hi f25 guys, seeing a problem in f25 if I try to install the lxde desktop group: 1. rpm -qa|grep -i lxde (empty output, in my eyes it seems no lxde package is installed) When I do the equivalent, the 3 packages below show up. My question: Is lxde installed, or not? I run lxde as my principal desktop. These are the only packages installed that have lxde in the name. imsettings-lxde-1.7.2-1.fc25.x86_64 lxde-common-0.99.1-1.fc25.noarch lxde-icon-theme-0.5.1-2.fc24.noarch Does the program /usr/bin/startlxde exist on your system? Hi Stan, does not exist! Then, lxde is not installed, no matter what dnf says. If try to login, no lxde desktop variant is offered. I remember that a had similar dnf problems in f24 if I tried to install desktop groups. Any help? What if you start in multiuser mode (old runlevel 3), login, and run startlxde from a terminal? As I said: does not exist! Is this an upgrade rather than a clean install? Is it possible that at the time of the upgrade a new lxde wasn't available, so the old one was deleted leaving an artifact behind still indicating that lxde group is installed, but it is actually gone? It is an upgrade from F24. What if you do a dnf group remove lxde to remove any cruft left over. Then try to do the group install again. Stan, This helped! Thanks. Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 25 (Twenty Five) Kernel-4.8.5-300.fc25.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Screen resolutiion not correctly detected in F25/xcfe session
Hi all, My monitor resolution is 1920x1080. I installed the xcfe desktop group in F25 and started an xfce session. Then the session runs with 1280x1024 screen, but not with 1920x1080. If have to set the resolution manually with xrandr to to run the session with 1920x1080 screen resolution. Gnome or lxde sessions are running correctly. Anybody sees this too? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 25 (Twenty Five) Kernel-4.8.5-300.fc25.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Restart of gnome-shell rejceted in a F25 Wayland session
I'm running F25 inside a wayland session, and for curiosity i tried to restart gnome-shell with Alt+F2 / r. This is rejected by a popup "Restart is not available on Wayland". Really? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 25 (Twenty Five) Kernel-4.8.5-300.fc25.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Inconsistency in F25 between installed groups and installable groups
Hi f25 guys, seeing a problem in f25 if I try to install the lxde desktop group: 1. rpm -qa|grep -i lxde (empty output, in my eyes it seems no lxde package is installed) 2. sudo dnf groupinstall lxde Last metadata expiration check: 0:49:44 ago on Fri Oct 28 15:24:39 2016. Group 'LXDE' is already installed, skipping. Dependencies resolved. Nothing to do. Complete! 3. dnf grouplist Last metadata expiration check: 0:20:21 ago on Fri Oct 28 16:03:37 2016. Available environment groups: Fedora Custom Operating System Minimal Install Fedora Server Edition Fedora Cloud Server Sugar Desktop Environment Development and Creative Workstation Web Server Infrastructure Server Installed environment groups: Fedora Workstation KDE Plasma Workspaces Xfce Desktop LXDE Desktop Hawaii Desktop LXQt Desktop Cinnamon Desktop MATE Desktop Basic Desktop My question: Is lxde installed, or not? If try to login, no lxde desktop variant is offered. I remember that a had similar dnf problems in f24 if I tried to install desktop groups. Any help? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 25 (Twenty Five) Kernel-4.8.4-301.fc25.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Taking a screenshot in GNOME (or other) desktop during a app menu is open. How to?
On 10/23/16 11:41, Joachim Backes wrote: Hi all, having a problem in F25: I need to take a screenshot on a gnome (or other) desktop (no wayland!) with alt+print or shift+print keys, during some application menu of some window is open, but nothing happens. How can I achive this? The menu should be included in the screenshot. The screenshot is performed flawlessly if the menu is closed. It seems that this is a X11 problem. All comments are welcome. Kind regards Joachim Backes Could solve the problem with gnome-screenshot and a delay value > 0 Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 25 (Twenty Five) Kernel-4.8.3-300.fc25.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Taking a screenshot in GNOME (or other) desktop during a app menu is open. How to?
Hi all, having a problem in F25: I need to take a screenshot on a gnome (or other) desktop (no wayland!) with alt+print or shift+print keys, during some application menu of some window is open, but nothing happens. How can I achive this? The menu should be included in the screenshot. The screenshot is performed flawlessly if the menu is closed. It seems that this is a X11 problem. All comments are welcome. Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 25 (Twenty Five) Kernel-4.8.3-300.fc25.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Nemo replaces nautilus in F25?
After upgrading F24 to F25-Beta by dnf, it seems that nautilus has been replaced by nemo as filemanager on the gnome desktop? Anybody can confirm this? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 25 (Twenty Five) Kernel-4.8.1-1.fc25.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Trying to install the F24 version of VirtualBox-5.1-5.1.6 in F25
On 10/11/16 14:48, Sérgio Basto wrote: On Ter, 2016-10-11 at 13:37 +0200, Joachim Backes wrote: On 10/11/16 11:47, Ian Kent wrote: On Tue, 2016-10-11 at 11:23 +0200, Sandro Mani wrote: On 11.10.2016 11:15, Ian Kent wrote: On Tue, 2016-10-11 at 16:29 +0800, Ian Kent wrote: [...] I guess the other thing you could do is grab the libvpx-1.5.0 source rpm and give it a different name like libvpx-compat, build and install it then the requirement of VirtualBox should be met without the dependencyLuxemburgo confessa agora que foi longe de mais, mas era inevitável. "Hoje não o faria, mas pela forma como se acercou de mim... Nenhum dirigente pode falar assim a um treinador ou a um jogador quando a adrenalina ainda está a correr". side effects above. https://smani.fedorapeople.org/compat-libvpx-1.5.0-1.fc26.src.rpm Well done Sandro, I see you've taken care to clean up the extra installed files, this should work just fine Joachim. Hi Ian Kent and Sandro Mani, this worked flawlessly (The only additional thing I had to do was to install /usr/bin/rpmbuild). After having installed the newly built rpm, I could install a working VirtualBox. Tank you very much. May I recomend you rpmfusion rpms ? I am the packager maintainer and any feedback is welcome) Hi Sergio, i switched from Rpmfusion to Unitedrpms because Rpmfusion always laggs behind new Fedora versions, so ready-for-use packages are missing for a longer time period after a new Fedora appears. Unitedrpms seems to be faster. Kind regards Joachim Backes http://rpmfusion.org/Howto/VirtualBox Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 25 (Twenty Five) Kernel-4.8.1-1.fc25.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Trying to install the F24 version of VirtualBox-5.1-5.1.6 in F25
On 10/11/16 11:47, Ian Kent wrote: On Tue, 2016-10-11 at 11:23 +0200, Sandro Mani wrote: On 11.10.2016 11:15, Ian Kent wrote: On Tue, 2016-10-11 at 16:29 +0800, Ian Kent wrote: [...] I guess the other thing you could do is grab the libvpx-1.5.0 source rpm and give it a different name like libvpx-compat, build and install it then the requirement of VirtualBox should be met without the dependency side effects above. https://smani.fedorapeople.org/compat-libvpx-1.5.0-1.fc26.src.rpm Well done Sandro, I see you've taken care to clean up the extra installed files, this should work just fine Joachim. Hi Ian Kent and Sandro Mani, this worked flawlessly (The only additional thing I had to do was to install /usr/bin/rpmbuild). After having installed the newly built rpm, I could install a working VirtualBox. Tank you very much. Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 25 (Twenty Five) Kernel-4.8.1-1.fc25.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Trying to install the F24 version of VirtualBox-5.1-5.1.6 in F25
Hi testers, I'm trying to install the F24 version of VirtualBox in F25 because no F25 version is available Anybody tried this and was successful? I'm experiencing this error: sudo dnf install VirtualBox-5.1-5.1.6_110634_fedora24-1.x86_64.rpm Last metadata expiration check: 3:04:28 ago on Tue Oct 11 06:49:21 2016. Error: *nothing provides libvpx.so.3()(64bit)* needed by VirtualBox-5.1-5.1.6_110634_fedora24-1.x86_64 (try to add '--allowerasing' to command line to replace conflicting packages) All comments are welcome. Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 25 (Twenty Five) Kernel-4.8.1-1.fc25.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ ___ test mailing list -- test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to test-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Testing idea: kernel 4.7 for Fedora 23 / Fedora 24
On 08/31/16 08:19, Adam Williamson wrote: Hi folks! Just thought I'd send out a testing idea for anyone who's looking for something they can do. We currently have kernel 4.7 in updates-testing for Fedora 23 and Fedora 24: 23 - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-f1adaaadc6 24 - https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-2e5ebfed6d Adam, Yesterday I installed kernel-4.7.2-201.fc24, and it runs well until now, including suspend/resume. Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four) Kernel-4.7.2-201.fc24.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
What means "KASLR disabled: 'kaslr not on cmdline(hibernation selected)'" when booting kernel-4.7.2-200.fc24.x86_64?
Hi, I installed the most recent FG24 kernel 4.7.2-200.fc24.x86_64 from KOJI. When booting, I always see a message - KASLR disabled 'KASLR' not on cmdline (hibernation selected) - Nevertheless, the boot is performed. Anybody has seen this, and what is the purpose for this message? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four) Kernel-4.7.2-200.fc24.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: I'm totally disturbed if trying to install a new desktop environment in Fedora 24
On 06/15/16 17:53, Adam Williamson wrote: On Wed, 2016-06-15 at 10:37 +0200, Joachim Backes wrote: So my (aditional question): How to understand the line "Installed environment groups:" reported by "dnf group list" or "dnf grouplist"? It means the packages for those desktops are installed. I can't tell you why switchdesk is failing, I've never used it. What is it supposed to do, given that you can pick your desktop from the login screen. GDM only presents "Gnome", "Gnome on Wayland" and "Gnome Classic" as desktop choice (this was my choice when installing F24 Workstation"), but KDE (for example) is not given for choice. So this behaviour seems a little buggy for me! change what's run by 'startx' without any args? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four) Kernel-4.5.7-300.fc24.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: I'm totally disturbed if trying to install a new desktop environment in Fedora 24
On 06/15/16 10:58, Ed Greshko wrote: On 06/15/16 16:37, Joachim Backes wrote: I installed Fedora workstation. Later on, the command "dnf group list" reports on my box(beside others): Installed environment groups: KDE Plasma Workspaces Xfce Desktop LXDE Desktop LXQt Desktop MATE Desktop But: sudo switchdesk 'LXDE Desktop' Red Hat Linux switchdesk 4.0 Copyright (C) 1999-2010 Red Hat, Inc Redistributable under the terms of the GNU General Public License Unknown desktop requested: LXDE or sudo switchdesk 'LXDE' Red Hat Linux switchdesk 4.0 Copyright (C) 1999-2010 Red Hat, Inc Redistributable under the terms of the GNU General Public License Unknown desktop requested: LXDE or sudo switchdesk kde Red Hat Linux switchdesk 4.0 Copyright (C) 1999-2010 Red Hat, Inc Redistributable under the terms of the GNU General Public License ERROR: KDE is not installed on your machine! to install KDE, please type yum groupinstall "KDE (K Desktop Environment)" The switchdesk command is a shell script. Also, the man page suggests that the supported "desktop name" would be (KDE, GNOME, XFce4, FVWM, WINDOWMAKER). But you could probably verify that by looking at the script. So, in your example above, you would want to use KDE and not kde. sudo switchdesk KDE Red Hat Linux switchdesk 4.0 Copyright (C) 1999-2010 Red Hat, Inc Redistributable under the terms of the GNU General Public License ERROR: KDE is not installed on your machine! to install KDE, please type yum groupinstall "KDE (K Desktop Environment)" No difference! And now? Joachim Backes -- You're Welcome Zachary Quinto -- Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four) Kernel-4.5.7-300.fc24.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
I'm totally disturbed if trying to install a new desktop environment in Fedora 24
I installed Fedora workstation. Later on, the command "dnf group list" reports on my box(beside others): Installed environment groups: KDE Plasma Workspaces Xfce Desktop LXDE Desktop LXQt Desktop MATE Desktop But: sudo switchdesk 'LXDE Desktop' Red Hat Linux switchdesk 4.0 Copyright (C) 1999-2010 Red Hat, Inc Redistributable under the terms of the GNU General Public License Unknown desktop requested: LXDE or sudo switchdesk 'LXDE' Red Hat Linux switchdesk 4.0 Copyright (C) 1999-2010 Red Hat, Inc Redistributable under the terms of the GNU General Public License Unknown desktop requested: LXDE or sudo switchdesk kde Red Hat Linux switchdesk 4.0 Copyright (C) 1999-2010 Red Hat, Inc Redistributable under the terms of the GNU General Public License ERROR: KDE is not installed on your machine! to install KDE, please type yum groupinstall "KDE (K Desktop Environment)" So my (aditional question): How to understand the line "Installed environment groups:" reported by "dnf group list" or "dnf grouplist"? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four) Kernel-4.5.7-300.fc24.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: F24: switchdesk fails if trying to activate another desktop environment (or displaymanager)
On 06/15/16 09:32, Matthias Runge wrote: On 15/06/16 09:26, Joachim Backes wrote: I installed switchdesk and tried the change my desktop environment simply by calling switchdesk The switchdesk manpage says: This should present a dialog box which allows the user to choose between the available desktops installed on the system. But what happens: switchdesk Red Hat Linux switchdesk 4.0 Copyright (C) 1999-2010 Red Hat, Inc Redistributable under the terms of the GNU General Public License Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/share/switchdesk/switchdesk-gui.py", line 51, in import gtk.glade ImportError: No module named glade Anybody sees this too? Kind regards Joachim Backes Looks like a missing dependency to me. You should file a bug. Done: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1346663 Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four) Kernel-4.5.7-300.fc24.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
F24: switchdesk fails if trying to activate another desktop environment (or displaymanager)
I installed switchdesk and tried the change my desktop environment simply by calling switchdesk The switchdesk manpage says: This should present a dialog box which allows the user to choose between the available desktops installed on the system. But what happens: switchdesk Red Hat Linux switchdesk 4.0 Copyright (C) 1999-2010 Red Hat, Inc Redistributable under the terms of the GNU General Public License Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/share/switchdesk/switchdesk-gui.py", line 51, in import gtk.glade ImportError: No module named glade Anybody sees this too? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four) Kernel-4.5.7-300.fc24.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: F24: Switching from runlevel 5 to runlevel 3 and then try to reswitch to runlevel 5 makes problems
On 06/15/16 07:05, Joachim Backes wrote: On 06/14/16 21:01, Chris Murphy wrote: On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 2:28 AM, Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de <mailto:joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de>> wrote: Anybody has seen this in F24: Booting into runlevel 5, login in a gnome session, open a gnome terminal and enter: "sudo init 3". Then goto a tty by CtrlAltFn, login as root and say: init 5. Then the box does not completely boot back to runlevel 5 but remains in some runlevel interstage where it's impossible to login again into a gnome session. Yes. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1336959 Hi Chris, thanks for your confirmation. Same here. It has obviously nothing to do with the usage of the legacy commands "init 3" and "init 5" or the usage of the systemd stylish command "systemd isolate ...". Sorry for typo, I meant "systemctl isolate ..." Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four) Kernel-4.5.7-300.fc24.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: F24: Switching from runlevel 5 to runlevel 3 and then try to reswitch to runlevel 5 makes problems
On 06/14/16 21:01, Chris Murphy wrote: On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 2:28 AM, Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de <mailto:joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de>> wrote: Anybody has seen this in F24: Booting into runlevel 5, login in a gnome session, open a gnome terminal and enter: "sudo init 3". Then goto a tty by CtrlAltFn, login as root and say: init 5. Then the box does not completely boot back to runlevel 5 but remains in some runlevel interstage where it's impossible to login again into a gnome session. Yes. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1336959 Hi Chris, thanks for your confirmation. Same here. It has obviously nothing to do with the usage of the legacy commands "init 3" and "init 5" or the usage of the systemd stylish command "systemd isolate ...". Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four) Kernel-4.5.7-300.fc24.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
F24: Switching from runlevel 5 to runlevel 3 and then try to reswitch to runlevel 5 makes problems
Anybody has seen this in F24: Booting into runlevel 5, login in a gnome session, open a gnome terminal and enter: "sudo init 3". Then goto a tty by CtrlAltFn, login as root and say: init 5. Then the box does not completely boot back to runlevel 5 but remains in some runlevel interstage where it's impossible to login again into a gnome session. Kind regards -- Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four) Kernel-4.5.7-300.fc24.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
F24: gnome-tweak-tool in a gnome-wayland session
Hi F24 testers, if running gnome-tweak-tool inside a gnome-on-wayland session, then it still offers the option: Icons on desktop on/off. But if choosing the on option, nothing happens, and still no desktop icons appear. This confuses the user. Anybody sees this too? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four) Kernel-4.5.7-300.fc24.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
gstreamer1-plugins from fedora versus gstreamer-plugins from rpmfusion
Hi all f24 testers, anybody knows why fedora now offers the installation of gstreamer*-plugins packages, or similar? I thought this was managed in the past by rpmfusion? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four) Kernel-4.5.7-300.fc24.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Cannot upgrade thunderbird to version 45.1.1-1.fc24
Upgrade of thunderbird to version 45.1.1-1.fc24 (from updates-testing) fails because of dependency problems: Dependencies resolved. Package Arch Version Repository Size Skipping packages with conflicts: (add '--best --allowerasing' to command line to force their upgrade): thunderbird x86_64 45.1.1-1.fc24 updates-testing 64 M Transaction Summary Skip 1 Package It seams thunderbird-lightning is the culprit. Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four) Kernel-4.5.7-300.fc24.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
fedora-bookmarks prevents installation of curent updates in F24
Anybody sees this error too in F24 when doing "sudo dnf upgrade": Error: Transaction check error: file /usr/share/bookmarks/default-bookmarks.html conflicts between attempted installs of fedora-bookmarks-24-1.fc24.noarch and astronomy-bookmarks-1-15.fc24.noarch The upgrade is only possible if excluding bookmark packages (Neither fedora-bookmarks nor astronomy-bookmarks is currently installed on my F24 box!). Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four) Kernel-4.5.6-300.fc24.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
F24: Lost uername if using closing an openconnect vpn connection
I have a vpn connection (openconnect). If opening this connection, working a little bit and then closing it, the username is cleared (but not the password), so I have to enter it again if opening the vnc connection for the next time. Any reason for this? The f23 openconnect pkg saves the username too. Kind regards -- Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four) Kernel-4.5.4-300.fc24.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: missing thunderbird-lightning in f24
On 05/05/16 17:30, Michael Cronenworth wrote: On 05/05/2016 10:24 AM, Joachim Backes wrote: Anybody sees this too: no more thunderbird-lightning for f24, I have to install the xpi file from the thunderbird extension download site (as in earlier times)! The Lightning extension is shipped with Thunderbird itself. It has been since Thunderbird version 38, which was about a year ago. You may uninstall your local copy and use the built-in copy. Weird: rpm -q thunderbird thunderbird-45.0-4.fc24.x86_64 rpm -q thunderbird-lightning package thunderbird-lightning is not installed backes@eule [~]: sudo dnf install thunderbird-lightning Package thunderbird-45.0-4.fc24.x86_64 is already installed, skipping. Dependencies resolved. Nothing to do. Complete! But with the installed thunderbird, I get no lightning functionality, only with installing the addon lightning-4.7-sm+tb-linunx.xpi (I think, starting with thunderbird-45.0-4.fc24). With previous F24 TB versions, no flaw! Kind regards Regards, Michael -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org -- Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four) Kernel-4.5.3-300.fc24.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
missing thunderbird-lightning in f24
Anybody sees this too: no more thunderbird-lightning for f24, I have to install the xpi file from the thunderbird extension download site (as in earlier times)! Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four) Kernel-4.5.3-300.fc24.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
F24: NetworkManager no more operable after "sudo service NetworkManager restart"
Hi F24 testers, after a "dnf upgrade", including an upgrade of NetworkManager to NetworkManager-1.2.0-0.8.rc2.fc24.x86_64 this morning, I see problems with NetworkManager: On a gnome3 desktop after a manual NetworkManager restart (done by "sudo service NetworkManager restart") , NM is inoperable (no more a NM icon on the desktop, remote hosts are no more accessible by name, exept those with an entry in /etc/hosts). I can solve this problem only by a full box restart. Anybody sees this too? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four) Kernel-4.5.1-300.fc24.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Weird bluetooth dependencies in F24 if trying to remove all bluetooth packages
Hi all F24 testers, I don't have any bluetooth hardware on my box, so I tried to remove all *bluetooth* packages: sudo dnf remove *bluetooth*. But dnf will remove a lot of additonal packages: sudo dnf erase *bluetooth* Dependencies resolved. Package Arch Version Repository Size Removing: NetworkManager-bluetooth x86_64 1:1.2.0-0.8.rc1.fc24 @updates-testing 729 k accountsservice x86_64 0.6.40-3.fc24 @koji-override-1 300 k accountsservice-libs x86_64 0.6.40-3.fc24 @koji-override-1 287 k control-center x86_64 1:3.20.0-1.fc24 @updates-testing 18 M gdm x86_64 1:3.20.0-1.fc24 @updates-testing 2.1 M gnome-bluetooth x86_64 1:3.18.3-1.fc24 @updates-testing 87 k gnome-bluetooth-libs x86_64 1:3.18.3-1.fc24 @updates-testing 1.1 M gnome-classic-sessionnoarch 3.20.0-1.fc24 @updates-testing 194 k gnome-initial-setup x86_64 3.20.0-1.fc24 @updates-testing 2.5 M gnome-keyring-pamx86_64 3.20.0-1.fc24 @updates-testing 44 k gnome-shell x86_64 3.20.0-1.fc24 @updates-testing 9.5 M gnome-shell-extension-alternate-tab noarch 3.20.0-1.fc24 @updates-testing 9.4 k gnome-shell-extension-apps-menu noarch 3.20.0-1.fc24 @updates-testing 26 k gnome-shell-extension-background-logo noarch 3.20.0-1.fc24 @updates-testing 56 k gnome-shell-extension-common noarch 3.20.0-1.fc24 @updates-testing 551 k gnome-shell-extension-launch-new-instance noarch 3.20.0-1.fc24 @updates-testing 4.9 k gnome-shell-extension-places-menu noarch 3.20.0-1.fc24 @updates-testing 23 k gnome-shell-extension-user-theme noarch 3.20.0-1.fc24 @updates-testing 7.0 k gnome-shell-extension-window-list noarch 3.20.0-1.fc24 @updates-testing 56 k gnome-tweak-tool noarch 3.20.0-1.fc24 @updates-testing 1.0 M mutter x86_64 3.20.0-1.fc24 @updates-testing 5.2 M pulseaudio-gdm-hooks x86_64 8.0-6.fc24 @koji-override-1 354 pulseaudio-module-bluetooth x86_64 8.0-6.fc24 @koji-override-1 174 k qgnomeplatform x86_64 0.1-4.fc24 @updates-testing 297 k sbc x86_64 1.3-4.fc24 @koji-override-1 268 k telepathy-logger x86_64 0.8.2-3.fc24 @koji-override-1 263 k vino x86_64 3.20.0-1.fc24 @updates-testing 2.0 M Transaction Summary Remove 27 Packages Installed: rpm -qa '*bluetooth*' gnome-bluetooth-libs-3.18.3-1.fc24.x86_64 gnome-bluetooth-3.18.3-1.fc24.x86_64 NetworkManager-bluetooth-1.2.0-0.8.rc1.fc24.x86_64 pulseaudio-module-bluetooth-8.0-6.fc24.x86_64 Anybody sees this too? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four) Kernel-4.5.0-302.fc24.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Trying to change the desktop icon in F24 for home lets freeze the desktop, only logout is possible.
Hi F24 testers, I'm running F24 with gnome desktop (desktop icons are switched on by gnome-tweak-tool). The desktop is physically that of my F23. If I try to change the desktop icon of my home dir, the desktop freezes totally, only logout is possible. The same happens with the usage of gnome-classic, or with a fresh created user. Anybody sees this too? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four) Kernel-4.5.0-302.fc24.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
No desktop icons with "gnome on wayland" as desktop variant in F24
Hi F24 testers, I installed F24 workstation and set "gnome on wayland" as login option, set "Dektop icons" to "on" using gnome-tweak-tool, but still desktop icons are not shown (same problem as in F23). Any workaround for this behaviour? Or is this a bug, or a feature? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four) Kernel-4.5.0-302.fc24.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: missing nautilus-open-terminal in f24 (unable to open a gnome-terminal in some nautilus window)
On 03/31/16 07:48, Adam Williamson wrote: On Thu, 2016-03-31 at 07:40 +0200, Joachim Backes wrote: Hi all F24 testers, I installed F24 alpha from Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-24_Alpha-7.iso and played a little bit with it. I'm missing the functionality of nautilus-open-terminal: It's impossible to open a gnome-terminal in some nautilus window (displaying some directory) by a popup menu entry: "open in terminal" as in previous versions. Trying to install nautilus-open-terminal failed because of unavailability. But I was able to install the F23 version of nautilus-open-terminal, and this helped. Question: will there be a F24 version of nautilus-open-terminal too? The git log says: commit f1751055d5cb1b238973d7db0124d54d7ef24320 Author: Paul W. Frields <sticks...@gmail.com> Date: Tue Jan 19 14:12:39 2016 -0500 Obsoleted by gnome-terminal-nautilus provider so, I guess try that? Adam, thanks for the hint: it works :-) -- Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four) Kernel-4.5.0-0.rc7.git0.2.fc24.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
missing nautilus-open-terminal in f24 (unable to open a gnome-terminal in some nautilus window)
Hi all F24 testers, I installed F24 alpha from Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-24_Alpha-7.iso and played a little bit with it. I'm missing the functionality of nautilus-open-terminal: It's impossible to open a gnome-terminal in some nautilus window (displaying some directory) by a popup menu entry: "open in terminal" as in previous versions. Trying to install nautilus-open-terminal failed because of unavailability. But I was able to install the F23 version of nautilus-open-terminal, and this helped. Question: will there be a F24 version of nautilus-open-terminal too? Kind regards -- Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four) Kernel-4.5.0-0.rc7.git0.2.fc24.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Koji downtime?
Hi all testers, trying this morning to access Koji, but it seems to be down. Anybody knows when it will be up again? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.4.2-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
yum-daprecated finds updates in updates-testing, dnf will not.
Hi all testers, I'm running f23 with all updates applied. For some reasons I needed to update wine* from the updates-testing repo. Using "dnf update", but dnf did not find the updates. Running "dnf clean all" did not help. If using yum-deprecated, all needed updates could be installed. Any comments? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.3.5-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Having some Libreoffice documents opening very slowly
On 03.11.2015 13:06, Joerg Lechner wrote: Hi Joachim, opened odt document 2 pages size, normal loading time. F23 Final RC11 Desktop x86_64. Note: there have been updates today, Hi Joerg, All F23 updates are applied. I forgot to say, that not all my LO documents show this behaviour, but only some few. Kind regards Joachim Backes updates installed. Kind regards Joerg -Ursprüngliche Mitteilung- Von: Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> An: Fedora-test <test@lists.fedoraproject.org> Verschickt: Di, 3 Nov 2015 12:54 pm Betreff: Re: Having some Libreoffice documents opening very slowly On 03.11.2015 12:36, Joachim Backes wrote: Hi all F23 testers, having a weird F23 effect: I have some libreoffice documents opening very slowly in gnome or gnome classic desktops. But if running libreoffice in xfce, lxde or openbox envirents, the docs get opened fast (as expected), The in F22 inside gnome desktop. Sorry :-( the last sentence should be: "But if running libreoffice in xfce, lxde or openbox environments, the docs get opened fast (as expected). Additionally, it opens the docs fast inside *F22* gnome desktop." Anybody has seen this? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.5-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Having some Libreoffice documents opening very slowly
On 03.11.2015 12:36, Joachim Backes wrote: Hi all F23 testers, having a weird F23 effect: I have some libreoffice documents opening very slowly in gnome or gnome classic desktops. But if running libreoffice in xfce, lxde or openbox envirents, the docs get opened fast (as expected), The in F22 inside gnome desktop. Anybody has seen this? Kind regards Joachim Backes By experimenting a little bit I found out that *abiword* opens the document very fast, even in desktop gnome environment! Kind regards -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.5-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Having some Libreoffice documents opening very slowly
Hi all F23 testers, having a weird F23 effect: I have some libreoffice documents opening very slowly in gnome or gnome classic desktops. But if running libreoffice in xfce, lxde or openbox envirents, the docs get opened fast (as expected), The in F22 inside gnome desktop. Anybody has seen this? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.5-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Keyboard mapping during system installation
Hi F23 testers,
seeing a (small) problem during F23 installation (RC5 included):
After choosing the keyboard type in a X11 based Fedora installation (for
example "german no dead keys"), this keyboard type won't be effective in
the tty's (^alt+F1,^alt+F2,...). The keys are still of US KB type. I
have to load the correspondent KB mapping for getting the right mapping
in the ttys ("loadkeys de" for example, or similar).
I think this is a *task to be done by anaconda* during the installation.
Anybody sees this too?
This issue exists since some Fedora versions :-)
Remark: I didn't test this inside a pure text install.
Kind regards
Joachim Backes
--
Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three)
Kernel-4.2.5-300.fc23.x86_64
Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de>
http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Unable to burn an image to a not empty DVD with K3B
On 22.10.2015 07:34, Ed Greshko wrote: On 10/22/2015 01:29 PM, Joachim Backes wrote: Hi F23 testers, anybody has been successful in burning an image (for example the Fedora TC11 boot iso) to a not empty DVD? K3B sees that the DVD is not empty and offers a formatting dialog, but the following formatting process will fail, and I don't see why. Trying to do the same with brasero succeeds. What type of DVD? DVD-RW, Rewritable! Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.3-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Unable to burn an image to a not empty DVD with K3B
On 22.10.2015 10:21, Joerg Lechner wrote: Hi Joachim, I burned just a DVD with TC11, but it's not a RW DVD. The TC11 iso is bootable. In addition that I used not a RW DVD my system differs from Yours (Acer Laptop E15 E5), and -when remember correctly- You have installed Alpha and installed all updates up to current TC11, I made a fresh install of TC11 and all updates. For burning I used K3B, as You did, but currently for me no RW DVD is avaible. But the difference may be in the DVDs. Hi Joerg, I don't think that the DVD-RW is the culprit, because blanking and burning with brasero was performed perfectly. Kind Regards Joachim Backes Kind Regards -Ursprüngliche Mitteilung- Von: Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> An: test <test@lists.fedoraproject.org>; Ed Greshko <ed.gres...@greshko.com> Verschickt: Do, 22 Okt 2015 8:58 am Betreff: Re: Unable to burn an image to a not empty DVD with K3B On 22.10.2015 07:34, Ed Greshko wrote: On 10/22/2015 01:29 PM, Joachim Backes wrote: Hi F23 testers, anybody has been successful in burning an image (for example the Fedora TC11 boot iso) to a not empty DVD? K3B sees that the DVD is not empty and offers a formatting dialog, but the following formatting process will fail, and I don't see why. Trying to do the same with brasero succeeds. What type of DVD? DVD-RW, Rewritable! Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.3-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Unable to burn an image to a not empty DVD with K3B
On 22.10.2015 12:53, Ed Greshko wrote: (Resend to correct list) On 10/22/2015 02:58 PM, Joachim Backes wrote: On 22.10.2015 07:34, Ed Greshko wrote: On 10/22/2015 01:29 PM, Joachim Backes wrote: Hi F23 testers, anybody has been successful in burning an image (for example the Fedora TC11 boot iso) to a not empty DVD? K3B sees that the DVD is not empty and offers a formatting dialog, but the following formatting process will fail, and I don't see why. Trying to do the same with brasero succeeds. What type of DVD? DVD-RW, Rewritable! OK. Wanted to make sure I used the correct type to test. Found a DVD-RW placed in my drive and brought up k3b. It showed the drive to contain an "Appendable Data DVD-RW". I then selected "Burn ISO". I didn't get any formatting dialog. It wrote the ISO just fine. I used Fedora-Workstation-netinst-x86_64-23_Beta.iso and I only have an F22 system with a DVD drive. k3b-2.0.3-3.fc22 I don't have a fresh, unused DVD-RW to try. Ed, New test results: If I blank the DVD separately by "wodim -v dev=/dev/sr0 blank=fast", then the DVD can be burned without flaw. Maybe, the blanking procedure in K3B is buggy -:( Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.3-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Unable to burn an image to a not empty DVD with K3B
Hi F23 testers, anybody has been successful in burning an image (for example the Fedora TC11 boot iso) to a not empty DVD? K3B sees that the DVD is not empty and offers a formatting dialog, but the following formatting process will fail, and I don't see why. Trying to do the same with brasero succeeds. Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.3-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Weird effect of mount command in F23
Anybody has seen this in F23: 1. eject CD (/dev/sr0) 2. sudo mount /dev/sr0 /mnt then the CD will be inserted, but immeditaly after it inserted, an error message appears: mount: no medium found on /dev/sr0 A kernel problem? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.3-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Weird effect of mount command in F23
On 20.10.2015 14:06, Ed Greshko wrote: On 10/20/2015 07:53 PM, Joachim Backes wrote: Anybody has seen this in F23: 1. eject CD (/dev/sr0) 2. sudo mount /dev/sr0 /mnt then the CD will be inserted, but immeditaly after it inserted, an error message appears: mount: no medium found on /dev/sr0 A kernel problem? Kind regards Joachim Backes Same thing happens on F22. Of course if you want a few moments and try again it works. I never would have thought to do it this way. Then how to check in a bash script when a CD is really mounted? That is my original problem :-) Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.3-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Weird effect of mount command in F23
On 20.10.2015 14:30, Ed Greshko wrote: On 10/20/2015 08:21 PM, Joachim Backes wrote: Then how to check in a bash script when a CD is really mounted? Check the return code of the mount command? [root@meimei ~]# mount /dev/sr0 /mnt mount: no medium found on /dev/sr0 [root@meimei ~]# echo $? 32 Hi Ed, $? = 32 helped. Thanks for the hint. Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.3-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Weird effect of mount command in F23
On 20.10.2015 17:41, Richard Ryniker wrote: I suspect you suffer from software that wants to help you and "Do the right thing." Exactly. When mounting HD's, *one* mount command is enough for achieving this, but for removable optical media (like CD's), I need at least 2 commands, if the media is not loaded. That's what I don't understand. If you try to mount a device with no media, mount might simply fail (no media present). Instead, at least for optical drives, it presumes the desired media might be available in the tray and requests the device to load media, then tries again to mount a file system from this device. This is exactly my question: why mount is able to load the media, but doesn't include it correctly into the filesystem? When the drive status changes from empty to loaded, a udev event occurs that can trigger another piece of software that wants to "Do the right thing." I suspect your initial problem results from conflict between these two programs. You're right! The original mount request fails, whatever operation started by udev completes, and when you issue a second mount request (for the now-loaded optical drive) there is no udev event to get in the way and the mount succeeds. I do not like to sacrifice well-defined, predictable behavior for convenience Convenience is what users need! but others may argue this default behavior serves the greater good. What is the *greater good*? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.3-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Problem with bash filename completetion
On 15.10.2015 12:47, Jon Ingason wrote: Den 2015-10-15 kl. 10:44, skrev Joachim Backes: Hi F23 testers, having a directory xyz with a subdir called vb-2015-10-15_07:51:53-win10 This subdir has some entries: drwxrwxr-x 3 backes backes4096 Oct 12 18:01 Machines drwx-- 4 backes backes4096 Oct 15 06:59 VirtualBox VMs -rw--- 1 backes backes 20409483264 Oct 15 07:35 win10.vdi 1.cd to xyz. 2.ls -l vb-2015-10-15_07:51:53-win10/M will not complete to vb-2015-10-15_07:51:53-win10/Machines, and I don't understand, why. Is this a bug in the filename completetion? No problem, if renaming vb-2015-10-15_07:51:53-win10 to vb-2015-10-15_07-51-53-win10 So it seems that the ":" in the filename "vb-2015-10-15_07:51:53-win10" is the culprit. : is a builtin command in sh (and all derivative), see man builtins. This can't be the problem! Otherwise, I would have similar problems with filenames containing "." (dots) in the names, because "." is a builtin command too. Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.3-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Problem with bash filename completetion
Hi F23 testers, having a directory xyz with a subdir called vb-2015-10-15_07:51:53-win10 This subdir has some entries: drwxrwxr-x 3 backes backes4096 Oct 12 18:01 Machines drwx-- 4 backes backes4096 Oct 15 06:59 VirtualBox VMs -rw--- 1 backes backes 20409483264 Oct 15 07:35 win10.vdi 1.cd to xyz. 2.ls -l vb-2015-10-15_07:51:53-win10/M will not complete to vb-2015-10-15_07:51:53-win10/Machines, and I don't understand, why. Is this a bug in the filename completetion? No problem, if renaming vb-2015-10-15_07:51:53-win10 to vb-2015-10-15_07-51-53-win10 So it seems that the ":" in the filename "vb-2015-10-15_07:51:53-win10" is the culprit. The bash command "complete" gives no help! Any comments are welcome. Kind regards Joachim Backes. -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.3-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Problem with bash filename completetion
On 15.10.2015 14:04, Ed Greshko wrote: On 10/15/2015 07:10 PM, Joachim Backes wrote: This can't be the problem! Otherwise, I would have similar problems with filenames containing "." (dots) in the names, because "." is a builtin command too. I think it is a problem Why? If I mkdir vb-2015-10-15_07:51:53-win10 and then do touch vb-2015 I get it expanded to touch vb-2015-10-15_07\:51\:53-win10/ notice the : are being escaped. My question is: why? For example: "mkdir a:b:c " runs without escaping the ":" chars! And then "ls a:b:c" runs without escaping ":" too. Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.3-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Problem with bash filename completetion
On 15.10.2015 16:12, Jon Ingason wrote: Den 2015-10-15 kl. 15:35, skrev Joachim Backes: On 15.10.2015 14:04, Ed Greshko wrote: On 10/15/2015 07:10 PM, Joachim Backes wrote: This can't be the problem! Otherwise, I would have similar problems with filenames containing "." (dots) in the names, because "." is a builtin command too. I think it is a problem Why? If I mkdir vb-2015-10-15_07:51:53-win10 and then do touch vb-2015 I get it expanded to touch vb-2015-10-15_07\:51\:53-win10/ notice the : are being escaped. My question is: why? For example: "mkdir a:b:c " runs without escaping the ":" chars! And then "ls a:b:c" runs without escaping ":" too. Here you are not using the bash shell to interpret the argument. Instead you are using /usr/bin/mkdir and /usr/bin/ls. I think, we should stop the discussion here. Nobody contributing to this thread could give me a solid explanation for the special treatment of ":" during filename comptetion. Nevertheless, thanks to all for their comments. Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.3-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Problem with bash filename completetion
On 15.10.2015 18:15, Samuel Sieb wrote: On 10/15/2015 04:10 AM, Joachim Backes wrote: On 15.10.2015 12:47, Jon Ingason wrote: Den 2015-10-15 kl. 10:44, skrev Joachim Backes: So it seems that the ":" in the filename "vb-2015-10-15_07:51:53-win10" is the culprit. : is a builtin command in sh (and all derivative), see man builtins. This can't be the problem! Otherwise, I would have similar problems with filenames containing "." (dots) in the names, because "." is a builtin command too. No, it has nothing to do with the internal command. It's part of the bash completion system. A colon is used as some sort of separator for completion. Lookup COMP_WORDBREAKS for more info. Sounds good. Thank you for the hint! Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.3-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: F23 Final TC9, Gnome does not install Gimp 2:2.8.14-1.fc22
On 14.10.2015 09:48, Joerg Lechner wrote: Hi, F23 Final TC9 x86_64 Desktop, Gnome refuses to install Gimp 2:2.8.14-1.fc22. Worthwhile to file a bug? See screen shot. Hi Joerg, why should Gnome install the F22 version of gimp? I guess, a typo! I'm running gimp-2.8.14-3.fc23.x86_64 (installed in F23 by "sudo dnf install gimp"). Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.3-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: F23 Final TC9, Gnome does not install Gimp 2:2.8.14-1.fc22
On 14.10.2015 10:36, Joerg Lechner wrote: Hi, I also installed Gimp with dnf. But there is the Gnome SW tool displayed amongst some other icons on the left side on the screen after booting of F23. So far it was possible to install all apps offered from Gnome SW tool. With TC9 this does not work, possibly because F22, F21 apps are offered not F23, I don't know, the version number I got from the display of the unsuccessful installation, but possibly this picture shows not the version, which was tried to install. See screenshot i.e. for Gimp, I didn't choose the F22 version, it's the only one which is offered. I filed Bug 1271520. Joerg, I'm running F23 since alpha, including *all* updates. And I could install gimp via gome-software properly with the most recent version gnome-software-3.18.0-2.fc23.x86_64. Because I did not install TC9 final, I'm unable to tell which version of gnome-software TC9/Final includes :-( Kind regards Joachim Backes Kind Regards -Ursprüngliche Mitteilung- Von: Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> An: For testing and quality assurance of Fedora releases <test@lists.fedoraproject.org>; Joerg Lechner <julech...@aol.com> Verschickt: Mi, 14 Okt 2015 10:10 am Betreff: Re: F23 Final TC9, Gnome does not install Gimp 2:2.8.14-1.fc22 On 14.10.2015 09:48, Joerg Lechner wrote: Hi, F23 Final TC9 x86_64 Desktop, Gnome refuses to install Gimp 2:2.8.14-1.fc22. Worthwhile to file a bug? See screen shot. Hi Joerg, why should Gnome install the F22 version of gimp? I guess, a typo! I'm running gimp-2.8.14-3.fc23.x86_64 (installed in F23 by "sudo dnf install gimp"). Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.3-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: acroread
On 07.10.2015 16:25, Timothy Murphy wrote: Has anyone managed to install acroread (Adobe Reader) under Fedora-23beta? Yes, I succeeded if installing "AdbeRdr9.5.5-1_i486linux_enu.bin". Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.3-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: F23 suspend issues anyone?
On 05.10.2015 23:16, Ankur Sinha wrote: Hiya, Is anyone else seeing suspend issues? Bug filed here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1268625 Ankur, I never had suspend problems in F23 with any kernel (my actual included: 4.2.3-300.fc23.x86_64). Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.3-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: f23 suggests to boot with the last but one kernel
On 04.10.2015 16:14, Joerg Lechner wrote: Hi, since some F23 releases Grub points for booting not to the newest kernel but to the last but one. I remenber there was a thread about in F22, but I don't remember the solution. Currently F23 Desktop Final TC1 x86_64. Is this only my problem, or do someone else see similar behaviour? Kind Regards Having the same problem, and already filed a BZ: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1258716 -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.2-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Help F23: Needing python3-coverage 4.0-0-12.b3.fc23.x86_64 rpm
Hi all, it seems that *python3-coverage-4.0-1.fc23* prevents from a correct booting (boots into emergency mode), and it seems that *python3-coverage-4.0-1.fc23* is the culprit. The last running version was for me 4.0-0-12.b3.fc23.x86_64, but I was not able (even after a long search) to download. Anybody knows a location for this pkg? Any hint would be very appreciated. Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 22 (Twenty Two) Kernel-4.1.6-200.fc22.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Help F23: Needing python3-coverage 4.0-0-12.b3.fc23.x86_64 rpm
On 30.09.2015 10:49, Joachim Backes wrote: Hi all, it seems that *python3-coverage-4.0-1.fc23* prevents from a correct booting (boots into emergency mode), and it seems that *python3-coverage-4.0-1.fc23* is the culprit. The last running version was for me 4.0-0-12.b3.fc23.x86_64, but I was not able (even after a long search) to download. Anybody knows a location for this pkg? Any hint would be very appreciated. Kind regards Joachim Backes Hi, please forget it! My mistake :-( -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.2-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: F23: "Gnome on Wayland" as login option: some problems with nautilus
On 28.09.2015 18:18, drago01 wrote: On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 6:17 PM, Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> wrote: Hi f23 testers, if choosing the "gnome on Wayland" option (on GDM login screen, maybe on other too), then after login, nautilus is not running So, I don't see the desktop icons after login, despite the fact I configured the desktop by gnome-tweak-tool so with "icons on desktop" is set to on! This feature is not supported on wayland. Simple question: where is this documented? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.1-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
F23: "Gnome on Wayland" as login option: some problems with nautilus
Hi f23 testers, if choosing the "gnome on Wayland" option (on GDM login screen, maybe on other too), then after login, nautilus is not running So, I don't see the desktop icons after login, despite the fact I configured the desktop by gnome-tweak-tool so with "icons on desktop" is set to on! And: If starting nautilus manually, there is a very restricted desktop menu (by mouse button 3 on the desktop): 1. Change background 2. Display settings 3. Settings. That's all I see! My video card: VGA compatible controller: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD/ATI] Cedar [Radeon HD 5000/6000/7350/8350 Series] lsmod|grep radeon radeon 1515520 9 i2c_algo_bit 16384 1 radeon drm_kms_helper118784 1 radeon ttm90112 1 radeon drm 335872 14 ttm,drm_kms_helper,radeon Anybody can see this too? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.1-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: problems with redhat bugzilla?
On 28.09.2015 11:09, Joerg Lechner wrote: Hi, can not login to bugzilla, also the bug ID of a known bug is rejected. Currently problems there? Kind Regards Hi Joerg, I had problems too after RH BZ was updated (week before last): I wasn't able to login, and I had to choose a new password (and was wondering about this fact!) Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.1-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
F23 and GDM: very often cannot re-login after logout
Hi F23 testers, I'm running gnome3 desktop, and gdm as desktop manager. It happens very often that after logging out and trying to re-login and after having entered the correct password at the gdm prompt, the login is rejected, so as if trying a wrong password. Something it helps to kill gdm, but not always. Perhaps some hint in /var/log/messages: Sep 25 08:54:17 eule /usr/libexec/gdm-x-session: Fatal server error: Sep 25 08:54:17 eule /usr/libexec/gdm-x-session: (EE) xf86OpenConsole: Cannot open virtual console 3 (Permission denied) Sep 25 08:54:17 eule /usr/libexec/gdm-x-session: (EE) Sep 25 08:54:17 eule /usr/libexec/gdm-x-session: (EE) Sep 25 08:54:17 eule /usr/libexec/gdm-x-session: Please consult the Fedora Project support Sep 25 08:54:17 eule /usr/libexec/gdm-x-session: at http://wiki.x.org Sep 25 08:54:17 eule /usr/libexec/gdm-x-session: for help. Sep 25 08:54:17 eule /usr/libexec/gdm-x-session: (EE) Please also check the log file at "/home/backes/.local/share/xorg/Xorg.0.log" for additional information. Sep 25 08:54:17 eule /usr/libexec/gdm-x-session: (EE) Sep 25 08:54:17 eule /usr/libexec/gdm-x-session: (WW) xf86CloseConsole: KDSETMODE failed: Bad file descriptor Sep 25 08:54:17 eule /usr/libexec/gdm-x-session: (WW) xf86CloseConsole: VT_GETMODE failed: Bad file descriptor Sep 25 08:54:17 eule /usr/libexec/gdm-x-session: (EE) Server terminated with error (1). Closing log file. Sep 25 08:54:17 eule /usr/libexec/gdm-x-session: Unable to run X server My video card: 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD/ATI] Cedar [Radeon HD 5000/6000/7350/8350 Series] I filed already a BZ (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260487), but getting no answer. The gnome mega update has been applied yesterday, but there is no difference in behaviour between before and after! If using lightdm instead of GDM, no such problems! Anybody sees this too or knows some workaraound? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.1-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: F23: # dnf update dnf* rpm* ==> no repos configured
On 25.09.2015 09:11, Russel Winder wrote: On Wed, 2015-09-23 at 15:53 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: […] Yes, the lurking gotcha being 'dnf doesn't work' :) Looks like, without explicit action, dnf will never work again as a way of upgrading packages: after each check-update, there is still nothing to upgrade, which after 24 hours is unheard of! […] If you have yum-deprecated installed you should be able to downgrade dnf with that, I think. Given the cavalier way dnf is updated to breaking point, yum-deprecated should be an integral part of the toolkit for everyone using Fedora Rawhide. I used yum-deprecated to update all the packages dnf didn't realise needed to be updated. Sadly none of them was dnf. The bug report claims an update to dnf is in the repository, should it have been part of the update? Did you try http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=687661 (dnf-1.1.2-3.fc23)? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.1-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Weird behaviour of the file command in F23
Hi all, I'm running F23 will all updates, and I see a weird behaviour of the file command: sudo file /var/log/dnf.rpm* /var/log/dnf.rpm.log: data /var/log/dnf.rpm.log-20150901: ASCII text /var/log/dnf.rpm.log-20150906: ASCII text /var/log/dnf.rpm.log-20150913: ASCII text /var/log/dnf.rpm.log-20150921: ASCII text Why /var/log/dnf.rpm.log is a _data_ file, but the rotated logs of /var/log/dnf.rpm.log are _ASCII_ files? All comments are welcome. Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.1-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> http://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes/ -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
upgrading to nautilus-3.17.91-1.fc23 breaks display of desktop icons
Hi F23 testers, I'm running F32 with gnome3 and nautilus as desktop manager. I Upgraded to nautilus-3.17.91-1.fc23.x86_64 and nautilus-extensions-3.17.91-1.fc23.x86_64. After logging out and relogging in, the desktop is broken (no more icons of desktop files and directories are shown, starting of gnome-terminal on desktop with right mousekey will not run). Downgrading to the previous nautilus version nautilus-3.17.90-1.fc23.x86_64 helps as workaround. I filed a BZ: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260475 Anybody sees this too? Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) Kernel-4.2.0-300.fc23.x86_64 Joachim Backes <joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de> https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
