Re: installing Fedora 21 or 22 on a MacBook Air 7,1
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 10:07:26PM +0700, Frederic Muller wrote: On 07/29/2015 08:07 PM, CS DBA wrote: I installed Fedora 20 on a macbook air like this: 1) burned the KDE live dvd, 2) plugged the dvd player into the mac usb port 3) held down the option button while I boot the macbook 4) when it comes up with the boot options choose the Fedora DVD (it takes a few min before it shows up) 5) boot off the DVD, then do the install to disk as normal Sorry if my email wasn't clear enough: there is no disk to install Fedora to. The SSD drive is simply invisible. From a root terminal[1] in the live USB, can you see the disk with `parted -l' or `fdisk -l'? If yes, you could format it from the command line, and then try starting the installer. Needless to say backup first. If you can't see it even with parted, then I'm afraid I don't have any thoughts how to proceed. Footnotes: [1] I think sudo should work, otherwise try su -, I think in a live system it is passwordless. -- Suvayu Open source is the future. It sets us free. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
[389-users] 389-amdin GUI/console :Performance counters-Connection Status display
Hi List I would like to know how can I confiige my console to see the stats for Connection Status windows there 4-5 columns :TIme Opened,Started but can't see any fields entries in my 389-admin GUI for thist particular counters ? Thank you Isabella -- 389 users mailing list 389-us...@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
Re: FAIL: Thunderbird: Replying to thread
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Rick Stevens ri...@alldigital.com wrote: The reply _is_ in the inbox of the gmail account, but without the Unread flag It's more than that. I use the web interface for Gmail, and messages from myself are not in the Inbox AT ALL, it just goes into the archive (All Mail). Curiously, if I explicitly Cc: myself, then it does go to Inbox. I get around it the same way Ed does, but explicitly labeling mailing list mail. In that case, the new messages from me are not marked unread and do get the label for the mailing list. The original point was, this is a feature of Gmail, not of the Fedora users list. --Greg -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Suspend asks for authentication
64-bit Fedora 21, up-to-date. In the last few days, suspend is asking for authentication. AFAIK, nothing has changed, other than updates. Any suggestions? Thanks. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: FAIL: Thunderbird: Replying to thread
On 07/28/2015 11:31 PM, Heinz Diehl wrote: On 29.07.2015, Greg Woods wrote: Stop right there. This unfortunately sounds like a well-known Google-ism. If you send mail to a mailing list that you are on, it does not put the message in your Inbox. Though I'm not a Thunderbird user, I wonder why it shouldn't be able to store a copy of your mail in the INBOX folder. I mean Thunderbird, not Google. After all, IMAP is nothing more than a bunch of directories. Maybe I'm missing something.. Mutt, which is what I'm using, allows specifying where I want to have my sent emails stored (set record), maybe Thunderbird can do the same? Another part of the problem may be that you haven't sorted your listmail into seperate folders. This being the case, your email will be sorted correctly when returned by the listserver.. I believe the gmail thing is related to an internal filter they have. If gmail sees a message with a From address that matches yours, it assumes you've already seen the reply (heck, you supposedly wrote it!) and doesn't flag the reply as Unread. The reply _is_ in the inbox of the gmail account, but without the Unread flag Thunderbird doesn't know that it should pick it up. Simple when you think about it. And before you ask, no, I don't know of a way to disable that feature of gmail. -- - Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigitalri...@alldigital.com - - AIM/Skype: therps2ICQ: 226437340 Yahoo: origrps2 - -- - If at first you don't succeed, quit. No sense being a damned fool! - -- -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: FAIL: Thunderbird: Replying to thread
On 29/07/15 13:30, Greg Woods wrote: On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Rick Stevens ri...@alldigital.com mailto:ri...@alldigital.com wrote: The reply _is_ in the inbox of the gmail account, but without the Unread flag It's more than that. I use the web interface for Gmail, and messages from myself are not in the Inbox AT ALL, it just goes into the archive (All Mail). Curiously, if I explicitly Cc: myself, then it does go to Inbox. I get around it the same way Ed does, but explicitly labeling mailing list mail. In that case, the new messages from me are not marked unread and do get the label for the mailing list. The original point was, this is a feature of Gmail, not of the Fedora users list. --Greg . Perhaps I don't understand the question but what I have always done is: Account Settings Copies Folders and then check the box: Bcc these email addresses[my address] That way I always have a copy in the proper place in the thread and it all appears logically. Bob -- Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA http://www.qrz.com/db/W2BOD box10 FEDORA-22/64bit LINUX XFCE -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21: Thunderbird insists on calling Fedora list messages junk!
On 07/29/2015 11:59 AM, William wrote: On 07/28/2015 05:25 PM, William wrote: On 07/28/2015 02:17 PM, William wrote: Good afternoon, On 07/23/2015 03:00 PM, William wrote: Good afternoon, Most messages received from this fedora list are labelled junk by Thunderbird. This is even though I whitelisted From = users-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org. Actually, I have this problem both in my Fedora-21 and my windows-7 systems. Any ideas? Surely messages from this list are not junk! thanks, Bill. My original message was vague; my apologies. The Fedora list messages were not being put into the Bulk Mail folder. Rather, they were being flagged with a little flame symbol in the inbox table of contents, and between the message header and the message body. Clicking the Not Junk button clears that flame symbol, but it reappears again shortly after. Also, not all fedora list messages are flagged with the flame symbol; but most are. I see no pattern as to which are and which are not. Seriously, I've gotten rid of that issue by whitelisting any message where the To: field contains users@lists.fedoraproject.org and haven't had one drop into the Junk folder since. Thank-you. I tried that. No change; same behavior. It also doesn't matter when I set the filter to be run. I checked for other user filters; there are none. I have several e-mail accounts in Thunderbird, but this problem shows up only for Fedora list messages, and only in the one e-mail account that I use for the Fedora list. If I recall correctly, this problem started showing up in late spring. Is anyone else seeing this behavior? Is there something in the Fedora list message headers that is bugging Thunderbird's spam-checking code, and can be adjusted? This seems to not be a Thunderbird issue and not a Fedora issue, but a Fedora list issue. thanks, Bill. Try this: remove the filter completely and close the list of filters. Then, reopen the list and create a new filter, giving it a different name and typing in the email address from scratch instead of using Copy/Paste. It sounds a tad heavy-handed, but there's a possibility that there's a non-printing character stuck in there that's fscking things up. Thank-you Joe. I tried what you suggested. No change. I also tried deleting *all* the filters, exiting Thunderbird, and re-launching Thunderbird. Still the same behavior. But it sure seemed like a good theory. I raised this issue because it is unique to the Fedora list, though I experience the problem in both Fedora-21 and Windows-7. I gather from everyone else's silence that I'm the only person experiencing the problem. If I really am the only person affected, we can drop this; it's just a rather minor nuisance. Bill. Rick Stevens said: In Thunderbird, go to: Edit-Account Settings Select the Junk Settings item under the account you're concerned with, then click on the Global Junk Preferences button. In the next window, select the Junk tab, then click on the Reset Training Data button. You've just wiped out any junk training Thunderbird client has. When you get new mail, the system won't tag anything as junk unless you click on the Junk button. Eventually you'll retrain Thunderbird. I also have the Do not automatically mark mail as junk if the sender is in:Personal Address Book section of the Junk Settings for my account and I've added this list's address in my address book. Thank-you Rick. I tried those things, both in Fedora and in Windows. After doing those things, I completely exited Thunderbird and re-launched. No change! Thunderbird keeps on flagging most messages from this group, and only messages from this group, as junk! ...even after I click the Not Junk button or use Message Mark As Not Junk. Sorry it didn't work. To be honest, that was a shotgun approach to the problem. It's worked for me before on some things but since I'm not having the same issue as you, it's hard to make suggestions. Looking at Thunderbird's website, make sure that you open messages that are NOT marked as junk and press the upper case J (not junk). This helps train Thunderbird to recognize non-junk messages. Have a look at this link: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/thunderbird-and-junk-spam-messages specifically the Training the junk filter section. -- - Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigitalri...@alldigital.com - - AIM/Skype: therps2ICQ: 226437340 Yahoo: origrps2 - -- - I haven't lost my mind. It's backed up on tape somewhere, but - - probably not recoverable.- -- -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
Re: installing Fedora 21 or 22 on a MacBook Air 7,1
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 9:07 AM, Frederic Muller f...@cm17.com wrote: Sorry if my email wasn't clear enough: there is no disk to install Fedora to. The SSD drive is simply invisible. It's possible it's being misidentified and stolen by multipathd and will need to be explicitly blacklisted. Doing that is easy, but totally non-obvious. This might provide some assistance on configuring the blacklist: https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/DM_Multipath/config_file_blacklist.html I think I used that or something really similar to it when I had this problem during Fedora 22 testing (which resulted in some multipathd changes, but hey there are always edge cases). On a MBA it's difficult to get information off of it, because proprietary firmware is needed for wireless. I'm not sure if the mDP/thunderbolt to ethernet adapter needs a driver (?), but if you have one and it works out of the box then you can scp a copy of 'journalctl -b -l -o short-monotonic journal.txt' to some other computer. Another option is two USB sticks. Another option still is to create the install media USB stick with livecd-iso-to-disk pointed at a *partition* rather than the whole stick. Pre-partition it into two partitions. Format the smaller partition as anything, mkfs.ext4 is fine so is FAT it doesn't matter. And then point l-i-t-d (part of livecd-tools package) to the other partition. While you're at it, you might as all use the --overlay-size-mb option because that's necessary to create a persistent blacklist file to be used at boot time - assuming the blacklist file is even needed. So now you can boot the install media, and you'll have a partition you can mount to capture the journal. Post that file somewhere and we'll see if it suggests multipathd or other confusion. While you're at it, both 'lsblk' and 'blkid' output might be useful also. But really it's whether the kernel sees it, and if so how udev and/or multipathd handled it thereafter. -- Chris Murphy -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21: Thunderbird insists on calling Fedora list messages junk!
On 07/28/2015 05:25 PM, William wrote: On 07/28/2015 02:17 PM, William wrote: Good afternoon, On 07/23/2015 03:00 PM, William wrote: Good afternoon, Most messages received from this fedora list are labelled junk by Thunderbird. This is even though I whitelisted From = users-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org. Actually, I have this problem both in my Fedora-21 and my windows-7 systems. Any ideas? Surely messages from this list are not junk! thanks, Bill. My original message was vague; my apologies. The Fedora list messages were not being put into the Bulk Mail folder. Rather, they were being flagged with a little flame symbol in the inbox table of contents, and between the message header and the message body. Clicking the Not Junk button clears that flame symbol, but it reappears again shortly after. Also, not all fedora list messages are flagged with the flame symbol; but most are. I see no pattern as to which are and which are not. Seriously, I've gotten rid of that issue by whitelisting any message where the To: field contains users@lists.fedoraproject.org and haven't had one drop into the Junk folder since. Thank-you. I tried that. No change; same behavior. It also doesn't matter when I set the filter to be run. I checked for other user filters; there are none. I have several e-mail accounts in Thunderbird, but this problem shows up only for Fedora list messages, and only in the one e-mail account that I use for the Fedora list. If I recall correctly, this problem started showing up in late spring. Is anyone else seeing this behavior? Is there something in the Fedora list message headers that is bugging Thunderbird's spam-checking code, and can be adjusted? This seems to not be a Thunderbird issue and not a Fedora issue, but a Fedora list issue. thanks, Bill. Try this: remove the filter completely and close the list of filters. Then, reopen the list and create a new filter, giving it a different name and typing in the email address from scratch instead of using Copy/Paste. It sounds a tad heavy-handed, but there's a possibility that there's a non-printing character stuck in there that's fscking things up. Thank-you Joe. I tried what you suggested. No change. I also tried deleting *all* the filters, exiting Thunderbird, and re-launching Thunderbird. Still the same behavior. But it sure seemed like a good theory. I raised this issue because it is unique to the Fedora list, though I experience the problem in both Fedora-21 and Windows-7. I gather from everyone else's silence that I'm the only person experiencing the problem. If I really am the only person affected, we can drop this; it's just a rather minor nuisance. Bill. Rick Stevens said: In Thunderbird, go to: Edit-Account Settings Select the Junk Settings item under the account you're concerned with, then click on the Global Junk Preferences button. In the next window, select the Junk tab, then click on the Reset Training Data button. You've just wiped out any junk training Thunderbird client has. When you get new mail, the system won't tag anything as junk unless you click on the Junk button. Eventually you'll retrain Thunderbird. I also have the Do not automatically mark mail as junk if the sender is in:Personal Address Book section of the Junk Settings for my account and I've added this list's address in my address book. Thank-you Rick. I tried those things, both in Fedora and in Windows. After doing those things, I completely exited Thunderbird and re-launched. No change! Thunderbird keeps on flagging most messages from this group, and only messages from this group, as junk! ...even after I click the Not Junk button or use Message Mark As Not Junk. Bill. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21: infection reported by chkrootkit.
(replying to two posts) On 07/28/2015 05:37 PM, William wrote: On 07/28/2015 01:55 PM, William wrote: Good afternoon, On 07/23/2015 02:56 PM, William wrote: Hi all, While doing my routine patches and scans, chkrootkit reported the following: (*** snip ***) Checking `asp'... not infected Checking `bindshell'... warning, got bogus l2cap line. warning, got bogus l2cap line. (*** snip ***) warning, got bogus l2cap line. INFECTED (PORTS: 3133) Checking `lkm'... chkproc: nothing detected (*** snip ***) I ran rkhunter immediately after the chkrootkit run finished, and it reported no problems. How do I determine if this is a false alarm or a real problem? If this is a real problem, what should I do about it? Also, as I'm neither a security expert nor a sysadmin, what is port 3133 used for? thanks, Bill. I realized a lot later that I also should have mentioned that the chkrootkit run was shortly after doing yum update, prelink -a, and rebooting. I don't know if that's significant. By examining the chkrootkit program -- it's a large shell script with a few helper tools -- to understand what it does to perform a check. ??? I looked at that long sh script. It didn't help. I don't see how knowing that chkrootkit uses netstat to check a port tells me whether or not I have a real problem. I don't understand what it means that a port is infected. I am a home user stuck doing his own sysadmin and security with no training or experience in these things. Do I have a security problem? If yes, how do I fix it? At http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/chkrootkit somebody has looked into the l2cap warning before. Thank-you. thanks, Bill. I'm not sure why you're using prelink, but if you're worried about security you might consider adding -r to the command. Some time ago, I was getting a lot of warnings from rkhunter. Both John Horne (of rkhunter fame) and the rkhunter warnings suggested I do a prelink -a after doing yum update, but before running rkhunter. It worked. So I always run prelink -a after doing yum update and before doing chkrootkit and rkhunter. The -r option requires an address. What address should I provide? Did you mean -R or -r? thanks, Bill. Michael Schwendt said: Then I suggest that chkrootkit is not the right tool for you. You may ask why not? Because it's far from bullet-proof. Some of the checks it implements are no longer relevant these days. There are more modern rootkits that are not covered by chkrootkit. There is no database that would receive online updates to cover more known rootkits or vulnerabilities. It only tries to check for a few modifications it is aware of. Other checks are not safe but only very rudimentary. Even normal processes running on a normal installation can confuse it. For a very long time, it considered the main systemd executable as infected, and nobody did anything about that. Everywhere you could meet Fedora users asking whether Fedora's official ISO images would be infected. There's a README file included in the Fedora package, which comments on the problem of false positives. It's the user's responsibility to verify what chkrootkit reports, because it's not safe to rely on it. Running chkrootkit gives a false sense of security. If it doesn't find anything (and rkhunter not either), you could still be affected by something it cannot find (even an only slightly modified rootkit) or by some other vulnerability it doesn't even check for. There are multiple layers of security. As a home user, better focus on tools that protect your machine from intruders. Such as a firewall, SELinux, security relevant updates, not running things as superuser root, and deciding carefully what to install or execute on your machine. Thank-yo for your comments, Michael. I *partially* agree. I already realized that chkrootkit is not bullet-proof. I understand that *no* security tool or method is bullet-proof. Malicious people are always brewing new evil things, and security tools and methods are almost always stuck trying to catch up and keep up. I suspected that chkrootkit did not on its own get updates from some on-line database, but I wasn't sure. I hoped that maybe it was getting such updates when I do yum update. You seem to be implying apparently not. :) This tool (along with rkhunter and SELinux) do not give me a false sense of security. But they sure occasionally give me a serious scare. As for the possibility of false positives, that's why I come to this group (or for rkhunter, its group) when I receive a warning or alert. It's obvious to me that the contributors to these groups include some real experts, and I trust the groups. If chkrootkit is so bad and out of date, are we getting any value from it? Is it completely redundant with SELinux and rkhunter? If it's not adding anything beyond what SELinux and rkhunter do, maybe it should be removed from Fedora? A couple years ago, when I got my new
Re: F21: Thunderbird insists on calling Fedora list messages junk!
On 07/29/2015 11:59 AM, William wrote: Thank-you Rick. I tried those things, both in Fedora and in Windows. After doing those things, I completely exited Thunderbird and re-launched. No change! Thunderbird keeps on flagging most messages from this group, and only messages from this group, as junk! ...even after I click the Not Junk button or use Message Mark As Not Junk. Have you tried making a filter that triggers on all messages from the list, runs before Junk Classification and simply stops the filter execution? Doing that works for me; if that's not enough, moving to the top of the list might help. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21: infection reported by chkrootkit.
On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 14:49:54 -0400, William wrote: I already realized that chkrootkit is not bullet-proof. I understand that *no* security tool or method is bullet-proof. Malicious people are always brewing new evil things, and security tools and methods are almost always stuck trying to catch up and keep up. I suspected that chkrootkit did not on its own get updates from some on-line database, but I wasn't sure. I hoped that maybe it was getting such updates when I do yum update. You seem to be implying apparently not. :) False sense of security. Check out rpm -q --changelog chkrootkit|less. That's Fedora's package changelog. v0.48 - 2007 v0.49 - 2010, three years later v0.50 - 2014, four years later (the project page had been gone for a long time even) And what did change in the software? Does it check for many new rootkits? Which rootkits are popular? Which pieces of code hackers leave on a machine after a breakin could be found by chkrootkit? When was the last time chkrootkit found a rootkit on your installation(s)? Then notice some of the details in Fedora package's changelog. Fixes for ancient undiscovered bugs. Oh wait, and CVE-2014-0476? That one is classified as a serious vulnerability in chkrootkit itself. This tool (along with rkhunter and SELinux) do not give me a false sense of security. But they sure occasionally give me a serious scare. That makes it even worse. I don't know why you find it worthwhile to run such tools. Have you made any experience with intrusion attempts and especially rootkits/backdoors? Or is it like running a random virus checker that never finds a virus, or running a cheap anti-virus which doesn't protect against the latest and greatest threats? It causes too much distraction. And having to deal with false positives is a strange hobby. ;-) If chkrootkit is so bad and out of date, are we getting any value from it? Well, decide for yourself. Is it completely redundant with SELinux and rkhunter? Do you run AIDE (package aide) just because it can add another layer of protection? I don't think so. But that's a great tool with a special target group, albeit special maintenance requirements, too. If it's not adding anything beyond what SELinux and rkhunter do, maybe it should be removed from Fedora? Some packages are kept alive, because there is a volunteer to become the owner of the Fedora package as soon as the previous owner wants to drop the package. I don't know whether the current owner is convinced of the usefulness or quality of the software. Back to the original question: Is that INFECTED (PORTS: 3133) alert a false alarm or a real problem? Suggestions: * Subscribe to the bugzilla ticket I've mentioned. * Run chkrootkit in expert mode. * Look up the *tiny* shell function that checks port 3133 and try to understand which netstat command chkrootkit runs to examine port 3133. * Draw conclusions. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: installing Fedora 21 or 22 on a MacBook Air 7,1
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 7:46 PM, Frederic Muller f...@cm17.com wrote: On a sidenote livecd-to-disk didn't work as the MBA didn't see the stick. dd however did work and booted. Those seem contradictory. The stick is a block device. In order for dd to use it, it had to show up the same as for livecd-iso-to-disk. Gparted however saw a 16GB stick instead of 4GB. Sounds suspiciously like counterfeit flash. -- Chris Murphy -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: installing Fedora 21 or 22 on a MacBook Air 7,1
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 8:15 PM, Frederic Muller f...@cm17.com wrote: On 07/30/2015 09:00 AM, Chris Murphy wrote: On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 7:46 PM, Frederic Muller f...@cm17.com wrote: On a sidenote livecd-to-disk didn't work as the MBA didn't see the stick. dd however did work and booted. Those seem contradictory. The stick is a block device. In order for dd to use it, it had to show up the same as for livecd-iso-to-disk. Gparted however saw a 16GB stick instead of 4GB. Sounds suspiciously like counterfeit flash. So I formatted afterwards because I used the flash for something else and it showed a hpfs+ partition (using dd). I need to have a look at the livecd gparted view (which is then 4GB - but I think it is very different) but I was also very surprised by the whole stuff. Gparted stated that their was a problem with the block size (IIRC) which was 512 at one place and 2048 at another place... Flash will report a logical sector size of 512 bytes and fib about physical sector size of 512 bytes also. Optical media has a sector size of 2048 bytes, and the ISO image contains an ISO 9660 file system so the terminology may just be getting confused between the actual flash as a physical device and the fs that's on it. *shrug* -- Chris Murphy -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: installing Fedora 21 or 22 on a MacBook Air 7,1
On 07/30/2015 09:00 AM, Chris Murphy wrote: On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 7:46 PM, Frederic Muller f...@cm17.com wrote: On a sidenote livecd-to-disk didn't work as the MBA didn't see the stick. dd however did work and booted. Those seem contradictory. The stick is a block device. In order for dd to use it, it had to show up the same as for livecd-iso-to-disk. Gparted however saw a 16GB stick instead of 4GB. Sounds suspiciously like counterfeit flash. So I formatted afterwards because I used the flash for something else and it showed a hpfs+ partition (using dd). I need to have a look at the livecd gparted view (which is then 4GB - but I think it is very different) but I was also very surprised by the whole stuff. Gparted stated that their was a problem with the block size (IIRC) which was 512 at one place and 2048 at another place... Fred -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: dnf update vs Software Udpates
On 07/23/2015 08:28 AM, Radek Holy wrote: - Original Message - From: Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 6:58:49 PM Subject: Re: dnf update vs Software Udpates On 07/22/2015 05:41 PM, Heinz Diehl wrote: On 22.07.2015, Suvayu Ali wrote: I usually update weekly (or at least once within two weeks). And since F22, I get nothing to do every time I do this What you describe indicates you could be victim of what I conside a massive design flaw in dnf, the dnf guys have been ignoring ever since, because they believe to know better: When dnf encounters a broken dependency, it doesn't tell you about it and ignores it. Try dnf --refresh --best update Ralf Let's admit that you ignore us as well. No, I do not ignore you. I am simply tired of being confronted with this immature and broken piece of banana software called dnf and am tired of permanently being confronted with what I perceive as false promises. Ralf -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: installing Fedora 21 or 22 on a MacBook Air 7,1
On 07/30/2015 01:16 AM, Chris Murphy wrote: On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 9:07 AM, Frederic Muller f...@cm17.com wrote: Sorry if my email wasn't clear enough: there is no disk to install Fedora to. The SSD drive is simply invisible. It's possible it's being misidentified and stolen by multipathd and will need to be explicitly blacklisted. Doing that is easy, but totally non-obvious. This might provide some assistance on configuring the blacklist: https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/DM_Multipath/config_file_blacklist.html I think I used that or something really similar to it when I had this problem during Fedora 22 testing (which resulted in some multipathd changes, but hey there are always edge cases). On a MBA it's difficult to get information off of it, because proprietary firmware is needed for wireless. I'm not sure if the mDP/thunderbolt to ethernet adapter needs a driver (?), but if you have one and it works out of the box then you can scp a copy of 'journalctl -b -l -o short-monotonic journal.txt' to some other computer. Another option is two USB sticks. Another option still is to create the install media USB stick with livecd-iso-to-disk pointed at a *partition* rather than the whole stick. Pre-partition it into two partitions. Format the smaller partition as anything, mkfs.ext4 is fine so is FAT it doesn't matter. And then point l-i-t-d (part of livecd-tools package) to the other partition. While you're at it, you might as all use the --overlay-size-mb option because that's necessary to create a persistent blacklist file to be used at boot time - assuming the blacklist file is even needed. So now you can boot the install media, and you'll have a partition you can mount to capture the journal. Post that file somewhere and we'll see if it suggests multipathd or other confusion. While you're at it, both 'lsblk' and 'blkid' output might be useful also. But really it's whether the kernel sees it, and if so how udev and/or multipathd handled it thereafter. Hi! Thank you for the answers I see quite a few more things to try now ;-) . On a sidenote livecd-to-disk didn't work as the MBA didn't see the stick. dd however did work and booted. Gparted however saw a 16GB stick instead of 4GB. And yes the wifi needs proprietary drivers... I however gave it back to my friend last night as he is leaving on holidays but really wants to go away from OSX (or Windows). He just likes that hardware. I'll get it back when he returns and will be able to have fun again. Thank you all for the follow ups. Fred -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Dell WMI
On 07/30/15 08:50, jd1008 wrote: /var/log/messages has many messages like these Jul 27 15:39:47 localhost kernel: [18095.720272] dell_wmi: Received unknown WMI event (0x11) Jul 27 15:39:48 localhost kernel: [18097.73] dell_wmi: Received unknown WMI event (0x11) Jul 27 15:40:38 localhost kernel: dell_wmi: Received unknown WMI event (0x11) Jul 27 15:40:41 localhost kernel: dell_wmi: Received unknown WMI event (0x11) So, is fedora going to provide a good interrupt handler to deal with these interrupts and service them correctly the way Dell intended them to be serviced? I wonder how windows handles these. dell-wmi is a kernel module. If this is causing you trouble, file a BZ against the kernel. -- If I wanted a blog or social media I'd go elsewhere -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Update 20 - 22, failure
Hello, Maybe I undertsand. THis is the list of xorg drivers: xorg-x11-drv-wacom-0.23.0-5.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-openchrome-0.3.3-2.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-vmware-13.0.2-4.20140613git82c9b0c.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-vesa-2.3.2-10.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-evdev-2.8.4-1.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-nouveau-1.0.9-2.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-intel-2.21.15-9.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-modesetting-0.8.0-3.fc19.i686 xorg-x11-drv-mga-1.6.2-8.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-qxl-0.1.1-4.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-geode-2.11.17-1.fc22.i686 xorg-x11-drv-ati-7.2.0-3.20131101git3b38701.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-vmmouse-13.0.0-6.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-synaptics-1.7.7-2.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-fbdev-0.4.3-10.fc20.i686 None of them has been updated!! How do I update them? === Patrick DUPRÉ | | email: pdu...@gmx.com Laboratoire de Physico-Chimie de l'Atmosphère | | Université du Littoral-Côte d'Opale | | Tel. (33)-(0)3 28 23 76 12 | | Fax: 03 28 65 82 44 189A, avenue Maurice Schumann | | 59140 Dunkerque, France === -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: No more email from bugzilla.redhat.com if filing a new bug ot modifiying a bug
On 07/29/15 14:04, Joachim Backes wrote: On 29.07.2015 07:53, Joachim Backes wrote: Having suddenly the problem that I get no more emails from bugzilla.redhat.com if filing a new bug or modifying a bug entry. Anybody sees this too? Kind regards Joachim Backes Weird: after opening a BZ for bugzilla itself (because of the described BZ behaviour), I got an email from bugzilla! Should always give the BZ when you take the time to report about one on the list. :-) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1247857 At least we know Bugzilla currently has a large backlog of queued emails after a storage problem earlier today and is struggling to clear the backlog. We are currently monitoring the system and investigating ways to clear the queue faster. -- If I wanted a blog or social media I'd go elsewhere -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora 22 WS live i686 fails
On 07/29/15 01:55, Patrick Dupre wrote: Yes it is an issue between burners. I cannot switch from one (burning) and another one (read)!!! . is this problem reversible? ie, neither can read the other? this is may be due to track alignment between to drives. The reason that I a doing that is the network, good compare with bad! Even if the DVD is checked, it does not mean that it is going to work! . it may be better if you consider using a boot/install usb flash memory. over the past year, i have moved away from optical as i find usb the way to go. i still use dvd to archiving. unetbootlin and live usb creator are great programs to use. dvd's not being from reputable maker can also cause problems. Philips, Imation, Sony? . nothing wrong with those names. maybe age, but not names. same applies to blanks. i have used memorex for years and their optical disk are as good as their magnet tapes that i have used from mid 60's. Is it live, or is it Memorex? a very true slogan. ;-) when buying a new burner, remember you want dvd-r to match dvd-r blanks What does it mean? . thru out my years of playing with computers, i have read many articles on what lead up to the current day optical disk and drives from their first concept during early 70's when i built my first computer, an s100 system. there has been little change from original, but a whole lot of improvement. instead of trying to explain, i believe it would be easier to understand if you rely on the informative from wikipedia.org as it is too much to try to condense in a post. the drive; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_disc_drive the disk; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_disc types of disk; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Optical_storage_media use last link to locate info for the various disk types. -- If Bill Gates got a dime for every time Windows crashes... ...oh, wait. He does. THAT explains it! -+- in a world with out fences, who needs gates. CentOS GNU/Linux 6.6 tc,hago. g . -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Update 20 - 22, failure
On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 11:08:00 +0200, Patrick Dupre wrote: For trouble-shooting Plymouth try booting without rhgb quiet boot parameters. You can remove them inside the GRUB boot menu. I never run with rhgb and quiet option In level 6, it starts Plymouth and stay stocked for ever Again, that's a very poor problem description. now: it is: [ 970.950] Kernel command line: BOOT_IMAGE=/vmlinuz-4.0.4-301.fc22.i686+PAE root=/dev/mapper/VolGrpSys0-root ro vconsole.keymap=fr rd.dm=0 rd.md=0 rd.luks=0 vconsole.font=latarcyrheb-sun16 rd.lvm.lv=VolGrpSys0/root LANG=en_US.UTF-8 3 I take it you haven't tried booting with enforcing=0 yet? After two days of facing boot problems, many a user would reinstall and hope for the best. Trouble-shooting, on the other hand, requires much more activity and interest in attempts at figuring out what the problem might be. Your kernel is not the latest either. It should be possible to update from run-level 3, minimum interest provided. You couldinstall a basic window manager such as Openbox to test how much X will work. Only GNOME's Oh no! message is not helpful at all, unfortunately. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: initial-setup-graphical.service
On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 22:39:54 +0200, Patrick Dupre wrote: Hello, In the manual (Installation Guide for fedora 22, 6.1), it says: You can make it display again (after the next reboot, before a login prompt is displayed), by executing the following command as root systemctl enable initial-setup-graphical.service But the response is: Fails to execute the operation: No such file or directory How could I rerun the Initial Setup? rm ~/.config/gnome-initial-setup-done or by running /usr/libexec/gnome-initial-setup --existing-user -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Update 20 - 22, failure
On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 23:48:01 +0200, Patrick Dupre wrote: Hello, crash means, in running level 3: startx (with a new user) The graphics mode (if there is not xorg.conf.d directory) starts asking about language and keyboard and return to text mode (before, it says, Oh no! etc..) That's a little bit better description. You're starting GNOME Shell, and the Oh no! messages is not from the X server but GNOME. In running level 6. it there is a xorg.conf.d directory the machine need to be unplugged after starting Plymouth For trouble-shooting Plymouth try booting without rhgb quiet boot parameters. You can remove them inside the GRUB boot menu. in the archive I put 5 files The *.OK are files when I run Live the other 2 ones are the ones which fail the machine Have you noticed the different kernel boot parameters? Who added inst.xdriver=vesa to them? And why? Is it like that since your F20? Do you need it? https://wwoods.fedorapeople.org/doc/boot-options.html#_inst_xdriver [90.317] Kernel command line: BOOT_IMAGE=/vmlinuz-4.0.4-301.fc22.i686+PAE root=/dev/mapper/VolGrpSys0-root ro vconsole.keymap=fr rd.dm=0 rd.md=0 rd.luks=0 vconsole.font=latarcyrheb-sun16 rd.lvm.lv=VolGrpSys0/root LANG=en_US.UTF-8 inst.xdriver=vesa Compare with your attached Xorg.1.log.OK (from the live image): [ 648.966] Kernel command line: BOOT_IMAGE=vmlinuz0 initrd=initrd0.img root=live:CDLABEL=Fedora-Live-WS-i686-22-3 rootfstype=auto ro rd.live.image quiet rhgb rd.luks=0 rd.md=0 rd.dm=0 -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Update 20 - 22, failure
=== Patrick DUPRÉ | | email: pdu...@gmx.com Laboratoire de Physico-Chimie de l'Atmosphère | | Université du Littoral-Côte d'Opale | | Tel. (33)-(0)3 28 23 76 12 | | Fax: 03 28 65 82 44 189A, avenue Maurice Schumann | | 59140 Dunkerque, France === Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 10:43 AM From: Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: Update 20 - 22, failure On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 23:48:01 +0200, Patrick Dupre wrote: Hello, crash means, in running level 3: startx (with a new user) The graphics mode (if there is not xorg.conf.d directory) starts asking about language and keyboard and return to text mode (before, it says, Oh no! etc..) That's a little bit better description. You're starting GNOME Shell, and the Oh no! messages is not from the X server but GNOME. In running level 6. it there is a xorg.conf.d directory the machine need to be unplugged after starting Plymouth For trouble-shooting Plymouth try booting without rhgb quiet boot parameters. You can remove them inside the GRUB boot menu. I never run with rhgb and quiet option In level 6, it starts Plymouth and stay stocked for ever in the archive I put 5 files The *.OK are files when I run Live the other 2 ones are the ones which fail the machine Have you noticed the different kernel boot parameters? Who added inst.xdriver=vesa to them? And why? Is it like that since your F20? Do you need it? I tried one time with this option, it did not help. now: it is: [ 970.950] Kernel command line: BOOT_IMAGE=/vmlinuz-4.0.4-301.fc22.i686+PAE root=/dev/mapper/VolGrpSys0-root ro vconsole.keymap=fr rd.dm=0 rd.md=0 rd.luks=0 vconsole.font=latarcyrheb-sun16 rd.lvm.lv=VolGrpSys0/root LANG=en_US.UTF-8 3 https://wwoods.fedorapeople.org/doc/boot-options.html#_inst_xdriver [90.317] Kernel command line: BOOT_IMAGE=/vmlinuz-4.0.4-301.fc22.i686+PAE root=/dev/mapper/VolGrpSys0-root ro vconsole.keymap=fr rd.dm=0 rd.md=0 rd.luks=0 vconsole.font=latarcyrheb-sun16 rd.lvm.lv=VolGrpSys0/root LANG=en_US.UTF-8 inst.xdriver=vesa Compare with your attached Xorg.1.log.OK (from the live image): [ 648.966] Kernel command line: BOOT_IMAGE=vmlinuz0 initrd=initrd0.img root=live:CDLABEL=Fedora-Live-WS-i686-22-3 rootfstype=auto ro rd.live.image quiet rhgb rd.luks=0 rd.md=0 rd.dm=0 I do not see much difference (after removing inst.xdriver=vesa). I also tried to use the file xorg.conf generated by Live, but it does not help. Thank for your help. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
installing Fedora 21 or 22 on a MacBook Air 7,1
Hi! I have been struggling installing Fedora on a friend's MBA as the local SSD doesn't seem to be recognized. I found a few posts online with various degrees of luck, unfortunately they never mentioned with MBA is used and that didn't work for me. Does anyone has (positive?) experience on the topic? Thank you. Fred -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: No more email from bugzilla.redhat.com if filing a new bug ot modifiying a bug
On 29.07.2015 08:04, Joachim Backes wrote: On 29.07.2015 07:53, Joachim Backes wrote: Having suddenly the problem that I get no more emails from bugzilla.redhat.com if filing a new bug or modifying a bug entry. Anybody sees this too? Kind regards Joachim Backes Weird: after opening a BZ for bugzilla itself (because of the described BZ behaviour), I got an email from bugzilla! Getting a reply from BZ: Bugzilla currently has a large backlog of queued emails after a storage problem earlier today and is struggling to clear the backlog. We are currently monitoring the system and investigating ways to clear the queue faster. This explains all. Kind regards Joachim Backes -- Fedora release 22 (Twenty Two) Kernel-4.1.3-200.fc22.x86_64 Joachim Backes joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: FAIL: Thunderbird: Replying to thread
On 29.07.2015, Greg Woods wrote: Stop right there. This unfortunately sounds like a well-known Google-ism. If you send mail to a mailing list that you are on, it does not put the message in your Inbox. Though I'm not a Thunderbird user, I wonder why it shouldn't be able to store a copy of your mail in the INBOX folder. I mean Thunderbird, not Google. After all, IMAP is nothing more than a bunch of directories. Maybe I'm missing something.. Mutt, which is what I'm using, allows specifying where I want to have my sent emails stored (set record), maybe Thunderbird can do the same? Another part of the problem may be that you haven't sorted your listmail into seperate folders. This being the case, your email will be sorted correctly when returned by the listserver.. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: No more email from bugzilla.redhat.com if filing a new bug ot modifiying a bug
On 29.07.2015 07:53, Joachim Backes wrote: Having suddenly the problem that I get no more emails from bugzilla.redhat.com if filing a new bug or modifying a bug entry. Anybody sees this too? Kind regards Joachim Backes Weird: after opening a BZ for bugzilla itself (because of the described BZ behaviour), I got an email from bugzilla! -- Fedora release 22 (Twenty Two) Kernel-4.1.3-200.fc22.x86_64 Joachim Backes joachim.bac...@rhrk.uni-kl.de https://www-user.rhrk.uni-kl.de/~backes -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora 22 WS live i686 fails
Yes it is an issue between burners. I cannot switch from one (burning) and another one (read)!!! The reason that I a doing that is the network, good compare with bad! Even if the DVD is checked, it does not mean that it is going to work! dvd's not being from reputable maker can also cause problems. Philips, Imation, Sony? when buying a new burner, remember you want dvd-r to match dvd-r blanks What does it mean? Thank === Patrick DUPRÉ | | email: pdu...@gmx.com Laboratoire de Physico-Chimie de l'Atmosphère | | Université du Littoral-Côte d'Opale | | Tel. (33)-(0)3 28 23 76 12 | | Fax: 03 28 65 82 44 189A, avenue Maurice Schumann | | 59140 Dunkerque, France === Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 6:16 AM From: g gel...@bellsouth.net To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: Fedora 22 WS live i686 fails On 07/28/15 02:44, Patrick Dupre wrote: On Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 4:46 AM jd1008 wrote On 07/27/2015 08:40 PM, g wrote: On 07/27/15 16:44, Patrick Dupre wrote: Hello, I tried to start Fedora 22 WS live i686 (from a DVD that I burned) on 2 different machines and it failed with the message: Could not boot /dev/disk/by-label/Fedora-Live-WS-i686-22-3 does not exist /dev/mapper/live-rw does not exit I burned 2 DVDs with the same issue! did you run checksum on iso before burning? YES . ok. are you burning cl or gui? GUI (k3d) . ok. try burning at 2 speeds slower to test dvd's and burner. The speed is auto (x4 if I am correct) . such would mean either your burner or dvd's are 4x. if both are above 4x, it would tend to indicate burner problem, or it is an early model. manually drop to 2x to see if new burn will boot. Another check should be done when the dvd is booted and anaconda prompts the user to check the media. If that check fails, then, perhaps a. bad burn It success b. bad media I tried 2 types of media already c. bad download !! d. flaky dvd drive I never had any problem before with this burner or DVDs . a burner can go bad while burning or reading a dvd. more often when burning. main cause of problems is laser fails, usually from higher wattage used during burn. optical disk burners are strange devices with stranger habits. another test is to burn a different live iso. something that you have burned before and had good results, _and_ is of early /dev configuration. because you have 2 machines, try burning dvd on 2nd box. dvd's not being from reputable maker can also cause problems. today's run of dvd-r disk are usually of 16x speed, where as burners are 24x. [do not ask. i wonder why myself.] current prices for good dvd burners are around $20 for internal and external usb. just decide what your time and peace of mind are worth. when buying a new burner, remember you want dvd-r to match dvd-r blanks. -- If Bill Gates got a dime for every time Windows crashes... ...oh, wait. He does. THAT explains it! -+- in a world with out fences, who needs gates. CentOS GNU/Linux 6.6 tc,hago. g . -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: FAIL: Thunderbird: Replying to thread
On 07/29/15 07:02, Greg Woods wrote: On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 4:28 PM, Rich Emberson emberson.r...@gmail.com mailto:emberson.r...@gmail.com wrote: When I reply to a thread using Thunderbird, the response never shows up, but, if I include the email of the person who wrote the thread I am responding to, that person gets the email. On the other hand, if I log in to my gmail account Stop right there. This unfortunately sounds like a well-known Google-ism. If you send mail to a mailing list that you are on, it does not put the message in your Inbox. Our users have complained about this countless times, but Google is a giant and we are small potatoes, so it's not going to change. Yes, I use T-Bird almost exclusively and without issue. A simple way, and the way I use, to fix it is to use gmail's filters to put emails from mailing lists into their own folder and bypass the INBOX. I prefer to do it that way since that is how I've things for a long timedating back to when I ran my own mail server. I also have different retention lengths for various mailing lists which is managed by T-Bird. Why should I archive everything when fedora holds it? :-) Check and see if the messages in question are in your All Mail folder (if you are able to see this through an IMAP connection with Thunderbird). Otherwise you would need to log in to your Gmail account through the browser interface to check. I do manage to get the mailing list mail into my Inbox, but only because I have filters (at Google) that explicitly label the mailing list messages. -- If I wanted a blog or social media I'd go elsewhere -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Update 20 - 22, failure
=== Patrick DUPRÉ | | email: pdu...@gmx.com Laboratoire de Physico-Chimie de l'Atmosphère | | Université du Littoral-Côte d'Opale | | Tel. (33)-(0)3 28 23 76 12 | | Fax: 03 28 65 82 44 189A, avenue Maurice Schumann | | 59140 Dunkerque, France === Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 12:10 PM From: Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: Update 20 - 22, failure On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 11:33:20 +0200, Patrick Dupre wrote: Hello, Maybe I undertsand. THis is the list of xorg drivers: xorg-x11-drv-wacom-0.23.0-5.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-openchrome-0.3.3-2.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-vmware-13.0.2-4.20140613git82c9b0c.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-vesa-2.3.2-10.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-evdev-2.8.4-1.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-nouveau-1.0.9-2.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-intel-2.21.15-9.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-modesetting-0.8.0-3.fc19.i686 xorg-x11-drv-mga-1.6.2-8.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-qxl-0.1.1-4.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-geode-2.11.17-1.fc22.i686 xorg-x11-drv-ati-7.2.0-3.20131101git3b38701.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-vmmouse-13.0.0-6.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-synaptics-1.7.7-2.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-fbdev-0.4.3-10.fc20.i686 None of them has been updated!! Didn't you say you upgraded from F20 to F22? How did you do that? YES How do I update them? On Run-level 3: dnf update Dependencies resolved. Nothing to do. Complete! or: dnf distro-sync Last metadata expiration check performed 1:03:22 ago on Wed Jul 29 11:16:10 2015. Error: package directfb-1.6.2-3.fc19.i686 requires libmng.so.1, but none of the providers can be installed. package pdftk-1.44-11.fc19.i686 requires itext(x86-32) = 2.1.7-6, but none of the providers can be installed Also verify dnf repolist and /etc/fedora-release so that you're really using Fedora 22 repos. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Update 20 - 22, failure
Extra Packages AdobeReader_enu.i4869.5.5-1 @System PyOpenGL.noarch 3.1.0b2-1.fc20 @System SOAPpy.noarch 0.11.6-17.fc20 @System adobe-release-i386.noarch 1.0-1@System aic94xx-firmware.noarch 30-6.fc20@System anaconda-yum-plugins.noarch 1:1.0-10.fc20@System automake14.noarch 1.4p6-24.fc19@System automake17.noarch 1.7.9-18.fc19@System bijiben.i6863.10.2-1.fc20@System brasero.i6863.10.0-1.fc20@System brasero-nautilus.i686 3.10.0-1.fc20@System btparser.i686 0.26-1.fc19 @System caribou.i6860.4.13-1.fc20@System caribou-gtk2-module.i6860.4.13-1.fc20@System caribou-gtk3-module.i6860.4.13-1.fc20@System celt.i686 0.11.3-1.fc20@System cheese.i686 2:3.10.2-2.fc20 @System cheese-libs.i6862:3.10.2-2.fc20 @System clutter.i6861.16.2-4.fc20@System clutter-gst2.i686 2.0.10-1.fc20@System clutter-gtk.i6861.4.4-3.fc20 @System cogl.i686 1.16.0-3.fc20@System control-center.i686 1:3.10.4-1.fc20 @System control-center-filesystem.i686 1:3.10.4-1.fc20 @System cpan2rpm.noarch 2.028-1 @System directfb.i686 1.6.2-3.fc19 @System empathy.i6863.10.3-2.fc20@System eog.i6863.10.2-1.fc20@System evince.i686 3.10.3-2.fc20@System evince-dvi.i686 3.10.3-2.fc20@System evince-libs.i6863.10.3-2.fc20@System evince-nautilus.i6863.10.3-2.fc20@System evolution.i686 3.10.4-4.fc20@System evolution-data-server.i686 3.10.4-7.fc20@System evolution-ews.i686 3.10.4-1.fc20@System evolution-help.noarch 3.10.4-4.fc20@System evolution-perl.i686 3.10.4-4.fc20@System farstream02.i6860.2.3-3.fc20 @System fedora-package-config-smart.i68613.89-25 @System ffmpeg-libs.i6862.1.8-1.fc20 @System flash-plugin.i386 11.2.202.491-release @System folks.i686 1:0.9.6-2.fc20 @System freeimage.i686 3.10.0-16.fc20 @System freerdp.i6861:1.0.2-6.fc20 @System freerdp-libs.i686 1:1.0.2-6.fc20 @System freerdp-plugins.i6861:1.0.2-6.fc20 @System gdm.i6861:3.10.0.1-1.fc20@System gdm-libs.i686 1:3.10.0.1-1.fc20@System giac.i386 1.1.0-1 @System gimp.i686 2:2.8.14-1.fc20 @System gimp-libs.i686 2:2.8.14-1.fc20 @System gnome-bluetooth.i6861:3.10.0-1.fc20 @System gnome-bluetooth-libs.i686 1:3.10.0-1.fc20 @System gnome-boxes.i6863.10.2-3.fc20@System gnome-clocks.i686 3.10.1-1.fc20@System gnome-contacts.i686 3.10.2-1.fc20@System gnome-desktop3.i686 3.10.2-3.fc20@System gnome-documents.i6863.10.3-1.fc20@System gnome-font-viewer.i686 3.10.0-1.fc20@System gnome-initial-setup.i6863.10.1.1-4.fc20 @System gnome-nettool.i686 3.8.1-2.fc20 @System gnome-online-miners.i686
Re: Update 20 - 22, failure
On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 12:52:57 +0200, Patrick Dupre wrote: parts of the output (rpm --last) According to that output, you have installed updates over the past two days. Surprise, surprise! kernel-tools-4.1.2-200.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:18:06 PM CEST kernel-tools-libs-4.1.2-200.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:18:05 PM CEST kernel-PAE-devel-4.1.2-200.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:16:42 PM CEST kernel-headers-4.1.2-200.fc22.i686Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:16:10 PM CEST That's the latest for F22. And 4.1.3 is in updates-testing. But why do you boot 4.0.4-301.fc22 then? Time to check your boot loader menu, too. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Update 20 - 22, failure
OK, I guess that I got it: dnf remove kernel-PAE-modules-extra-3.19.8-100.fc20.i686 dnf remove directfb dnf remove pdftk and now it is installing the updated packages === Patrick DUPRÉ | | email: pdu...@gmx.com Laboratoire de Physico-Chimie de l'Atmosphère | | Université du Littoral-Côte d'Opale | | Tel. (33)-(0)3 28 23 76 12 | | Fax: 03 28 65 82 44 189A, avenue Maurice Schumann | | 59140 Dunkerque, France === Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 1:57 PM From: Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: Update 20 - 22, failure On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 13:48:28 +0200, Patrick Dupre wrote: I run: dnf remove xorg-x11-drv-ati and then: dnf install xorg-x11-drv-ati Last metadata expiration check performed 2:29:58 ago on Wed Jul 29 11:16:10 2015. Error: package xorg-x11-drv-ati-7.5.0-3.fc22.i686 requires xserver-abi(videodrv-19) = 0, but none of the providers can be installed It is not wise to break your installation further. If that package cannot be update automatically, removing it won't fix anything, since removing it doesn't fix the dependency problems. You could try: dnf update --best and if that also fails, examine your installation for retired/broken packages: dnf repoquery --unsatisfied dnf repoquery --duplicated -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Update 20 - 22, failure
On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 13:55:47 +0200, Patrick Dupre wrote: Is it the same when you run dnf distro-sync? Error: package directfb-1.6.2-3.fc19.i686 requires libmng.so.1, but none of the providers can be installed. package pdftk-1.44-11.fc19.i686 requires itext(x86-32) = 2.1.7-6, but none of the providers can be installed I told you before that these do not exist anymore and have been retired _after_ Fedora 19. You *cannot* keep them if they cause dep breakage: dnf remove directfb pdftk dnf distro-sync nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerpro-common-192-13.1-5.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerpro-devel-192-13.1-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerpro-vars-192-13.1-5.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerproc-192-13.1-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerproc-common-192-13.1-5.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerproc-devel-192-13.1-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerprof-192-13.1-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerprof-common-192-13.1-5.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerprof-devel-192-13.1-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-idb-192-13.0-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-idb-common-192-13.0-5.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-idbcdt-192-13.0-5.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-ipp-192-7.1-1.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-ipp-common-192-7.1-1.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-ipp-devel-192-7.1-1.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-mkl-192-11.0-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-mkl-common-192-11.0-5.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-mkl-devel-192-11.0-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-openmp-192-13.1-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-openmp-devel-192-13.1-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-sourcechecker-common-192-13.1-5.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-sourcechecker-devel-192-13.1-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-tbb-192-4.1-4.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-tbb-devel-192-4.1-4.noarch These are not from Fedora, are they? You may need to deal with them, too, as long as they cause dependency problems. dnf repoquery --duplicated kernel-PAE-0:3.19.8-100.fc20.i686 kernel-PAE-0:4.0.4-301.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-devel-0:3.19.8-100.fc20.i686 kernel-PAE-devel-0:4.0.4-301.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-devel-0:4.0.8-300.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-devel-0:4.1.2-200.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-modules-extra-0:3.19.8-100.fc20.i686 kernel-PAE-modules-extra-0:4.0.4-301.fc22.i686 Well, okay for now, cleaning up wouldn't hurt but normally three kernels are kept automatically only anyway. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Update 20 - 22, failure
On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 11:33:20 +0200, Patrick Dupre wrote: Hello, Maybe I undertsand. THis is the list of xorg drivers: xorg-x11-drv-wacom-0.23.0-5.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-openchrome-0.3.3-2.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-vmware-13.0.2-4.20140613git82c9b0c.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-vesa-2.3.2-10.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-evdev-2.8.4-1.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-nouveau-1.0.9-2.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-intel-2.21.15-9.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-modesetting-0.8.0-3.fc19.i686 xorg-x11-drv-mga-1.6.2-8.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-qxl-0.1.1-4.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-geode-2.11.17-1.fc22.i686 xorg-x11-drv-ati-7.2.0-3.20131101git3b38701.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-vmmouse-13.0.0-6.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-synaptics-1.7.7-2.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-fbdev-0.4.3-10.fc20.i686 None of them has been updated!! Didn't you say you upgraded from F20 to F22? How did you do that? How do I update them? On Run-level 3: dnf update or: dnf distro-sync Also verify dnf repolist and /etc/fedora-release so that you're really using Fedora 22 repos. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Update 20 - 22, failure
On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 12:20:13 +0200, Patrick Dupre wrote: xorg-x11-drv-ati-7.2.0-3.20131101git3b38701.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-vmmouse-13.0.0-6.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-synaptics-1.7.7-2.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-fbdev-0.4.3-10.fc20.i686 None of them has been updated!! Didn't you say you upgraded from F20 to F22? How did you do that? YES _HOW_ exactly? With a tool like fedup? On Run-level 3: dnf update Dependencies resolved. Nothing to do. Complete! Have you had a look at rpm -qa --last yet? What does it tell? You can redirect the output to a file or a pipe, such as rpm -qa --last output.txt rpm -qa --last|less and show it. or: dnf distro-sync Last metadata expiration check performed 1:03:22 ago on Wed Jul 29 11:16:10 2015. Error: package directfb-1.6.2-3.fc19.i686 requires libmng.so.1, but none of the providers can be installed. package pdftk-1.44-11.fc19.i686 requires itext(x86-32) = 2.1.7-6, but none of the providers can be installed directfb has been retired after Fedora 19: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/directfb.git/plain/dead.package pdftk has been retired after Fedora 19, too: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/pdftk.git/plain/dead.package It seems you haven't cleaned up your installation for a very long time. There have been tools to do that. Even yum list extras has been popular. dnf list extras also exists. Also verify dnf repolist and /etc/fedora-release so that you're really using Fedora 22 repos. Did you ignore this step deliberately? -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Update 20 - 22, failure
On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 13:02:27 +0200, Patrick Dupre wrote: Extra Packages Irrelevant. As explained, your installation _must_ be up-to-date before this command makes sense. Not all old updates are kept in the repos, so the command would complain about old updates found on your machine when you don't update to the latest updates. xorg-x11-drv-ati.i686 7.2.0-3.20131101git3b38701.fc20 @System Focus on this one, please, as it is the driver you need: rpm -qa xorg-x11-drv-ati\* If you get duplicates, look at bottom of man yum2dnf and run commands to _clean up_ duplicates. If you get only a single package, try further to update your installation. The driver package is xorg-x11-drv-ati-7.5.0-3.fc22 or higher for F22: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=610865 If dnf update still doesn't update those packages, show some basic queries, such as dnf list xorg-x11-drv-ati, dnf repolist and try dnf update xorg-x11\* too -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: installing Fedora 21 or 22 on a MacBook Air 7,1
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 04:41:04PM +0700, Frederic Muller wrote: Hi! I have been struggling installing Fedora on a friend's MBA as the local SSD doesn't seem to be recognized. I found a few posts online with various degrees of luck, unfortunately they never mentioned with MBA is used and that didn't work for me. I'm not a Mac user, but knowing what you tried might give others some ideas what you could try. -- Suvayu Open source is the future. It sets us free. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Update 20 - 22, failure
hello, Sorry, but the file is huge even after compression. It has been through the moderator! How can I help? === Patrick DUPRÉ | | email: pdu...@gmx.com Laboratoire de Physico-Chimie de l'Atmosphère | | Université du Littoral-Côte d'Opale | | Tel. (33)-(0)3 28 23 76 12 | | Fax: 03 28 65 82 44 189A, avenue Maurice Schumann | | 59140 Dunkerque, France === Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 12:29 PM From: Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: Update 20 - 22, failure On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 12:20:13 +0200, Patrick Dupre wrote: xorg-x11-drv-ati-7.2.0-3.20131101git3b38701.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-vmmouse-13.0.0-6.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-synaptics-1.7.7-2.fc20.i686 xorg-x11-drv-fbdev-0.4.3-10.fc20.i686 None of them has been updated!! Didn't you say you upgraded from F20 to F22? How did you do that? YES fedup --device /dev/sr0 --product=nonproduct yum update dnf update _HOW_ exactly? With a tool like fedup? On Run-level 3: dnf update Dependencies resolved. Nothing to do. Complete! Have you had a look at rpm -qa --last yet? What does it tell? You can redirect the output to a file or a pipe, such as rpm -qa --last output.txt rpm -qa --last|less and show it. or: dnf distro-sync Last metadata expiration check performed 1:03:22 ago on Wed Jul 29 11:16:10 2015. Error: package directfb-1.6.2-3.fc19.i686 requires libmng.so.1, but none of the providers can be installed. package pdftk-1.44-11.fc19.i686 requires itext(x86-32) = 2.1.7-6, but none of the providers can be installed directfb has been retired after Fedora 19: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/directfb.git/plain/dead.package pdftk has been retired after Fedora 19, too: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/pdftk.git/plain/dead.package It seems you haven't cleaned up your installation for a very long time. There have been tools to do that. Even yum list extras has been popular. dnf list extras also exists. Also verify dnf repolist and /etc/fedora-release so that you're really using Fedora 22 repos. Did you ignore this step deliberately? -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Update 20 - 22, failure
parts of the output (rpm --last) allegro-4.4.2-13.fc22.i686Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:18:21 PM CEST coolkey-1.1.0-27.fc22.i686Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:18:20 PM CEST goffice-0.10.22-2.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:18:19 PM CEST iw-4.1-1.fc22.i686Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:18:17 PM CEST libidn-1.31-1.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:18:16 PM CEST pam_pkcs11-0.6.8-6.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:18:15 PM CEST perl-Params-Validate-1.20-1.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:18:14 PM CEST wpa_supplicant-2.4-4.fc22.i686Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:18:13 PM CEST wpa_supplicant-gui-2.4-4.fc22.i686Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:18:12 PM CEST avahi-autoipd-0.6.31-32.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:18:12 PM CEST avahi-0.6.31-32.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:18:10 PM CEST avahi-ui-gtk3-0.6.31-32.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:18:09 PM CEST avahi-gobject-0.6.31-32.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:18:09 PM CEST audit-libs-python-2.4.3-1.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:18:08 PM CEST audit-2.4.3-1.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:18:08 PM CEST livecd-tools-22.2-1.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:18:06 PM CEST kernel-tools-4.1.2-200.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:18:06 PM CEST kernel-tools-libs-4.1.2-200.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:18:05 PM CEST parted-3.2-9.fc22.i686Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:18:04 PM CEST audit-libs-2.4.3-1.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:18:03 PM CEST avahi-libs-0.6.31-32.fc22.i686Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:18:02 PM CEST avahi-glib-0.6.31-32.fc22.i686Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:18:02 PM CEST kernel-PAE-devel-4.1.2-200.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:16:42 PM CEST dnf-langpacks-0.12.0-2.fc22.noarchWed 29 Jul 2015 12:16:13 PM CEST kernel-headers-4.1.2-200.fc22.i686Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:16:10 PM CEST hplip-gui-3.15.7-1.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:16:08 PM CEST debhelper-9.20150507-2.fc22.noarchWed 29 Jul 2015 12:16:06 PM CEST dpkg-dev-1.17.25-3.fc22.noarchWed 29 Jul 2015 12:16:04 PM CEST python-imgcreate-22.2-1.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:16:03 PM CEST libsane-hpaio-3.15.7-1.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:16:03 PM CEST hplip-3.15.7-1.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:16:02 PM CEST hplip-compat-libs-3.15.7-1.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:15:59 PM CEST hpijs-3.15.7-1.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:15:54 PM CEST hplip-libs-3.15.7-1.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:15:51 PM CEST hplip-common-3.15.7-1.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:15:50 PM CEST xvidcore-1.3.2-6.fc22.i686Tue 28 Jul 2015 12:19:44 AM CEST xorg-x11-drv-geode-2.11.17-1.fc22.i686Tue 28 Jul 2015 12:19:43 AM CEST wput-0.6.1-15.fc22.i686 Tue 28 Jul 2015 12:19:41 AM CEST whois-5.2.9-1.fc22.i686 Tue 28 Jul 2015 12:19:39 AM CEST whereami-1.0-9.fc22.i686 Tue 28 Jul 2015 12:19:39 AM CEST vo-amrwbenc-0.1.2-2.fc22.i686 Tue 28 Jul 2015 12:19:38 AM CEST twolame-libs-0.3.13-4.fc22.i686 Tue 28 Jul 2015 12:19:37 AM CEST tslib-1.0-9.fc22.i686 Tue 28 Jul 2015 12:19:36 AM CEST tmpwatch-2.11-6.fc22.i686 Tue 28 Jul 2015 12:19:35 AM CEST gpg-pubkey-246110c1-51954fca Tue 07 Jan 2014 11:22:10 PM CET libcddb-1.3.2-12.fc20.i686Mon 06 Jan 2014 11:17:51 PM CET libmng-1.0.10-12.fc20.i686Mon 06 Jan 2014 11:17:36 PM CET prelink-0.5.0-1.fc20.i686 Mon 06 Jan 2014 11:17:14 PM CET xorg-x11-drv-vmmouse-13.0.0-6.fc20.i686 Mon 06 Jan 2014 11:13:18 PM CET xorg-x11-drv-vesa-2.3.2-10.fc20.i686 Mon 06 Jan 2014 11:13:17 PM CET xorg-x11-drv-fbdev-0.4.3-10.fc20.i686 Mon 06 Jan 2014 11:13:16 PM CET xorg-x11-drv-nouveau-1.0.9-2.fc20.i686Mon 06 Jan 2014 11:13:15 PM CET xorg-x11-drv-mga-1.6.2-8.fc20.i686Mon 06 Jan 2014 11:13:15 PM CET xorg-x11-drv-openchrome-0.3.3-2.fc20.i686 Mon 06 Jan 2014 11:13:14 PM CET sushi-3.10.0-1.fc20.i686 Mon 06 Jan 2014 11:10:48 PM CET totem-mozplugin-3.10.1-1.fc20.i686Mon 06 Jan 2014 11:09:57 PM CET gnome-system-monitor-3.10.2-1.fc20.i686 Mon 06 Jan 2014 11:09:51 PM CET gnome-font-viewer-3.10.0-1.fc20.i686 Mon 06 Jan 2014 11:09:12 PM CET eog-3.10.2-1.fc20.i686Mon 06 Jan 2014 11:09:10 PM CET vinagre-3.10.2-1.fc20.i686Mon 06 Jan 2014 11:08:30 PM CET xorg-x11-drv-ati-7.2.0-3.20131101git3b38701.fc20.i686 Mon 06 Jan 2014 11:08:27 PM CET gnome-clocks-3.10.1-1.fc20.i686 Mon 06 Jan 2014 11:07:29 PM CET
Re: Update 20 - 22, failure
There are several issues: kernel-PAE-4.1.2-200.fc22.i686 has not been installed! rpm -qa |grep kernel libreport-plugin-kerneloops-2.6.1-1.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-modules-extra-4.0.4-301.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-devel-4.0.4-301.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-devel-4.1.2-200.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-core-4.0.4-301.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-3.19.8-100.fc20.i686 kernel-tools-4.1.2-200.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-devel-4.0.8-300.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-modules-4.0.4-301.fc22.i686 kernel-tools-libs-4.1.2-200.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-4.0.4-301.fc22.i686 texlive-l3kernel-svn32599.SVN_4646-8.fc22.noarch abrt-addon-kerneloops-2.6.1-1.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-modules-extra-3.19.8-100.fc20.i686 kernel-core-4.0.4-301.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-devel-3.19.8-100.fc20.i686 kernel-headers-4.1.2-200.fc22.i686 kernel-doc-3.19.8-100.fc20.noarch === Patrick DUPRÉ | | email: pdu...@gmx.com Laboratoire de Physico-Chimie de l'Atmosphère | | Université du Littoral-Côte d'Opale | | Tel. (33)-(0)3 28 23 76 12 | | Fax: 03 28 65 82 44 189A, avenue Maurice Schumann | | 59140 Dunkerque, France === Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 1:09 PM From: Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: Update 20 - 22, failure On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 13:02:27 +0200, Patrick Dupre wrote: Extra Packages Irrelevant. As explained, your installation _must_ be up-to-date before this command makes sense. Not all old updates are kept in the repos, so the command would complain about old updates found on your machine when you don't update to the latest updates. xorg-x11-drv-ati.i686 7.2.0-3.20131101git3b38701.fc20 @System Focus on this one, please, as it is the driver you need: rpm -qa xorg-x11-drv-ati\* If you get duplicates, look at bottom of man yum2dnf and run commands to _clean up_ duplicates. If you get only a single package, try further to update your installation. Yes only one but I cannot update it with dnf. I could do it manually, there we need to understand why the update does not work properly Dependencies resolved. Nothing to do. Complete! The driver package is xorg-x11-drv-ati-7.5.0-3.fc22 or higher for F22: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=610865 If dnf update still doesn't update those packages, show some basic queries, such as dnf list xorg-x11-drv-ati, Installed Packages xorg-x11-drv-ati.i686 7.2.0-3.20131101git3b38701.fc20 @System Available Packages xorg-x11-drv-ati.i686 7.5.0-3.fc22 fedora dnf repolist and try repolist Last metadata expiration check performed 2:13:06 ago on Wed Jul 29 11:16:10 2015. repo idrepo name status *fedoraFedora 22 - i386 37,654 rpmfusion-free RPM Fusion for Fedora 22 - Free 418 rpmfusion-free-updates RPM Fusion for Fedora 22 - Free - Updates 18 rpmfusion-nonfree RPM Fusion for Fedora 22 - Nonfree161 rpmfusion-nonfree-updates RPM Fusion for Fedora 22 - Nonfree - Updates 13 *updates Fedora 22 - i386 - Updates 6,203 Are the * OK? dnf update xorg-x11\* too ackage xorg-x11-twm not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-drv-intel-devel not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-fonts-ISO8859-9-100dpi not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-drv-voodoo not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-drv-nvidia-304xx not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-xdm not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-xfs not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-drv-nvidia-340xx-cuda not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-xsm not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-drv-nvidia-devel not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-drv-nvidia-340xx not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-server-Xwayland not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-util-macros not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-drv-nvidia not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-fonts-ISO8859-14-75dpi not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-server-Xdmx not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-drv-libinput not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-drv-dummy not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-fonts-ISO8859-2-100dpi not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-fonts-ISO8859-14-100dpi not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-xfs-utils not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-drivers not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-docs not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-drv-nvidia-304xx-libs not installed,
Re: Update 20 - 22, failure
I run: dnf remove xorg-x11-drv-ati and then: dnf install xorg-x11-drv-ati Last metadata expiration check performed 2:29:58 ago on Wed Jul 29 11:16:10 2015. Error: package xorg-x11-drv-ati-7.5.0-3.fc22.i686 requires xserver-abi(videodrv-19) = 0, but none of the providers can be installed === Patrick DUPRÉ | | email: pdu...@gmx.com Laboratoire de Physico-Chimie de l'Atmosphère | | Université du Littoral-Côte d'Opale | | Tel. (33)-(0)3 28 23 76 12 | | Fax: 03 28 65 82 44 189A, avenue Maurice Schumann | | 59140 Dunkerque, France === Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 1:32 PM From: Patrick Dupre pdu...@gmx.com To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Cc: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: Update 20 - 22, failure There are several issues: kernel-PAE-4.1.2-200.fc22.i686 has not been installed! rpm -qa |grep kernel libreport-plugin-kerneloops-2.6.1-1.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-modules-extra-4.0.4-301.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-devel-4.0.4-301.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-devel-4.1.2-200.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-core-4.0.4-301.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-3.19.8-100.fc20.i686 kernel-tools-4.1.2-200.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-devel-4.0.8-300.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-modules-4.0.4-301.fc22.i686 kernel-tools-libs-4.1.2-200.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-4.0.4-301.fc22.i686 texlive-l3kernel-svn32599.SVN_4646-8.fc22.noarch abrt-addon-kerneloops-2.6.1-1.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-modules-extra-3.19.8-100.fc20.i686 kernel-core-4.0.4-301.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-devel-3.19.8-100.fc20.i686 kernel-headers-4.1.2-200.fc22.i686 kernel-doc-3.19.8-100.fc20.noarch === Patrick DUPRÉ | | email: pdu...@gmx.com Laboratoire de Physico-Chimie de l'Atmosphère | | Université du Littoral-Côte d'Opale | | Tel. (33)-(0)3 28 23 76 12 | | Fax: 03 28 65 82 44 189A, avenue Maurice Schumann | | 59140 Dunkerque, France === Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 1:09 PM From: Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: Update 20 - 22, failure On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 13:02:27 +0200, Patrick Dupre wrote: Extra Packages Irrelevant. As explained, your installation _must_ be up-to-date before this command makes sense. Not all old updates are kept in the repos, so the command would complain about old updates found on your machine when you don't update to the latest updates. xorg-x11-drv-ati.i686 7.2.0-3.20131101git3b38701.fc20 @System Focus on this one, please, as it is the driver you need: rpm -qa xorg-x11-drv-ati\* If you get duplicates, look at bottom of man yum2dnf and run commands to _clean up_ duplicates. If you get only a single package, try further to update your installation. Yes only one but I cannot update it with dnf. I could do it manually, there we need to understand why the update does not work properly Dependencies resolved. Nothing to do. Complete! The driver package is xorg-x11-drv-ati-7.5.0-3.fc22 or higher for F22: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=610865 If dnf update still doesn't update those packages, show some basic queries, such as dnf list xorg-x11-drv-ati, Installed Packages xorg-x11-drv-ati.i686 7.2.0-3.20131101git3b38701.fc20 @System Available Packages xorg-x11-drv-ati.i686 7.5.0-3.fc22 fedora dnf repolist and try repolist Last metadata expiration check performed 2:13:06 ago on Wed Jul 29 11:16:10 2015. repo idrepo name status *fedoraFedora 22 - i386 37,654 rpmfusion-free RPM Fusion for Fedora 22 - Free 418 rpmfusion-free-updates RPM Fusion for Fedora 22 - Free - Updates 18 rpmfusion-nonfree RPM Fusion for Fedora 22 - Nonfree 161 rpmfusion-nonfree-updates RPM Fusion for Fedora 22 - Nonfree - Updates 13 *updates Fedora 22 - i386 - Updates 6,203 Are the * OK? dnf update xorg-x11\* too ackage xorg-x11-twm not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-drv-intel-devel not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-fonts-ISO8859-9-100dpi not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-drv-voodoo not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-drv-nvidia-304xx not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-xdm not installed, cannot update it. Package xorg-x11-xfs not installed, cannot update it.
Re: Update 20 - 22, failure
=== Patrick DUPRÉ | | email: pdu...@gmx.com Laboratoire de Physico-Chimie de l'Atmosphère | | Université du Littoral-Côte d'Opale | | Tel. (33)-(0)3 28 23 76 12 | | Fax: 03 28 65 82 44 189A, avenue Maurice Schumann | | 59140 Dunkerque, France === Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 1:50 PM From: Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: Update 20 - 22, failure On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 13:32:49 +0200, Patrick Dupre wrote: Dependencies resolved. Nothing to do. Complete! This is a major misdesign of dnf. It hides some problems and tries to be helpful, but the confusion that causes can be highly problematic in cases such as yours. It is a known issue. DNF developers are aware of it. Is it the same when you run dnf distro-sync? Error: package directfb-1.6.2-3.fc19.i686 requires libmng.so.1, but none of the providers can be installed. package pdftk-1.44-11.fc19.i686 requires itext(x86-32) = 2.1.7-6, but none of the providers can be installed What do you get for: dnf repoquery --unsatisfied Last metadata expiration check performed 2:37:06 ago on Wed Jul 29 11:16:10 2015. nothing provides libHalf.so.6 needed by freeimage-3.10.0-16.fc20.i686 nothing provides libpackagekit-glib2.so.16 needed by gnome-settings-daemon-updates-3.10.3-2.fc20.i686 nothing provides libgcrypt.so.11 needed by grilo-plugins-0.2.9-3.fc20.i686 nothing provides libgphoto2_port.so.10 needed by gvfs-gphoto2-1.18.4-1.fc20.i686 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerpro-common-192-13.1-5.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerpro-devel-192-13.1-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerpro-vars-192-13.1-5.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerproc-192-13.1-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerproc-common-192-13.1-5.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerproc-devel-192-13.1-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerprof-192-13.1-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerprof-common-192-13.1-5.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerprof-devel-192-13.1-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-idb-192-13.0-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-idb-common-192-13.0-5.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-idbcdt-192-13.0-5.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-ipp-192-7.1-1.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-ipp-common-192-7.1-1.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-ipp-devel-192-7.1-1.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-mkl-192-11.0-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-mkl-common-192-11.0-5.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-mkl-devel-192-11.0-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-openmp-192-13.1-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-openmp-devel-192-13.1-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-sourcechecker-common-192-13.1-5.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-sourcechecker-devel-192-13.1-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-tbb-192-4.1-4.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-tbb-devel-192-4.1-4.noarch nothing provides libgcj_bc.so.1 needed by itext-2.1.7-21.fc20.i686 nothing provides /usr/lib/security/classpath.security needed by java-1.5.0-gcj-1.5.0.0-45.fc20.i686 nothing provides java-1.8.0-openjdk = 1:1.8.0.45-36.b13.fc22 needed by java-1.8.0-openjdk-devel-1:1.8.0.45-36.b13.fc22.i686 nothing provides libgcrypt.so.11 needed by libimobiledevice-1.1.6-2.fc20.i686 nothing provides libgcj.so.14 needed by pdftk-1.44-11.fc19.i686 nothing provides perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.18.2) needed by perl-Chart-Clicker-2.86-1.fc20.noarch nothing provides perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.18.2) needed by perl-Chart-GRACE-0.95-1.fc20.noarch nothing provides perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.18.2) needed by perl-Color-Scheme-1.05-1.fc20.noarch nothing provides perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.18.2) needed by perl-Forest-0.10-1.fc20.noarch nothing provides perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.18.2) needed by perl-Geometry-Primitive-0.22-1.fc20.noarch nothing provides perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.18.2) needed by perl-Graphics-Color-0.29-1.fc20.noarch nothing provides perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.18.2) needed by perl-Graphics-Primitive-0.61-1.fc20.noarch nothing provides perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.18.2) needed by perl-Graphics-Primitive-Driver-Cairo-0.44-1.fc20.noarch nothing provides perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.18.2) needed by perl-Layout-Manager-0.34-1.fc20.noarch nothing provides perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.18.2) needed by perl-Math-GSL-0.27-1.fc20.i686 nothing provides perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.18.2) needed by perl-Math-Integral-Romberg-0.04-1.fc20.noarch nothing provides perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.18.2) needed by
Re: Update 20 - 22, failure
=== Patrick DUPRÉ | | email: pdu...@gmx.com Laboratoire de Physico-Chimie de l'Atmosphère | | Université du Littoral-Côte d'Opale | | Tel. (33)-(0)3 28 23 76 12 | | Fax: 03 28 65 82 44 189A, avenue Maurice Schumann | | 59140 Dunkerque, France === Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 1:02 PM From: Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: Update 20 - 22, failure On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 12:52:57 +0200, Patrick Dupre wrote: parts of the output (rpm --last) According to that output, you have installed updates over the past two days. Surprise, surprise! kernel-tools-4.1.2-200.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:18:06 PM CEST kernel-tools-libs-4.1.2-200.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:18:05 PM CEST kernel-PAE-devel-4.1.2-200.fc22.i686 Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:16:42 PM CEST kernel-headers-4.1.2-200.fc22.i686Wed 29 Jul 2015 12:16:10 PM CEST I just installed them, and have not reboot yet I am going to reboot. That's the latest for F22. And 4.1.3 is in updates-testing. But why do you boot 4.0.4-301.fc22 then? Time to check your boot loader menu, too. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Update 20 - 22, failure
On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 13:32:49 +0200, Patrick Dupre wrote: Dependencies resolved. Nothing to do. Complete! This is a major misdesign of dnf. It hides some problems and tries to be helpful, but the confusion that causes can be highly problematic in cases such as yours. It is a known issue. DNF developers are aware of it. Is it the same when you run dnf distro-sync? What do you get for: dnf repoquery --unsatisfied dnf repoquery --duplicated dnf repolist and try repolist Last metadata expiration check performed 2:13:06 ago on Wed Jul 29 11:16:10 2015. repo idrepo name status *fedoraFedora 22 - i386 37,654 rpmfusion-free RPM Fusion for Fedora 22 - Free 418 rpmfusion-free-updates RPM Fusion for Fedora 22 - Free - Updates 18 rpmfusion-nonfree RPM Fusion for Fedora 22 - Nonfree 161 rpmfusion-nonfree-updates RPM Fusion for Fedora 22 - Nonfree - Updates 13 *updates Fedora 22 - i386 - Updates 6,203 Are the * OK? Yes. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Update 20 - 22, failure
On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 13:48:28 +0200, Patrick Dupre wrote: I run: dnf remove xorg-x11-drv-ati and then: dnf install xorg-x11-drv-ati Last metadata expiration check performed 2:29:58 ago on Wed Jul 29 11:16:10 2015. Error: package xorg-x11-drv-ati-7.5.0-3.fc22.i686 requires xserver-abi(videodrv-19) = 0, but none of the providers can be installed It is not wise to break your installation further. If that package cannot be update automatically, removing it won't fix anything, since removing it doesn't fix the dependency problems. You could try: dnf update --best and if that also fails, examine your installation for retired/broken packages: dnf repoquery --unsatisfied dnf repoquery --duplicated -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Update 20 - 22, failure
On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 12:48:21 +0200, Patrick Dupre wrote: hello, Sorry, but the file is huge even after compression. It has been through the moderator! How can I help? I've mentioned http://fpaste.org multiple times before. From rpm -qa --last output, only the top few pages would be interesting. And dnf list extras output (or output from package-cleanup replacement, see bottom of man yum2dnf) is only relevant if your installation is fully updated. Only then it can discover retired packages and packages missing in the repos. fedup --device /dev/sr0 --product=nonproduct yum update dnf update Without paying attention to the output? ;-) Keep trying. Remove retired packages. Run dnf update again. Watch out for dependency problems due to your ancient installation. Remove problematic packages. Run dnf update again. Rinse repeat. Take a look at man yum2dnf, too. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora 22 WS live i686 fails
On 07/29/15 03:34, g wrote: when buying a new burner, remember you want dvd-r to match dvd-r blanks What does it mean? thru out my years of playing with computers, i have read many articles on what lead up to the current day optical disk and drives from their first concept during early 70's when i built my first computer, an s100 system. there has been little change from original, but a whole lot of improvement. instead of trying to explain, i believe it would be easier to understand if you rely on the informative from wikipedia.org as it is too much to try to condense in a post. the drive; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_disc_drive the disk; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_disc types of disk; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Optical_storage_media use last link to locate info for the various disk types. i woke up a couple hours ago and thought i would do some searching for dvd-r and dvd+r, both drives and disks. nothing new, dvd+r still has a different/better format than dvd-r. :-) also did some searching on drives to find that with today's newer drives, there is a greater availability of drives with combinations of r/w, -r/+r, as well as 'dual layer', blu-ray and hd. so, if you go with a new drive, note what type it is and that you can still use disks that you have. as for disk media, it seems that better quality disks are still from japan. -- If Bill Gates got a dime for every time Windows crashes... ...oh, wait. He does. THAT explains it! -+- in a world with out fences, who needs gates. CentOS GNU/Linux 6.6 tc,hago. g . -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Dell WMI
/var/log/messages has many messages like these Jul 27 15:39:47 localhost kernel: [18095.720272] dell_wmi: Received unknown WMI event (0x11) Jul 27 15:39:48 localhost kernel: [18097.73] dell_wmi: Received unknown WMI event (0x11) Jul 27 15:40:38 localhost kernel: dell_wmi: Received unknown WMI event (0x11) Jul 27 15:40:41 localhost kernel: dell_wmi: Received unknown WMI event (0x11) Jul 28 09:28:16 localhost kernel: [ 17.818200] wmi: Mapper loaded Jul 28 09:28:16 localhost kernel: [ 18.128714] input: Dell WMI hotkeys as /devices/virtual/input/input11 Jul 27 21:13:10 localhost kernel: dell_wmi: Received unknown WMI event (0x11) Jul 27 21:13:12 localhost kernel: dell_wmi: Received unknown WMI event (0x11) Jul 28 09:28:10 localhost kernel: wmi: Mapper loaded Jul 28 09:28:10 localhost kernel: input: Dell WMI hotkeys as /devices/virtual/input/input11 Jul 28 14:33:20 localhost kernel: [ 10.917483] wmi: Mapper loaded Jul 28 14:33:20 localhost kernel: [ 11.184338] input: Dell WMI hotkeys as /devices/virtual/input/input8 Jul 28 11:34:28 localhost kernel: dell_wmi: Received unknown WMI event (0x11) Jul 28 11:34:28 localhost kernel: dell_wmi: Received unknown WMI event (0x11) Jul 28 14:33:15 localhost kernel: wmi: Mapper loaded Jul 28 14:33:15 localhost kernel: input: Dell WMI hotkeys as /devices/virtual/input/input8 Jul 28 21:04:06 localhost kernel: [ 11.269317] wmi: Mapper loaded Jul 28 21:04:06 localhost kernel: [ 11.382839] input: Dell WMI hotkeys as /devices/virtual/input/input12 Jul 28 18:39:48 localhost kernel: dell_wmi: Received unknown WMI event (0x11) Jul 28 18:39:49 localhost kernel: dell_wmi: Received unknown WMI event (0x11) Jul 28 21:04:02 localhost kernel: wmi: Mapper loaded Jul 28 21:04:02 localhost kernel: input: Dell WMI hotkeys as /devices/virtual/input/input12 Jul 29 16:30:12 localhost kernel: [ 18.138436] wmi: Mapper loaded Jul 29 16:30:12 localhost kernel: [ 18.354453] input: Dell WMI hotkeys as /devices/virtual/input/input11 Jul 28 22:15:25 localhost kernel: dell_wmi: Received unknown WMI event (0x11) Jul 28 22:15:27 localhost kernel: dell_wmi: Received unknown WMI event (0x11) Jul 29 16:30:08 localhost kernel: wmi: Mapper loaded Jul 29 16:30:08 localhost kernel: input: Dell WMI hotkeys as /devices/virtual/input/input11 So, is fedora going to provide a good interrupt handler to deal with these interrupts and service them correctly the way Dell intended them to be serviced? I wonder how windows handles these. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: installing Fedora 21 or 22 on a MacBook Air 7,1
On 07/29/2015 08:07 PM, CS DBA wrote: I installed Fedora 20 on a macbook air like this: 1) burned the KDE live dvd, 2) plugged the dvd player into the mac usb port 3) held down the option button while I boot the macbook 4) when it comes up with the boot options choose the Fedora DVD (it takes a few min before it shows up) 5) boot off the DVD, then do the install to disk as normal Sorry if my email wasn't clear enough: there is no disk to install Fedora to. The SSD drive is simply invisible. Fred. On 07/29/2015 06:13 AM, Frederic Muller wrote: On 07/29/2015 07:01 PM, Suvayu Ali wrote: On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 04:41:04PM +0700, Frederic Muller wrote: Hi! I have been struggling installing Fedora on a friend's MBA as the local SSD doesn't seem to be recognized. I found a few posts online with various degrees of luck, unfortunately they never mentioned with MBA is used and that didn't work for me. I'm not a Mac user, but knowing what you tried might give others some ideas what you could try. Well unfortunately there is not much thing to try as the disk is simply invisible. So I have tried a lot of web searches for one ;-) and also other distro install with even less success (screen simply didn't even display text, so I couldn't get very far - maybe that was a problem with the intel HD graphics 6000 drivers?). And so to directly answer your question: 1. create USB key to boot from 2. Boot from EFI disk 3. Try to find the disk when ask to chose a disk to install: and here it only sees the USB key. Thank you for the follow up.. i feel so :-/ Fred -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Update 20 - 22, failure
Hello, I wish to thank Michael for his help and patience in understanding the issue. It was a bit stressing, but finally done. It seems to indicate that the upgrade from 20 to 22 may not be without risk. My understanding is that the dependency failures which where more or less acceptable with yum update, now prevent the update with dnf. The key point is that there is not real complain or straight aware. Thank again every body. === Patrick DUPRÉ | | email: pdu...@gmx.com Laboratoire de Physico-Chimie de l'Atmosphère | | Université du Littoral-Côte d'Opale | | Tel. (33)-(0)3 28 23 76 12 | | Fax: 03 28 65 82 44 189A, avenue Maurice Schumann | | 59140 Dunkerque, France === Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 2:06 PM From: Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: Update 20 - 22, failure On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 13:55:47 +0200, Patrick Dupre wrote: Is it the same when you run dnf distro-sync? Error: package directfb-1.6.2-3.fc19.i686 requires libmng.so.1, but none of the providers can be installed. package pdftk-1.44-11.fc19.i686 requires itext(x86-32) = 2.1.7-6, but none of the providers can be installed I told you before that these do not exist anymore and have been retired _after_ Fedora 19. You *cannot* keep them if they cause dep breakage: dnf remove directfb pdftk dnf distro-sync nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerpro-common-192-13.1-5.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerpro-devel-192-13.1-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerpro-vars-192-13.1-5.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerproc-192-13.1-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerproc-common-192-13.1-5.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerproc-devel-192-13.1-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerprof-192-13.1-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerprof-common-192-13.1-5.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-compilerprof-devel-192-13.1-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-idb-192-13.0-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-idb-common-192-13.0-5.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-idbcdt-192-13.0-5.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-ipp-192-7.1-1.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-ipp-common-192-7.1-1.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-ipp-devel-192-7.1-1.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-mkl-192-11.0-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-mkl-common-192-11.0-5.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-mkl-devel-192-11.0-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-openmp-192-13.1-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-openmp-devel-192-13.1-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-sourcechecker-common-192-13.1-5.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-sourcechecker-devel-192-13.1-5.i486 nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-tbb-192-4.1-4.noarch nothing provides lsb = 3.0 needed by intel-tbb-devel-192-4.1-4.noarch These are not from Fedora, are they? You may need to deal with them, too, as long as they cause dependency problems. dnf repoquery --duplicated kernel-PAE-0:3.19.8-100.fc20.i686 kernel-PAE-0:4.0.4-301.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-devel-0:3.19.8-100.fc20.i686 kernel-PAE-devel-0:4.0.4-301.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-devel-0:4.0.8-300.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-devel-0:4.1.2-200.fc22.i686 kernel-PAE-modules-extra-0:3.19.8-100.fc20.i686 kernel-PAE-modules-extra-0:4.0.4-301.fc22.i686 Well, okay for now, cleaning up wouldn't hurt but normally three kernels are kept automatically only anyway. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: installing Fedora 21 or 22 on a MacBook Air 7,1
On 07/29/2015 07:01 PM, Suvayu Ali wrote: On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 04:41:04PM +0700, Frederic Muller wrote: Hi! I have been struggling installing Fedora on a friend's MBA as the local SSD doesn't seem to be recognized. I found a few posts online with various degrees of luck, unfortunately they never mentioned with MBA is used and that didn't work for me. I'm not a Mac user, but knowing what you tried might give others some ideas what you could try. Well unfortunately there is not much thing to try as the disk is simply invisible. So I have tried a lot of web searches for one ;-) and also other distro install with even less success (screen simply didn't even display text, so I couldn't get very far - maybe that was a problem with the intel HD graphics 6000 drivers?). And so to directly answer your question: 1. create USB key to boot from 2. Boot from EFI disk 3. Try to find the disk when ask to chose a disk to install: and here it only sees the USB key. Thank you for the follow up.. i feel so :-/ Fred -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: installing Fedora 21 or 22 on a MacBook Air 7,1
I installed Fedora 20 on a macbook air like this: 1) burned the KDE live dvd, 2) plugged the dvd player into the mac usb port 3) held down the option button while I boot the macbook 4) when it comes up with the boot options choose the Fedora DVD (it takes a few min before it shows up) 5) boot off the DVD, then do the install to disk as normal On 07/29/2015 06:13 AM, Frederic Muller wrote: On 07/29/2015 07:01 PM, Suvayu Ali wrote: On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 04:41:04PM +0700, Frederic Muller wrote: Hi! I have been struggling installing Fedora on a friend's MBA as the local SSD doesn't seem to be recognized. I found a few posts online with various degrees of luck, unfortunately they never mentioned with MBA is used and that didn't work for me. I'm not a Mac user, but knowing what you tried might give others some ideas what you could try. Well unfortunately there is not much thing to try as the disk is simply invisible. So I have tried a lot of web searches for one ;-) and also other distro install with even less success (screen simply didn't even display text, so I couldn't get very far - maybe that was a problem with the intel HD graphics 6000 drivers?). And so to directly answer your question: 1. create USB key to boot from 2. Boot from EFI disk 3. Try to find the disk when ask to chose a disk to install: and here it only sees the USB key. Thank you for the follow up.. i feel so :-/ Fred -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
