Re: Fora vs. mailing lists

[Tim via users]

Joe Zeff wrote (about web forums):
> why don't you simply set as many of them as possible to email you 
> when there's a reply?

Have you noticed how many of them won't let you reply to an email
notification?  Essentially you get a "someone left you a message"
message, no details on what the message is, and no way to respond
without going to the website.
 
-- 
 
uname -rsvp
Linux 3.10.0-1160.108.1.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Thu Jan 25 16:17:31 UTC 2024 x86_64
 
Boilerplate:  All unexpected mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted.
I will only get to see the messages that are posted to the mailing list.
 
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fora vs. mailing lists

[Tim via users]

On Sun, 2024-03-10 at 11:32 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> However, realize that you spend a long time setting all that up.
> The subscriptions, filtering, how things look in your email client, etc. 
> For someone new or just wanting to ask a question or two, lists are
> horrible.

I say forums aren't that much better.  Have you seen reddit?

If you google a "how do I?" question, invariably reddit is the
response, with some awfully crap information, and dozens of unrelated
things.
 
-- 
 
uname -rsvp
Linux 3.10.0-1160.108.1.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Thu Jan 25 16:17:31 UTC 2024 x86_64
 
Boilerplate:  All unexpected mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted.
I will only get to see the messages that are posted to the mailing list.
 
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fora vs. mailing lists

[Tim via users]

Thomas Cameron:
>> I hate using fora. I generally have to open a separate tab for each 
>> forum I'm on, and I'm on a LOT.

Joe Zeff:
> Why keep a separate tab for each forum open at all times?  How many of 
> them do you actually need to look at each day?

Firstly, I thoroughly agree with all of Thomas's points from his
opening message.

At one stage, I was on about 11 different (technical) mailing lists. 

It's less now, but even having to go to a few different sites to see
what's going on, and tediously reply back in their nearly always badly
designed form, is something I refuse to do.  Not to mention they rarely
allow you to save a draft, to work on a message that takes time to
compile.  Forcing to use an external editor for such things.  And then
you find you can't post something because you typed some < or > symbols
in and their HTML message handler is crap.

Facebook is the only web forum I participate in, and only because it
can't be done in another way, and only because friends kept on dragging
me into the damn thing. It's such a massive time-waster.
 
-- 
 
uname -rsvp
Linux 3.10.0-1160.108.1.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Thu Jan 25 16:17:31 UTC 2024 x86_64
 
Boilerplate:  All unexpected mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted.
I will only get to see the messages that are posted to the mailing list.
 
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fora vs. mailing lists

[M. Fioretti]

On Sun, Mar 10, 2024 11:40:05 AM -0500, Thomas Cameron wrote:
> 
> 
> Quick definition: fora is the plural of forum, as in a web based forum to
> discuss a topic or technology, like https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/.
> 
> Having said that...
> 
> I love mailing lists. I have filters set up they silently go to the correct
> mail folder, I can read through them at my leisure, and I only have to deal
> with one client - my mail client. My mail client defaults to sane viewing
> rules, threaded, in the order I prefer. It's the same experience across
> every mailing list I'm a member of. I love that. It's very
> accessibility-friendly.
> 
> I hate using fora.

Same here, I agree with everything you said.
Thanks for posting it. It's a shame that email is pushed so hard on
the sidelines, in general.

Marco
-- 
https://mfioretti.substack.com
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: ghost town

[Tim via users]

On Sun, 2024-03-10 at 09:50 +, Barry wrote:
> The majority of user traffic is on https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/ 
> these days.

I flatly refuse to use webforums.  They're extremely inconvenient.

Email comes to me, I can go through it in my spare time as I see fit.

Websites waste my time in a massive way.
 
-- 
 
uname -rsvp
Linux 3.10.0-1160.108.1.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Thu Jan 25 16:17:31 UTC 2024 x86_64
 
Boilerplate:  All unexpected mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted.
I will only get to see the messages that are posted to the mailing list.
 
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Configuring LXC containers

[Mike Wright]

On 3/10/24 15:40, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:

On Sun, 2024-03-10 at 11:13 -0700, Mike Wright wrote:

The last two lines are key.  Add these flags: -F -o logfile.  The
default loglevel is ERROR.  If you want more detail include -l LEVEL.

e.g. lxc-start -n containerName -F -o containerName.log -l WARN



This is what I get:

$ lxc-start -n test -F -o test.log -l WARN



$ cat test.log
lxc-start test 20240310223702.913 ERRORcgfsng - 
cgroups/cgfsng.c:__cgfsng_delegate_controllers:2921 - Device or resource busy - Could not 
enable "+cpu +io +memory +pids" controllers in the unified cgroup 9
lxc-start test 20240310223702.934 ERRORcgfsng - 
cgroups/cgfsng.c:__cgfsng_delegate_controllers:2921 - Device or resource busy - Could not 
enable "+cpu +io +memory +pids" controllers in the unified cgroup 9



I use this:

lxc.apparmor.profile=unconfined

which runs the container as root.  That setting doesn't stop you from 
adding profiles.



If I disable that line I get a cgfsng WARN and the container won't 
start. ( My containers are used for local services so I'm pretty lax 
about running them as root. They are also heavily firewalled behind a 
router (also a container which starts the firewall then puts an IP on 
the WAN and sets the default route.  Until the router container comes up 
my host has no network connectivity at all) )


Also, you're remapping IDs.  What happens if you comment those out?

My thought here is to get it running as root first then begin the 
process of securing it as you see fit.



I don't have this in my configs but I found this:

lxc.cgroup.devices.allow=a
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Marble problem: libicui18n.so.69

[Samuel Sieb]

On 3/10/24 22:28, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

On 3/10/24 21:48, Samuel Sieb wrote:
I doubt the bug report will come up with anything since this is 
something very specific to your system.  Do you have any packages from 
fc37?  Do you have any locked packages?  Have you installed any 
self-built packages?


You didn't answer these questions.


Does "rpm -qf /lib64/*\.so* | grep owned" give you anything?
Mine only shows "p11-kit-trust.so".


  rpm -qf /lib64/*\.so* | grep owned
file /lib64/ld-lsb-x86-64.so is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libavahi-gobject.so.0 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libavahi-gobject.so.0.0.5 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libFAudio.so.0.22.10 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libfreeaptx.so.0 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libfreeaptx.so.0.1.1 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libfzclient-commonui-private-3.66.0.so is not owned by any 
package

file /lib64/libfzclient-private-3.66.0.so is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libgdal.so.33.3.7.2 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libgovirt.so.2 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libgovirt.so.2.3.1 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libhpdiscovery.so.0 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libhpdiscovery.so.0.0.1 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libhpipp.so.0 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libhpipp.so.0.0.1 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libhpip.so.0 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libhpip.so.0.0.1 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libhpmud.so.0 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libhpmud.so.0.0.6 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libnetsnmp.so.40.1.0 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libopenfec.so.1 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libopenfec.so.1.4.2 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libopensc.so.8 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libopensc.so.8.0.0 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libpipewire-0.3.so.0.361.0 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libpipewire-0.3.so.0.372.0 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libroc.so.0 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libroc.so.0.2 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libSDL2_image-2.0.so.0.600.1 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libsmm-local.so.8 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libsmm-local.so.8.0.0 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/onepin-opensc-pkcs11.so is not owned by any package
file /lib64/opensc-pkcs11.so is not owned by any package
file /lib64/p11-kit-trust.so is not owned by any package
file /lib64/pkcs11-spy.so is not owned by any package


You probably need to get rid of these.  Check the dates on the files with:
ls -l $(rpm -qf /lib64/*\.so* | grep owned | cut -d' ' -f2)


What does "ldd /bin/marble | grep libicu" show?


# ldd /bin/marble | grep libic
 libicui18n.so.73 => /lib64/libicui18n.so.73 (0x7fdf3960)
 libicuuc.so.73 => /lib64/libicuuc.so.73 (0x7fdf3920)
 libicudata.so.73 => /lib64/libicudata.so.73 (0x7fdf2e00)
 libicui18n.so.69 => not found
 libicuuc.so.69 => not found
 libicudata.so.69 => not found


Ok, then show the whole output of "ldd /bin/marble".
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Marble problem: libicui18n.so.69

[ToddAndMargo via users]

On 3/10/24 21:48, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 3/10/24 19:40, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

On 3/10/24 19:18, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 3/10/24 18:39, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

On 3/10/24 16:52, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 3/10/24 16:40, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

And this is interesting:

# dnf install libicu-73.2-2.fc39.x86_64
Fedora 39 - x86_64   18 kB/s |  24 kB 
00:01
Fedora 39 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64    4.6 kB/s | 989  B 
00:00
Fedora 39 - x86_64 - Updates 33 kB/s |  23 kB 
00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Free 5.7 kB/s | 3.6 kB 
00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Free - Updates   6.6 kB/s | 3.9 kB 
00:00

Package libicu-73.2-2.fc39.x86_64 is already installed.
Dependencies resolved.
Nothing to do.
Complete!


Yes, this is why it isn't working.  You have (I assume) a qt5 
package that is linked with a previous version and somehow wasn't 
updated when libicu was.


# rpm -qa qt* | grep -v fc39



I didn't mean a previous Fedora release.  I meant that something is 
linked against the previous version of libicu.


However, with some investigation, the 69 version was in F37 at the 
latest, so something is strange on your system and is from a previous 
release.  I'm surprised other things aren't breaking.


I am at a loss to figure out who is the culprit.  I will
just have to wait on the bug report


I doubt the bug report will come up with anything since this is 
something very specific to your system.  Do you have any packages from 
fc37?  Do you have any locked packages?  Have you installed any 
self-built packages?


Does "rpm -qf /lib64/*\.so* | grep owned" give you anything?
Mine only shows "p11-kit-trust.so".


 rpm -qf /lib64/*\.so* | grep owned
file /lib64/ld-lsb-x86-64.so is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libavahi-gobject.so.0 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libavahi-gobject.so.0.0.5 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libFAudio.so.0.22.10 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libfreeaptx.so.0 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libfreeaptx.so.0.1.1 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libfzclient-commonui-private-3.66.0.so is not owned by any 
package

file /lib64/libfzclient-private-3.66.0.so is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libgdal.so.33.3.7.2 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libgovirt.so.2 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libgovirt.so.2.3.1 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libhpdiscovery.so.0 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libhpdiscovery.so.0.0.1 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libhpipp.so.0 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libhpipp.so.0.0.1 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libhpip.so.0 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libhpip.so.0.0.1 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libhpmud.so.0 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libhpmud.so.0.0.6 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libnetsnmp.so.40.1.0 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libopenfec.so.1 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libopenfec.so.1.4.2 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libopensc.so.8 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libopensc.so.8.0.0 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libpipewire-0.3.so.0.361.0 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libpipewire-0.3.so.0.372.0 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libroc.so.0 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libroc.so.0.2 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libSDL2_image-2.0.so.0.600.1 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libsmm-local.so.8 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/libsmm-local.so.8.0.0 is not owned by any package
file /lib64/onepin-opensc-pkcs11.so is not owned by any package
file /lib64/opensc-pkcs11.so is not owned by any package
file /lib64/p11-kit-trust.so is not owned by any package
file /lib64/pkcs11-spy.so is not owned by any package




Anything in "ls /usr/local/lib*"?


# ls /usr/local/lib*
/usr/local/lib:

/usr/local/lib64:
bpf  gems  perl5

/usr/local/libexec:




What does "ldd /bin/marble | grep libicu" show?


# ldd /bin/marble | grep libic
libicui18n.so.73 => /lib64/libicui18n.so.73 (0x7fdf3960)
libicuuc.so.73 => /lib64/libicuuc.so.73 (0x7fdf3920)
libicudata.so.73 => /lib64/libicudata.so.73 (0x7fdf2e00)
libicui18n.so.69 => not found
libicuuc.so.69 => not found
libicudata.so.69 => not found
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Marble problem: libicui18n.so.69

[Samuel Sieb]

On 3/10/24 19:40, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

On 3/10/24 19:18, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 3/10/24 18:39, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

On 3/10/24 16:52, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 3/10/24 16:40, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

And this is interesting:

# dnf install libicu-73.2-2.fc39.x86_64
Fedora 39 - x86_64   18 kB/s |  24 kB 
00:01
Fedora 39 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64    4.6 kB/s | 989  B 
00:00
Fedora 39 - x86_64 - Updates 33 kB/s |  23 kB 
00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Free 5.7 kB/s | 3.6 kB 
00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Free - Updates   6.6 kB/s | 3.9 kB 
00:00

Package libicu-73.2-2.fc39.x86_64 is already installed.
Dependencies resolved.
Nothing to do.
Complete!


Yes, this is why it isn't working.  You have (I assume) a qt5 
package that is linked with a previous version and somehow wasn't 
updated when libicu was.


# rpm -qa qt* | grep -v fc39



I didn't mean a previous Fedora release.  I meant that something is 
linked against the previous version of libicu.


However, with some investigation, the 69 version was in F37 at the 
latest, so something is strange on your system and is from a previous 
release.  I'm surprised other things aren't breaking.


I am at a loss to figure out who is the culprit.  I will
just have to wait on the bug report


I doubt the bug report will come up with anything since this is 
something very specific to your system.  Do you have any packages from 
fc37?  Do you have any locked packages?  Have you installed any 
self-built packages?


Does "rpm -qf /lib64/*\.so* | grep owned" give you anything?
Mine only shows "p11-kit-trust.so".

Anything in "ls /usr/local/lib*"?

What does "ldd /bin/marble | grep libicu" show?
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Marble problem: libicui18n.so.69

[ToddAndMargo via users]

On 3/10/24 20:16, Jerry James wrote:

On Sun, Mar 10, 2024 at 8:40 PM ToddAndMargo via users
 wrote:

On 3/10/24 19:18, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 3/10/24 18:39, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

On 3/10/24 16:52, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 3/10/24 16:40, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

And this is interesting:

# dnf install libicu-73.2-2.fc39.x86_64
Fedora 39 - x86_64   18 kB/s |  24 kB 00:01
Fedora 39 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_644.6 kB/s | 989  B 00:00
Fedora 39 - x86_64 - Updates 33 kB/s |  23 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Free 5.7 kB/s | 3.6 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Free - Updates   6.6 kB/s | 3.9 kB 00:00
Package libicu-73.2-2.fc39.x86_64 is already installed.
Dependencies resolved.
Nothing to do.
Complete!


Yes, this is why it isn't working.  You have (I assume) a qt5 package
that is linked with a previous version and somehow wasn't updated
when libicu was.


# rpm -qa qt* | grep -v fc39



I didn't mean a previous Fedora release.  I meant that something is
linked against the previous version of libicu.

However, with some investigation, the 69 version was in F37 at the
latest, so something is strange on your system and is from a previous
release.  I'm surprised other things aren't breaking.


I am at a loss to figure out who is the culprit.  I will
just have to wait on the bug report


Does this show anything?

rpm -q --whatrequires 'libicui18n.so.69()(64bit)'

If not, does this show anything?

grep -Fl 'libicui18n.so.69' /usr/lib64/lib*


# rpm -q --whatrequires 'libicui18n.so.69()(64bit)'
no package requires libicui18n.so.69()(64bit)

# rpm -q --whatrequires libicui18n.so*
no package requires libicui18n.so*

# rpm -q --whatrequires libicui18n.so\*
no package requires libicui18n.so*

# grep -Fl 'libicui18n.so.69' /usr/lib64/lib* 2&>1 | grep -v "Is A 
directory"




--
~~
Computers are like air conditioners.
They malfunction when you open windows
~~
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Marble problem: libicui18n.so.69

[Jerry James]

On Sun, Mar 10, 2024 at 8:40 PM ToddAndMargo via users
 wrote:
> On 3/10/24 19:18, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> > On 3/10/24 18:39, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
> >> On 3/10/24 16:52, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> >>> On 3/10/24 16:40, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
>  And this is interesting:
> 
>  # dnf install libicu-73.2-2.fc39.x86_64
>  Fedora 39 - x86_64   18 kB/s |  24 kB 00:01
>  Fedora 39 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_644.6 kB/s | 989  B 00:00
>  Fedora 39 - x86_64 - Updates 33 kB/s |  23 kB 00:00
>  RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Free 5.7 kB/s | 3.6 kB 00:00
>  RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Free - Updates   6.6 kB/s | 3.9 kB 00:00
>  Package libicu-73.2-2.fc39.x86_64 is already installed.
>  Dependencies resolved.
>  Nothing to do.
>  Complete!
> >>>
> >>> Yes, this is why it isn't working.  You have (I assume) a qt5 package
> >>> that is linked with a previous version and somehow wasn't updated
> >>> when libicu was.
> >>
> >> # rpm -qa qt* | grep -v fc39
> >> 
> >
> > I didn't mean a previous Fedora release.  I meant that something is
> > linked against the previous version of libicu.
> >
> > However, with some investigation, the 69 version was in F37 at the
> > latest, so something is strange on your system and is from a previous
> > release.  I'm surprised other things aren't breaking.
>
> I am at a loss to figure out who is the culprit.  I will
> just have to wait on the bug report

Does this show anything?

rpm -q --whatrequires 'libicui18n.so.69()(64bit)'

If not, does this show anything?

grep -Fl 'libicui18n.so.69' /usr/lib64/lib*

-- 
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Configuring LXC containers

[Mike Wright]

On 3/10/24 15:40, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:

On Sun, 2024-03-10 at 11:13 -0700, Mike Wright wrote:

The last two lines are key.  Add these flags: -F -o logfile.  The
default loglevel is ERROR.  If you want more detail include -l LEVEL.

e.g. lxc-start -n containerName -F -o containerName.log -l WARN



This is what I get:

$ lxc-start -n test -F -o test.log -l WARN

...

lxc-start test 20240310223702.945 ERRORstart - 
start.c:print_top_failing_dir:99 - Permission denied - Could not access 
/home/poc/.local. Please grant it x access, or add an ACL for the container root


This one looks interesting
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Marble problem: libicui18n.so.69

[ToddAndMargo via users]

On 3/10/24 19:18, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 3/10/24 18:39, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

On 3/10/24 16:52, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 3/10/24 16:40, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

And this is interesting:

# dnf install libicu-73.2-2.fc39.x86_64
Fedora 39 - x86_64   18 kB/s |  24 kB 00:01
Fedora 39 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64    4.6 kB/s | 989  B 00:00
Fedora 39 - x86_64 - Updates 33 kB/s |  23 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Free 5.7 kB/s | 3.6 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Free - Updates   6.6 kB/s | 3.9 kB 00:00
Package libicu-73.2-2.fc39.x86_64 is already installed.
Dependencies resolved.
Nothing to do.
Complete!


Yes, this is why it isn't working.  You have (I assume) a qt5 package 
that is linked with a previous version and somehow wasn't updated 
when libicu was.


# rpm -qa qt* | grep -v fc39



I didn't mean a previous Fedora release.  I meant that something is 
linked against the previous version of libicu.


However, with some investigation, the 69 version was in F37 at the 
latest, so something is strange on your system and is from a previous 
release.  I'm surprised other things aren't breaking.


I am at a loss to figure out who is the culprit.  I will
just have to wait on the bug report
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Marble problem: libicui18n.so.69

[Samuel Sieb]

On 3/10/24 18:39, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

On 3/10/24 16:52, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 3/10/24 16:40, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

And this is interesting:

# dnf install libicu-73.2-2.fc39.x86_64
Fedora 39 - x86_64   18 kB/s |  24 kB 00:01
Fedora 39 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64    4.6 kB/s | 989  B 00:00
Fedora 39 - x86_64 - Updates 33 kB/s |  23 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Free 5.7 kB/s | 3.6 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Free - Updates   6.6 kB/s | 3.9 kB 00:00
Package libicu-73.2-2.fc39.x86_64 is already installed.
Dependencies resolved.
Nothing to do.
Complete!


Yes, this is why it isn't working.  You have (I assume) a qt5 package 
that is linked with a previous version and somehow wasn't updated when 
libicu was.


# rpm -qa qt* | grep -v fc39



I didn't mean a previous Fedora release.  I meant that something is 
linked against the previous version of libicu.


However, with some investigation, the 69 version was in F37 at the 
latest, so something is strange on your system and is from a previous 
release.  I'm surprised other things aren't breaking.

--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Marble problem: libicui18n.so.69

[ToddAndMargo via users]

On 3/10/24 16:52, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 3/10/24 16:40, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

And this is interesting:

# dnf install libicu-73.2-2.fc39.x86_64
Fedora 39 - x86_64   18 kB/s |  24 kB 00:01
Fedora 39 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64    4.6 kB/s | 989  B 00:00
Fedora 39 - x86_64 - Updates 33 kB/s |  23 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Free 5.7 kB/s | 3.6 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Free - Updates   6.6 kB/s | 3.9 kB 00:00
Package libicu-73.2-2.fc39.x86_64 is already installed.
Dependencies resolved.
Nothing to do.
Complete!


Yes, this is why it isn't working.  You have (I assume) a qt5 package 
that is linked with a previous version and somehow wasn't updated when 
libicu was.


# rpm -qa qt*
qt-common-4.8.7-74.fc39.noarch
qt-4.8.7-74.fc39.x86_64
qt-x11-4.8.7-74.fc39.x86_64
qtkeychain-qt5-0.13.2-5.fc39.x86_64
qtlockedfile-qt5-2.4-39.20150629git5a07df5.fc39.x86_64
qtsingleapplication-qt5-2.6.1-46.fc39.x86_64
qt-settings-39.1-1.fc39.noarch
qt5-qttools-common-5.15.12-1.fc39.noarch
qt5-qtserialport-5.15.12-1.fc39.x86_64
qt5-qtspeech-5.15.12-1.fc39.x86_64
qt5-qtspeech-speechd-5.15.12-1.fc39.x86_64
qt5-qtwebsockets-5.15.12-1.fc39.x86_64
qt5-qttranslations-5.15.12-1.fc39.noarch
qt5-qtwayland-5.15.12-2.fc39.x86_64
qt5-qtx11extras-5.15.12-1.fc39.x86_64
qt5-qtdeclarative-5.15.12-1.fc39.x86_64
qt5-qttools-libs-designer-5.15.12-1.fc39.x86_64
qt5-qtlocation-5.15.12-1.fc39.x86_64
qt5-qtwebchannel-5.15.12-1.fc39.x86_64
qt5-qtsensors-5.15.12-1.fc39.x86_64
qt5-qtxmlpatterns-5.15.12-1.fc39.x86_64
qt5-qtsvg-5.15.12-1.fc39.x86_64
qt5-qttools-libs-designercomponents-5.15.12-1.fc39.x86_64
qt5-designer-5.15.12-1.fc39.x86_64
qt5-qtconnectivity-5.15.12-1.fc39.x86_64
qt5-qtgraphicaleffects-5.15.12-1.fc39.x86_64
qt5-qtquickcontrols2-5.15.12-1.fc39.x86_64
qt5-qtmultimedia-5.15.12-1.fc39.x86_64
qt5-qtscript-5.15.12-1.fc39.x86_64
qt5-qttools-libs-help-5.15.12-1.fc39.x86_64
qt5-qtwebkit-5.212.0-0.80alpha4.fc39.x86_64
qt5-qtquickcontrols-5.15.12-1.fc39.x86_64
qt5-qtimageformats-5.15.12-1.fc39.x86_64
qt5-srpm-macros-5.15.12-1.fc39.noarch
qt5-qtwebengine-5.15.16-1.fc39.x86_64
qt5-qtbase-common-5.15.12-5.fc39.noarch
qt5-qtbase-5.15.12-5.fc39.x86_64
qt5-qtbase-gui-5.15.12-5.fc39.x86_64
qt5-qtbase-mysql-5.15.12-5.fc39.x86_64
qt5-qtbase-5.15.12-5.fc39.i686
qt6-qtbase-common-6.6.2-1.fc39.noarch
qt6-qtbase-6.6.2-1.fc39.x86_64
qt6-qttranslations-6.6.2-1.fc39.noarch
qt6-qtdeclarative-6.6.2-1.fc39.x86_64
qt6-qtwayland-6.6.2-1.fc39.x86_64
qt6-qtbase-gui-6.6.2-1.fc39.x86_64
qt6-qtsvg-6.6.2-1.fc39.x86_64
qt6-srpm-macros-6.6.2-1.fc39.noarch

# rpm -qa qt* | grep -v fc39


--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Marble problem: libicui18n.so.69

[Samuel Sieb]

On 3/10/24 16:40, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

And this is interesting:

# dnf install libicu-73.2-2.fc39.x86_64
Fedora 39 - x86_64   18 kB/s |  24 kB 00:01
Fedora 39 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64    4.6 kB/s | 989  B 00:00
Fedora 39 - x86_64 - Updates 33 kB/s |  23 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Free 5.7 kB/s | 3.6 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Free - Updates   6.6 kB/s | 3.9 kB 00:00
Package libicu-73.2-2.fc39.x86_64 is already installed.
Dependencies resolved.
Nothing to do.
Complete!


Yes, this is why it isn't working.  You have (I assume) a qt5 package 
that is linked with a previous version and somehow wasn't updated when 
libicu was.

--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Marble problem: libicui18n.so.69

[ToddAndMargo via users]

On 3/10/24 16:40, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

On 3/10/24 16:17, Samuel Sieb wrote:
You keep dropping the leading "l" from your searches.  The package is 
called "libicu".


ah poop!  Good catch.

# dnf whatprovides libicui18n\* --releasever=39
Last metadata expiration check: 0:40:30 ago on Sun 10 Mar 2024 03:54:32 
PM PDT.


...
libicu-73.2-2.fc39.x86_64 : International Components for Unicode - 
libraries

Repo    : @System
Matched from:
Provide    : libicui18n.so.73()(64bit)


and others.


And this is interesting:

# dnf install libicu-73.2-2.fc39.x86_64
Fedora 39 - x86_64   18 kB/s |  24 kB 00:01
Fedora 39 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64    4.6 kB/s | 989  B 00:00
Fedora 39 - x86_64 - Updates 33 kB/s |  23 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Free 5.7 kB/s | 3.6 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Free - Updates   6.6 kB/s | 3.9 kB 00:00
Package libicu-73.2-2.fc39.x86_64 is already installed.
Dependencies resolved.
Nothing to do.
Complete!



And with the "l":
# find / -iname libicui18n\*
find: ‘/run/user/500/doc’: Permission denied
find: ‘/run/user/500/gvfs’: Permission denied
/usr/lib/libicui18n.so.73.2
/usr/lib/libicui18n.so.73
/usr/lib64/libicui18n.so
/usr/lib64/libicui18n.so.73.2
/usr/lib64/libicui18n.so.73
/home/tony/.dropbox-dist/dropbox-lnx.x86_64-84.4.170/libicui18n.so.42
/opt/libreoffice7.6/program/libicui18n.so.73
/opt/onlyoffice/desktopeditors/libicui18n.so.52


# ln -s /usr/lib/libicui18n.so.73 /usr/lib/libicui18n.so.69

#  ls -al /usr/lib/libicui18n.so.73
lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 18 Jul 19  2023 /usr/lib/libicui18n.so.73 -> 
libicui18n.so.73.2


$ marble
marble: error while loading shared libraries: libicui18n.so.69: cannot 
open shared object file: No such file or directory




--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Marble problem: libicui18n.so.69

[ToddAndMargo via users]

On 3/10/24 16:17, Samuel Sieb wrote:
You keep dropping the leading "l" from your searches.  The package is 
called "libicu".


ah poop!  Good catch.

# dnf whatprovides libicui18n\* --releasever=39
Last metadata expiration check: 0:40:30 ago on Sun 10 Mar 2024 03:54:32 
PM PDT.


...
libicu-73.2-2.fc39.x86_64 : International Components for Unicode - libraries
Repo: @System
Matched from:
Provide: libicui18n.so.73()(64bit)


and others.


And this is interesting:

# dnf install libicu-73.2-2.fc39.x86_64
Fedora 39 - x86_64   18 kB/s |  24 kB 
00:01
Fedora 39 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_644.6 kB/s | 989  B 
00:00
Fedora 39 - x86_64 - Updates 33 kB/s |  23 kB 
00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Free 5.7 kB/s | 3.6 kB 
00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora 39 - Free - Updates   6.6 kB/s | 3.9 kB 
00:00

Package libicu-73.2-2.fc39.x86_64 is already installed.
Dependencies resolved.
Nothing to do.
Complete!


--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Marble problem: libicui18n.so.69

[Samuel Sieb]

On 3/10/24 15:52, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:

On 3/10/24 03:35, Barry Scott wrote:



On 10 Mar 2024, at 06:06, ToddAndMargo via users 
 wrote:


root@rn6:/home$ marble
marble: error while loading shared libraries:libicui18n.so 
.69: cannot open shared object file: No such 
file or directory


I just installed marble on f39 and its works. I have libicu18n.so 
.73 on my system.


# dnf whatprovides ibicui18n*
Last metadata expiration check: 14:26:03 ago on Sun 10 Mar 2024 12:19:03 
AM PST.
Error: No matches found. If searching for a file, try specifying the 
full path or using a wildcard prefix ("*/") at the beginning.


# find / -iname ibicui18n\*



You keep dropping the leading "l" from your searches.  The package is 
called "libicu".


It's not an issue with marble itself.  It's somewhere in a qt library. 
I just verified that it wasn't a direct dependency of marble and didn't 
want to dig any further.


When I installed marble, these are the dependencies:
=
 Package 
ArchitectureVersion

=
Installing:
 marble  x86_64 
 1:23.08.5-1.fc39

Installing dependencies:
 gpsd-libs   x86_64 
 1:3.25-7.fc39
 kf5-krunner x86_64 
 5.115.0-1.fc39
 kf5-kwaylandx86_64 
 5.110.0-1.fc39
 kf5-plasma  x86_64 
 5.115.0-1.fc39
 kf5-threadweaverx86_64 
 5.110.0-1.fc39
 marble-astrox86_64 
 1:23.08.5-1.fc39
 marble-common   noarch 
 1:23.08.5-1.fc39
 marble-widget-data  noarch 
 1:23.08.5-1.fc39
 marble-widget-qt5   x86_64 
 1:23.08.5-1.fc39
 shapelibx86_64 
 1.5.0-16.fc39

--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Marble problem: libicui18n.so.69

[ToddAndMargo via users]

On 3/10/24 03:35, Barry Scott wrote:



On 10 Mar 2024, at 06:06, ToddAndMargo via users 
 wrote:


root@rn6:/home$ marble
marble: error while loading shared libraries:libicui18n.so 
.69: cannot open shared object file: No such 
file or directory


I just installed marble on f39 and its works. I have libicu18n.so 
.73 on my system.


# dnf whatprovides ibicui18n*
Last metadata expiration check: 14:26:03 ago on Sun 10 Mar 2024 12:19:03 
AM PST.
Error: No matches found. If searching for a file, try specifying the 
full path or using a wildcard prefix ("*/") at the beginning.


# find / -iname ibicui18n\*


Any idea where yours came from?




What are you running? Do you have an alias or another "marble" on your PATH?


No.

# which marble
/usr/bin/marble



Does /usr/bin/marble work?


That is how I got the error message
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Marble problem: libicui18n.so.69

[ToddAndMargo via users]

On 3/10/24 01:53, Barry wrote:




On 10 Mar 2024, at 06:06, ToddAndMargo via users 
 wrote:

root@rn6:/home$ marble
marble: error while loading shared libraries: libicui18n.so.69: cannot open 
shared object file: No such file or directory


Looks like a packaging issue on the surface.

Suggest you report as a bug in fedora bugtracker so
the maintainer can look at it.

Barry


I did:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2268746


--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Configuring LXC containers

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Sun, 2024-03-10 at 11:13 -0700, Mike Wright wrote:
> The last two lines are key.  Add these flags: -F -o logfile.  The 
> default loglevel is ERROR.  If you want more detail include -l LEVEL.
> 
> e.g. lxc-start -n containerName -F -o containerName.log -l WARN
> 

This is what I get:

$ lxc-start -n test -F -o test.log -l WARN
lxc-start: test: cgroups/cgfsng.c: __cgfsng_delegate_controllers: 2921 Device 
or resource busy - Could not enable "+cpu +io +memory +pids" controllers in the 
unified cgroup 9
lxc-start: test: cgroups/cgfsng.c: __cgfsng_delegate_controllers: 2921 Device 
or resource busy - Could not enable "+cpu +io +memory +pids" controllers in the 
unified cgroup 9
lxc-start: test: start.c: print_top_failing_dir: 99 Permission denied - Could 
not access /home/poc/.local. Please grant it x access, or add an ACL for the 
container root
lxc-start: test: sync.c: sync_wait: 34 An error occurred in another process 
(expected sequence number 1)
lxc-start: test: start.c: __lxc_start: 2074 Failed to spawn container "test"
lxc-start: test: tools/lxc_start.c: main: 306 The container failed to start
lxc-start: test: tools/lxc_start.c: main: 311 Additional information can be 
obtained by setting the --logfile and --logpriority options
$ cat test.log
lxc-start test 20240310223702.913 ERRORcgfsng - 
cgroups/cgfsng.c:__cgfsng_delegate_controllers:2921 - Device or resource busy - 
Could not enable "+cpu +io +memory +pids" controllers in the unified cgroup 9
lxc-start test 20240310223702.934 ERRORcgfsng - 
cgroups/cgfsng.c:__cgfsng_delegate_controllers:2921 - Device or resource busy - 
Could not enable "+cpu +io +memory +pids" controllers in the unified cgroup 9
lxc-start test 20240310223702.944 WARN cgfsng - 
cgroups/cgfsng.c:fchowmodat:1251 - No such file or directory - Failed to 
fchownat(15, memory.oom.group, 65536, 0, AT_EMPTY_PATH | AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW )
lxc-start test 20240310223702.944 WARN cgfsng - 
cgroups/cgfsng.c:fchowmodat:1251 - No such file or directory - Failed to 
fchownat(15, memory.reclaim, 65536, 0, AT_EMPTY_PATH | AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW )
lxc-start test 20240310223702.945 ERRORstart - 
start.c:print_top_failing_dir:99 - Permission denied - Could not access 
/home/poc/.local. Please grant it x access, or add an ACL for the container root
lxc-start test 20240310223702.945 ERRORsync - sync.c:sync_wait:34 - An 
error occurred in another process (expected sequence number 1)
lxc-start test 20240310223702.945 ERRORstart - start.c:__lxc_start:2074 - 
Failed to spawn container "test"
lxc-start test 20240310223702.945 WARN start - start.c:lxc_abort:1039 - No 
such process - Failed to send SIGKILL via pidfd 16 for process 148416
lxc-start test 20240310223702.958 ERRORlxc_start - 
tools/lxc_start.c:main:306 - The container failed to start

I guess the first two lines are the key to the problem. My default config file 
is:

$ cat ~/.config/lxc/default.conf
lxc.net.0.type = veth
lxc.net.0.link = lxcbr0
lxc.net.0.flags = up
lxc.net.0.hwaddr = 00:16:3e:xx:xx:xx
lxc.idmap = u 0 10 65536
lxc.idmap = g 0 10 65536

The 'test' container is a Fedora 39 instance.

poc
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fora vs. mailing lists

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Sun, 2024-03-10 at 11:40 -0500, Thomas Cameron wrote:
> I love mailing lists. I have filters set up they silently go to the 
> correct mail folder, I can read through them at my leisure, and I
> only 
> have to deal with one client - my mail client. My mail client
> defaults 
> to sane viewing rules, threaded, in the order I prefer. It's the same
> experience across every mailing list I'm a member of. I love that.
> It's 
> very accessibility-friendly.

+1

Not long ago the Gnome Project decided to stop supporting a number of
mailing lists, including the list for Evolution, in favour of an
instance of the Discourse web forum. We were told that a forum could
provide everything a list provided, and you could even interact with it
via email, so clearly it was a Good Thing.

It shortly became clear that the user experience of interacting with
Discourse via email was significantly worse than a traditional mailing
list, so a bunch of us set up a new list
(evolution-us...@lists.osuosl.org) where we continue on our merry way.
The Discourse instance still exists (the two mechanisms are entirely
separate with no cross-posting between them), but traffic on the
mailing list is noticeably greater than on the forum, which I think
says something.

poc
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Email Balkanization (was Re: Fora vs. mailing lists)

[Tom Horsley]

On Sun, 10 Mar 2024 22:23:04 +
Barry wrote:

> You log in once only, the login is remembered in a cookie.
> Just only and close the tab as needed.

On some forums, not on others.
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Email Balkanization (was Re: Fora vs. mailing lists)

[Barry]

> On 10 Mar 2024, at 20:03, Thomas Cameron  
> wrote:
> 
> Basically, the fora require you to open a browser/tab, log in, and only 
> *then* can you read your message

You log in once only, the login is remembered in a cookie.
Just only and close the tab as needed.

Barry
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fora vs. mailing lists

[Barry]

> On 10 Mar 2024, at 19:21, Thomas Cameron  
> wrote:
> 
> For fora, I have to explicitly remember that I've even posted something 
> (which is often a problem due to the ADHD), then open a new browser or tab, 
> go to the forum, log in, find my message, and see if there are any responses 
> or whatever.

You can set things up to email about a thread you started or replied to that 
has activity.

Personally I prefer the forums for a couple of reasons, I can edit out my typos 
and thinkos. It formats code and logs nicely.

I am also in the old man camp these days, been using email for ever.

I have a lot of email lists I am subscribed to and read as well.

Barry



--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fora vs. mailing lists

[Tom Horsley]

On Sun, 10 Mar 2024 21:19:27 +0100
wwp wrote:

> Tried fora a a while when I was forced to and finally gave up with 80%
> of them

So who's working on a web forum/email interface that is totally independent
of the web forum so the forum couldn't stop you from using email even
if they wanted to? Seems doable, just need it to log into the web forum
and extract replies to interesting threads. You'd only need to support
the various quirks of the 4,627 different forums :-).
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fora vs. mailing lists

[wwp]

Hello Thomas,


On Sun, 10 Mar 2024 11:40:05 -0500 Thomas Cameron 
 wrote:

> 
> 
> Quick definition: fora is the plural of forum, as in a web based forum to 
> discuss a topic or technology, like https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/.
> 
> Having said that...
> 
> I love mailing lists. I have filters set up they silently go to the correct 
> mail folder, I can read
[snip]

In agreement with 100% of what you wrote there.

Tried fora a a while when I was forced to and finally gave up with 80%
of them, cutting away from topics I was following.  It forced me to
abandon few things, the good point is that it gave me more time for
disconnected activities, which could be a not-so-minor turn in life.


Regards,

-- 
wwp
https://useplaintext.email/


pgphDid8YrQV2.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: port forwarding and RDP or ssh

[Samuel Sieb]

On 3/10/24 09:23, Alex wrote:

I believe Cinnamon is just a window manager on top of GNOME?


It's not.  It's independent from Gnome.


 >     My current preferred method is to use rustdesk.  There's an rpm
 >     available from the website.  I run my own server and relay
for it, so
 >     it's completely private.  I've only used it for supporting
windows
 >     users
 >     so far, so I'm not sure how well it works for Wayland on the
remote
 >     system.  It works fine with Wayland on the viewing side.
 >
 >
 > It appears rustdesk is only the client, correct? The server is
built-in
 > to Wayland as an RDP server, correct?

It's both and Wayland doesn't have an RDP server.  Both sides run
rustdesk and one side does the connection using the connection info
provided from the other side.


All the googling I've done hasn't resulted in any docs on how to 
download/setup/configure rustdesk on the server side. Do you have a 
pointer on how to do this?


You don't need the server side that I was referring to.  You can use 
their public infrastructure.  You just run the program on each side and 
the connection information is right there in the application.


I'm also assuming his desktop is wayland, given it's the fedora default, 
so should I convert to Xorg? It's a basic 10yo PC with a built-in video 
card and 64GB RAM.


It's not the "Fedora default".  It depends on the desktop.  Most are 
going that direction, but many haven't got there yet.


It doesn't look like Cinnamon has a built-in desktop sharing system, but 
you could use VNC or xrdp.  There are various options you can find:

https://www.google.com/search?q=cinnamon+remote+desktop
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Email Balkanization (was Re: Fora vs. mailing lists)

[Thomas Cameron]

On 3/10/24 14:17, Dave Close wrote:

To me the analogy is, in the olden days, a company sending you postal
mail in care of the local post office, the PO sending you a post card
that something has arrived, and you having to go to the PO and show
your identification to retrieve the item. No one would have tolerated
that situation; why do we tolerate it on the Internet?


This is a GREAT analogy. You're absolutely right. Basically, the fora 
require you to open a browser/tab, log in, and only *then* can you read 
your message.


With email, it's passive. It comes in, you scan the subject, and decide 
what to do - discard, read, respond, or archive. No hoops to jump 
through, and you don't have to open another app to deal with it.


--
Thomas
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fora vs. mailing lists

[Joe Zeff]

On 03/10/2024 01:46 PM, Thomas Cameron wrote:

On 3/10/24 14:39, Thomas Cameron wrote:
... but that's always the case with the myriad of fora which which I 
interact.


Correction, I meant to write "that's not* always the case..."



OK, fair enough.  But you still don't need to keep tabs constantly open 
for those that do, and probably don't need to be checking those that 
don't more than once an hour at most.  Remember, the more time you spend 
checking for replies, the less time you have to be productive on other 
tasks.

--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fora vs. mailing lists

[Joe Zeff]

On 03/10/2024 01:39 PM, Thomas Cameron wrote:
Where did I write that I did that at all? The Fedora forum *can* send 
emails, as Kevin pointed out, but that's always the case with the myriad 
of fora which which I interact.


If so, as I pointed out before, you don't need to keep all of those tabs 
open, which is what you're objecting to.  I do understand your point, I 
just think you're wrong.

--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fora vs. mailing lists

[Thomas Cameron]

On 3/10/24 14:39, Thomas Cameron wrote:
... but that's always the case with the myriad 
of fora which which I interact.


Correction, I meant to write "that's not* always the case..."

--
Thomas
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fora vs. mailing lists

[Thomas Cameron]

On 3/10/24 14:32, Joe Zeff wrote:

On 03/10/2024 01:20 PM, Thomas Cameron wrote:


I'm not sure why you're refusing to understand my point here.


Oh, I understand your point, I just think that you're going out of your 
way to make your life more difficult than it needs to be.  Instead of 
keeping each forum open on a tab and obsessively going back and forth 
watching for replies and getting far less useful work done than you 
could, why don't you simply set as many of them as possible to email you 
when there's a reply?


I'm reading this:


Instead of keeping each forum open on a tab and obsessively going back and 
forth watching for replies


Where did I write that I did that at all? The Fedora forum *can* send 
emails, as Kevin pointed out, but that's always the case with the myriad 
of fora which which I interact.


Again, you're intentionally refusing to understand what I said. I won't 
be responding to further silliness.


--
Thomas
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fora vs. mailing lists

[Joe Zeff]

On 03/10/2024 01:20 PM, Thomas Cameron wrote:


I'm not sure why you're refusing to understand my point here.


Oh, I understand your point, I just think that you're going out of your 
way to make your life more difficult than it needs to be.  Instead of 
keeping each forum open on a tab and obsessively going back and forth 
watching for replies and getting far less useful work done than you 
could, why don't you simply set as many of them as possible to email you 
when there's a reply?

--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fora vs. mailing lists

[Thomas Cameron]

On 3/10/24 13:32, Kevin Fenzi wrote:

So, I agree with you about the push vs pull factor, so I interact with
discussion.fedoraproject.org via email. 🙂

https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/guide-to-interacting-with-this-site-by-email/25960

You can decide what tags you want to 'subscribe' to, it sends emails
with list-id headers, you can filter them, reply to them, etc.
There are some drawbacks: If you want to start a thread you have to do
that with the web interface (so you can specify the tags), etc.

Of course that won't work for many, but for people who have a large
email infrastructure setup it might be a better way to interact with it.

kevin


Kevin, I'm gonna have to buy you your favorite beverage if I see you at 
Summit or SCALE or TXLF, man. I wasn't aware of the email functionality, 
and I'm absolutely going to dig into it. Thank you SO MUCH for posting 
this!


--
Thanks!
Thomas
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fora vs. mailing lists

[Thomas Cameron]

On 3/10/24 12:58, Joe Zeff wrote:
You only need to have a tab open for a forum when you're actively using 
it.  Why are you going out of your way to make your life difficult?


I'm not sure why you're refusing to understand my point here.

It's that, in an email list, it's all in one place, and it's passive. It 
comes to me in an app I already have open all the time. I get a 
notification, and I can check it and decide whether to take action.


For fora, I have to explicitly remember that I've even posted something 
(which is often a problem due to the ADHD), then open a new browser or 
tab, go to the forum, log in, find my message, and see if there are any 
responses or whatever.


If you can't see the difference, I honestly don't know what to tell you.

--
Thomas
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Email Balkanization (was Re: Fora vs. mailing lists)

[Dave Close]

Thomas Cameron wrote:
>

Well said. I'm in full agreement.

I see a possibly related condition that also irritates me. The
Balkanization of "email" (quotes deliberate). You want to send an
email message to some company but you don't know their address. You
check their web site and find a page, "send us email". But it doesn't
give you an address, just a web form. You have no easy way to keep a
copy of your message. If they reply, you have to go back to their web
site to read it. In many cases, that means you have to log in before
you can read a reply, or even to send the message initially. This is
NOT email, folks.

To me the analogy is, in the olden days, a company sending you postal
mail in care of the local post office, the PO sending you a post card
that something has arrived, and you having to go to the PO and show
your identification to retrieve the item. No one would have tolerated
that situation; why do we tolerate it on the Internet?

I get that the design of Internet email was not well done
initially. Designers had no thought of future integrity or security
problems. Solutions to those problems have been developed but require
users to be at least semi-intelligent. Since people read email using a
web interface that hides much of the information useful for identifying
spam, it seems to me that those web systems should make the use of
proper encryption techniques to identify senders and recipients easy
when that is appropriate.
-- 
 Dave Close, Compata, Irvine CA   +1 714 434 7359
   d...@compata.com  dhcl...@alumni.caltech.edu
"Thoughts, like fleas, jump from man to man,
 but they don't bite everybody." -- Stanislaw Jerzy Lec

--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Virtualization: Windows 32-bit i686 guest not working on Fedora 39 x86_64 ?

[Franta Hanzlík via users]

After 'dnf system-upgrade...' my machine from F37 x86_64 to F39, win7-32 
guest did not start due to BSOD 0x007B boot problem, while win10 
64-bit works fine on the same machine.

I then tried:

- a newly created virtual machine consisting only of Win7-32 or Win10-32 
installation ISO image freezes after start on the first inquiry window 
- the keyboard and mouse do not respond.

- the same way created virtual win10 64-bit installation CD ISO works 
correctly.

- I received the same behavior on a cleqan, freshly installed F39 system 
 - Win7 or Win10 32-bit did not work, but 64-bit without problems.

- on a new installation of F38 - Win7 guest works without problems, 
as well as both guest installations of 32-bit windows from the CD ISO 
image.

On F38 is libvirt-daemon-9.0.0-4.fc38.x86_64 + qemu-kvm-7.2.8-1.fc38.x86_64
On F39 is libvirt-daemon-9.7.0-2.fc39.x86_64 + qemu-kvm-8.1.3-4.fc39.x86_64

Does anyone have any idea where the problem could be?
-- 
Thanks, Franta Hanzlik
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fora vs. mailing lists

[Charles Dennett]

On 3/10/24 12:40, Thomas Cameron wrote:



Am I the only one who feels this way? Has the day finally come where I'm 
just old and set in my ways? Are there others who prefer mailing lists 
to fora?




I agree with all you said. I've been on the Internet a long time.  Heck, 
anyone remember bang paths?  I'm a retied IT systems admin and have 
always subscribed to multiple mailing lists depending on what my 
job/interests were at the time. I never found it a hassle to set up 
filters on my gmail account or to set up procmail filters on my home 
imap server where I consolidate mail from a few gmail accounts and my 
ISP's email via fetchmail.  For me, it just seems more convenient to 
use, basically for all the reasons the OP noted.  I guess I'm also old 
and set in my ways.


Charlie Dennett
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fora vs. mailing lists

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Sun, Mar 10, 2024 at 11:40:05AM -0500, Thomas Cameron wrote:
> 
> 
> Quick definition: fora is the plural of forum, as in a web based forum to
> discuss a topic or technology, like https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/.
> 
> Having said that...
> 
> I love mailing lists. I have filters set up they silently go to the correct
> mail folder, I can read through them at my leisure, and I only have to deal
> with one client - my mail client. My mail client defaults to sane viewing
> rules, threaded, in the order I prefer. It's the same experience across
> every mailing list I'm a member of. I love that. It's very
> accessibility-friendly.

Yep. Same here. 

However, realize that you spend a long time setting all that up.
The subscriptions, filtering, how things look in your email client, etc. 
For someone new or just wanting to ask a question or two, lists are
horrible.

> I hate using fora. I generally have to open a separate tab for each forum
> I'm on, and I'm on a LOT. And I have to go out of my way to even remember
> all the fora I am a member of. For those of us who are members of a bunch,
> it's kind of a beating - especially if you're an ADHD person, like me. I get
> that I can (sometimes) set up email notifications when there are responses
> to my posts or comments, but... if we're already emailing forum members, why
> the heck don't we just use email lists?

Because it's not great for new people/casual questions, it lacks ability
to do things like merge threads that are about the same thing, etc.
It's easy to spam lists, harder to do so on a fora. 
email is becoming more and more difficult due to the giant walled
gardens of gmail/microsoft and I could go on...

> I also love that I see interesting problems on mailing lists that I'd never
> thought of or dealt with, and it's right there, in the list's mail folder. I
> learn a LOT perusing those messages. It's there, I can easily read through
> the threads when I get a minute. And I don't have to remember to fire up a
> new browser tab to parse them.
> 
> The whole "fora are an archive" argument is kinda nonsensical, since mailing
> lists are generally archived on the web, as well. In my experience, mailing
> list archives are easier to search than a forum.
> 
> I get the sense that moving from email lists to fora was a move to force
> folks to go to a web site to drive advertising. I kinda hate that. When Red
> Hat moved from email lists to fora (log in required), I got the sense that
> it was really to gather information about who was interacting with their web
> site. Ditto pretty much every other vendor who moved from email lists to web
> based fora - this isn't a Red Hat or Fedora specific thing.

That might be a general trend (I don't know), but has nothing to do with
Fedora's discourse instance. There's no ads or extra monitoring that I
can think of.

> Am I the only one who feels this way? Has the day finally come where I'm
> just old and set in my ways? Are there others who prefer mailing lists to
> fora?
> 
> To be clear, I am not bashing fora, per se - I'm just saying that for me,
> they're not NEARLY as easy to deal with as email lists. If you like fora,
> that's awesome. I'm not attacking you. Let's nip that in the bud. I'm not
> looking for a flame war, just trying to see if other feel the same way.
> Let's keep it civil.

So, I agree with you about the push vs pull factor, so I interact with
discussion.fedoraproject.org via email. :)

https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/guide-to-interacting-with-this-site-by-email/25960

You can decide what tags you want to 'subscribe' to, it sends emails
with list-id headers, you can filter them, reply to them, etc. 
There are some drawbacks: If you want to start a thread you have to do
that with the web interface (so you can specify the tags), etc.

Of course that won't work for many, but for people who have a large
email infrastructure setup it might be a better way to interact with it.

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fora vs. mailing lists

[Frank Bures]

On 2024-03-10 12:40, Thomas Cameron wrote:



Quick definition: fora is the plural of forum, as in a web based forum to 
discuss a topic or technology, like https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/.


Having said that...

I love mailing lists. I have filters set up they silently go to the correct 
mail folder, I can read through them at my leisure, and I only have to deal 
with one client - my mail client. My mail client defaults to sane viewing 
rules, threaded, in the order I prefer. It's the same experience across 
every mailing list I'm a member of. I love that. It's very 
accessibility-friendly.


I hate using fora. I generally have to open a separate tab for each forum 
I'm on, and I'm on a LOT. And I have to go out of my way to even remember 
all the fora I am a member of. For those of us who are members of a bunch, 
it's kind of a beating - especially if you're an ADHD person, like me. I 
get that I can (sometimes) set up email notifications when there are 
responses to my posts or comments, but... if we're already emailing forum 
members, why the heck don't we just use email lists?


I also love that I see interesting problems on mailing lists that I'd never 
thought of or dealt with, and it's right there, in the list's mail folder. 
I learn a LOT perusing those messages. It's there, I can easily read 
through the threads when I get a minute. And I don't have to remember to 
fire up a new browser tab to parse them.


The whole "fora are an archive" argument is kinda nonsensical, since 
mailing lists are generally archived on the web, as well. In my experience, 
mailing list archives are easier to search than a forum.


I get the sense that moving from email lists to fora was a move to force 
folks to go to a web site to drive advertising. I kinda hate that. When Red 
Hat moved from email lists to fora (log in required), I got the sense that 
it was really to gather information about who was interacting with their 
web site. Ditto pretty much every other vendor who moved from email lists 
to web based fora - this isn't a Red Hat or Fedora specific thing.


Am I the only one who feels this way? Has the day finally come where I'm 
just old and set in my ways? Are there others who prefer mailing lists to 
fora?


To be clear, I am not bashing fora, per se - I'm just saying that for me, 
they're not NEARLY as easy to deal with as email lists. If you like fora, 
that's awesome. I'm not attacking you. Let's nip that in the bud. I'm not 
looking for a flame war, just trying to see if other feel the same way. 
Let's keep it civil.


I agree with you wholeheartedly.  I just don't see what coud we do about it.

Cheers
Frank

--


--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Configuring LXC containers

[Mike Wright]

On 3/10/24 09:39, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:

I'd like to play with LXC but I find the docs not very newbie-friendly.
I'm trying to follow a guide at:

https://brandonrozek.com/blog/lxc-fedora-38/

(basically because it mentions Fedora). I followed the steps closely
and rebooted, but I get the following error:

$ systemd-run --unit=my-unit --user --scope -p "Delegate=yes" -- lxc-start 
test
Running scope as unit: my-unit.scope
lxc-start: test: lxccontainer.c: wait_on_daemonized_start: 877 Received container state 
"ABORTING" instead of "RUNNING"
lxc-start: test: tools/lxc_start.c: main: 306 The container failed to start
lxc-start: test: tools/lxc_start.c: main: 309 To get more details, run the 
container in foreground mode
lxc-start: test: tools/lxc_start.c: main: 311 Additional information can be 
obtained by setting the --logfile and --logpriority options

Any insights would be welcome. (Just in case, I tried running with

SElinux turned off, but it made no difference.)


I use lxc all the time.

The last two lines are key.  Add these flags: -F -o logfile.  The 
default loglevel is ERROR.  If you want more detail include -l LEVEL.


e.g. lxc-start -n containerName -F -o containerName.log -l WARN

My experience has been that there is a disconnect between the container 
and the host's bridge usually caused by misconfigured network options in 
the config file or perhaps the default bridge is not up.


Here's a section from my Archlinux config.  This particular bridge is 
named WWW.  The veth.pair isn't necessary but it puts a name on the 
interface and makes it easier to identify with "ip link list (ip l l )". 
 The generated names, eth-VLXWORL eg. aren't helpful at all.  Same 
thing about hwaddr.  If you don't provide a MAC one will be provided for 
you.


 # Network configuration
 lxc.net.0.type = veth
 lxc.net.0.link = WWW
 lxc.net.0.flags = up

 # not required
 lxc.net.0.veth.pair = WWW-rch
 lxc.net.0.hwaddr = 00:16:3e:00:05:10

hth, :m

--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fora vs. mailing lists

[Joe Zeff]

On 03/10/2024 11:14 AM, Thomas Cameron wrote:


I'm not saying that. What I AM saying, is that every time I need to go 
to a forum, I have to open a separate tab. It's a pain.


You only need to have a tab open for a forum when you're actively using 
it.  Why are you going out of your way to make your life difficult?

--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fora vs. mailing lists

[Mike Wright]

On 3/10/24 09:40, Thomas Cameron wrote:



Quick definition: fora is the plural of forum, as in a web based forum 
to discuss a topic or technology, like 
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/.


Having said that...

I love mailing lists. I have filters set up they silently go to the 
correct mail folder, I can read through them at my leisure, and I only 
have to deal with one client - my mail client. My mail client defaults 
to sane viewing rules, threaded, in the order I prefer. It's the same 
experience across every mailing list I'm a member of. I love that. It's 
very accessibility-friendly.


I hate using fora. I generally have to open a separate tab for each 
forum I'm on, and I'm on a LOT. And I have to go out of my way to even 
remember all the fora I am a member of. For those of us who are members 
of a bunch, it's kind of a beating - especially if you're an ADHD 
person, like me. I get that I can (sometimes) set up email notifications 
when there are responses to my posts or comments, but... if we're 
already emailing forum members, why the heck don't we just use email lists?


I also love that I see interesting problems on mailing lists that I'd 
never thought of or dealt with, and it's right there, in the list's mail 
folder. I learn a LOT perusing those messages. It's there, I can easily 
read through the threads when I get a minute. And I don't have to 
remember to fire up a new browser tab to parse them.


The whole "fora are an archive" argument is kinda nonsensical, since 
mailing lists are generally archived on the web, as well. In my 
experience, mailing list archives are easier to search than a forum.


I get the sense that moving from email lists to fora was a move to force 
folks to go to a web site to drive advertising. I kinda hate that. When 
Red Hat moved from email lists to fora (log in required), I got the 
sense that it was really to gather information about who was interacting 
with their web site. Ditto pretty much every other vendor who moved from 
email lists to web based fora - this isn't a Red Hat or Fedora specific 
thing.


Am I the only one who feels this way? Has the day finally come where I'm 
just old and set in my ways? Are there others who prefer mailing lists 
to fora?


To be clear, I am not bashing fora, per se - I'm just saying that for 
me, they're not NEARLY as easy to deal with as email lists. If you like 
fora, that's awesome. I'm not attacking you. Let's nip that in the bud. 
I'm not looking for a flame war, just trying to see if other feel the 
same way. Let's keep it civil.




Thank you for posting this.

I could not agree more.  After Barry's post "Re: ghost town" I visited 
the forum.


It's pretty.  Lot of wasted space.  When I opened a "thread" there 
didn't seem to be a way to close it.  That lead to lots of scrolling.  Lots.


When I stretched my always open mail client to the same size as the 
forum I had more than 50 threads listed.  The forum had eight.


I can only speculate because I use a desktop vis-à-vis a cellphone so 
maybe I'm missing something that makes web forums easier and mailing 
lists more difficult for those users.


But all in all, I concur with Thomas' well written opinion, especially 
his comment regarding list archives.


If the mailing list were to atrophy from lack of users it would become 
useless to me and I would fade away from the Fedora scene.


Mike Wright
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fora vs. mailing lists

[Thomas Cameron]

On 3/10/24 12:04, Joe Zeff wrote:


Why keep a separate tab for each forum open at all times?  How many of 
them do you actually need to look at each day?


I'm not saying that. What I AM saying, is that every time I need to go 
to a forum, I have to open a separate tab. It's a pain.


Also, if I have a mail folder where my list traffic goes, I see that 
there are messages. It's passive. My email is always open. But if I want 
to catch up on fora, it's a separate process, opening a separate tab, 
for EVERY forum.


Am I making the distinction clear? Inbound email is passive, and super 
easy to catch up on. Going to a forum is an active, outbound process 
that I have to remember to do. Again, it's not a dig on fora, it's a dig 
on the process. Active vs. passive.


--
Thomas
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fora vs. mailing lists

[Joe Zeff]

On 03/10/2024 10:40 AM, Thomas Cameron wrote:
I hate using fora. I generally have to open a separate tab for each 
forum I'm on, and I'm on a LOT.


Why keep a separate tab for each forum open at all times?  How many of 
them do you actually need to look at each day?

--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Fora vs. mailing lists

[Thomas Cameron]

Quick definition: fora is the plural of forum, as in a web based forum 
to discuss a topic or technology, like 
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/.


Having said that...

I love mailing lists. I have filters set up they silently go to the 
correct mail folder, I can read through them at my leisure, and I only 
have to deal with one client - my mail client. My mail client defaults 
to sane viewing rules, threaded, in the order I prefer. It's the same 
experience across every mailing list I'm a member of. I love that. It's 
very accessibility-friendly.


I hate using fora. I generally have to open a separate tab for each 
forum I'm on, and I'm on a LOT. And I have to go out of my way to even 
remember all the fora I am a member of. For those of us who are members 
of a bunch, it's kind of a beating - especially if you're an ADHD 
person, like me. I get that I can (sometimes) set up email notifications 
when there are responses to my posts or comments, but... if we're 
already emailing forum members, why the heck don't we just use email lists?


I also love that I see interesting problems on mailing lists that I'd 
never thought of or dealt with, and it's right there, in the list's mail 
folder. I learn a LOT perusing those messages. It's there, I can easily 
read through the threads when I get a minute. And I don't have to 
remember to fire up a new browser tab to parse them.


The whole "fora are an archive" argument is kinda nonsensical, since 
mailing lists are generally archived on the web, as well. In my 
experience, mailing list archives are easier to search than a forum.


I get the sense that moving from email lists to fora was a move to force 
folks to go to a web site to drive advertising. I kinda hate that. When 
Red Hat moved from email lists to fora (log in required), I got the 
sense that it was really to gather information about who was interacting 
with their web site. Ditto pretty much every other vendor who moved from 
email lists to web based fora - this isn't a Red Hat or Fedora specific 
thing.


Am I the only one who feels this way? Has the day finally come where I'm 
just old and set in my ways? Are there others who prefer mailing lists 
to fora?


To be clear, I am not bashing fora, per se - I'm just saying that for 
me, they're not NEARLY as easy to deal with as email lists. If you like 
fora, that's awesome. I'm not attacking you. Let's nip that in the bud. 
I'm not looking for a flame war, just trying to see if other feel the 
same way. Let's keep it civil.


Thanks,
Thomas
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Configuring LXC containers

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

I'd like to play with LXC but I find the docs not very newbie-friendly.
I'm trying to follow a guide at:

https://brandonrozek.com/blog/lxc-fedora-38/

(basically because it mentions Fedora). I followed the steps closely
and rebooted, but I get the following error:

   $ systemd-run --unit=my-unit --user --scope -p "Delegate=yes" -- lxc-start 
test
   Running scope as unit: my-unit.scope
   lxc-start: test: lxccontainer.c: wait_on_daemonized_start: 877 Received 
container state "ABORTING" instead of "RUNNING"
   lxc-start: test: tools/lxc_start.c: main: 306 The container failed to start
   lxc-start: test: tools/lxc_start.c: main: 309 To get more details, run the 
container in foreground mode
   lxc-start: test: tools/lxc_start.c: main: 311 Additional information can be 
obtained by setting the --logfile and --logpriority options
   
Any insights would be welcome. (Just in case, I tried running with
SElinux turned off, but it made no difference.)

poc
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: port forwarding and RDP or ssh

[Alex]

Hi,

> I'm not clear on if you want to do desktop sharing or a remote X
> > connection.  For an application like evolution, I would suggest
> desktop
> > sharing.  If you want to run evolution and have it display on your
> > screen using X forwarding, then you just need the "-X" option to ssh.
> > No port forwarding required (other than ssh to get in).  Then you
> have
> > to run the application and it only displays on your screen (slowly).
> >
> >
> > I forgot that the command-line I was using was from a long time ago when
> > I actually had tigervnc working properly over port 5901. When I connect
> > using just -X then try to run evolution, it fails:
> >
> > $ ssh -X -i ~/.ssh/mykey-key.rsa -l gary remotehost -p 1024
> > [gary@fedora ~]$ evolution
> > (evolution:3644): GLib-GIO-WARNING **: 09:41:05.182: Your application
> > did not unregister from D-Bus before destruction. Consider using
> > g_application_run().
>
> That's not failing unless it comes back to the prompt.  How long did you
> wait?  Is it already running for that user?
>

He's bringing the PC to me so I can experiment now, but I think it went
back to the prompt and evolution simply never appeared. My DISPLAY was set
to localhost:10.0 but it's somehow possible it was being displayed on his
computer.

>
> > If you want to do desktop sharing, then your friend needs to enable
> > that
> > in the sharing section of the Gnome settings.
> >
> >
> > Do you have more specifics on that? I've tried search for "sharing" and
> > "remote" in my GNOME settings in Cinnamon and nothing is found.
>
> I don't know about Cinnamon.  Maybe it doesn't have it.  In Gnome,
> there's a section called "Sharing" which has ssh, desktop sharing, and
> file sharing.
>

I believe Cinnamon is just a window manager on top of GNOME?

I'm an old-school admin who used to build his own X configs - haven't kept
up with the desktop stuff, despite having fedora as my daily driver for
decades :-)

> My current preferred method is to use rustdesk.  There's an rpm
> > available from the website.  I run my own server and relay for it, so
> > it's completely private.  I've only used it for supporting windows
> > users
> > so far, so I'm not sure how well it works for Wayland on the remote
> > system.  It works fine with Wayland on the viewing side.
> >
> >
> > It appears rustdesk is only the client, correct? The server is built-in
> > to Wayland as an RDP server, correct?
>
> It's both and Wayland doesn't have an RDP server.  Both sides run
> rustdesk and one side does the connection using the connection info
> provided from the other side.
>

All the googling I've done hasn't resulted in any docs on how to
download/setup/configure rustdesk on the server side. Do you have a pointer
on how to do this?

I'm also assuming his desktop is wayland, given it's the fedora default, so
should I convert to Xorg? It's a basic 10yo PC with a built-in video card
and 64GB RAM.
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: port forwarding and RDP or ssh

[Samuel Sieb]

On 3/10/24 07:01, Alex wrote:

I'm not clear on if you want to do desktop sharing or a remote X
connection.  For an application like evolution, I would suggest desktop
sharing.  If you want to run evolution and have it display on your
screen using X forwarding, then you just need the "-X" option to ssh.
No port forwarding required (other than ssh to get in).  Then you have
to run the application and it only displays on your screen (slowly).


I forgot that the command-line I was using was from a long time ago when 
I actually had tigervnc working properly over port 5901. When I connect 
using just -X then try to run evolution, it fails:


$ ssh -X -i ~/.ssh/mykey-key.rsa -l gary remotehost -p 1024
[gary@fedora ~]$ evolution
(evolution:3644): GLib-GIO-WARNING **: 09:41:05.182: Your application 
did not unregister from D-Bus before destruction. Consider using 
g_application_run().


That's not failing unless it comes back to the prompt.  How long did you 
wait?  Is it already running for that user?



If you want to do desktop sharing, then your friend needs to enable
that
in the sharing section of the Gnome settings. 



Do you have more specifics on that? I've tried search for "sharing" and 
"remote" in my GNOME settings in Cinnamon and nothing is found.


I don't know about Cinnamon.  Maybe it doesn't have it.  In Gnome, 
there's a section called "Sharing" which has ssh, desktop sharing, and 
file sharing.



My current preferred method is to use rustdesk.  There's an rpm
available from the website.  I run my own server and relay for it, so
it's completely private.  I've only used it for supporting windows
users
so far, so I'm not sure how well it works for Wayland on the remote
system.  It works fine with Wayland on the viewing side.


It appears rustdesk is only the client, correct? The server is built-in 
to Wayland as an RDP server, correct?


It's both and Wayland doesn't have an RDP server.  Both sides run 
rustdesk and one side does the connection using the connection info 
provided from the other side.

--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: port forwarding and RDP or ssh

[Alex]

Hi,

> Hi, I have a fedora38 system on Optonline with port 1024 forwarded from
> > the router to 1024 on the fedora38 system where ssh is listening. I'm
> > currently using the following to connect:
> >
> > $ ssh -i ~/.ssh/mykey-key.rsa -L 5901:127.0.0.1:5901
> >  -Y -l gary remotehost -p 1024
> >
> > I'd like to be able to have applications launched on the remote system
> > appear on my desktop, also using fedora38. What's the best way to do
> that?
> >
> > I've read about RDP and gnome-remote-session but much of the docs appear
> > to be out-of-date. General advice on what works in 2024 would be
> > appreciated.
> >
> > My friend is having difficulty with his evolution configuration. I'd
> > like to be able to launch evolution on his PC and have it appear on mine.
>
> I'm not clear on if you want to do desktop sharing or a remote X
> connection.  For an application like evolution, I would suggest desktop
> sharing.  If you want to run evolution and have it display on your
> screen using X forwarding, then you just need the "-X" option to ssh.
> No port forwarding required (other than ssh to get in).  Then you have
> to run the application and it only displays on your screen (slowly).
>

I forgot that the command-line I was using was from a long time ago when I
actually had tigervnc working properly over port 5901. When I connect using
just -X then try to run evolution, it fails:

$ ssh -X -i ~/.ssh/mykey-key.rsa -l gary remotehost -p 1024
[gary@fedora ~]$ evolution
(evolution:3644): GLib-GIO-WARNING **: 09:41:05.182: Your application did
not unregister from D-Bus before destruction. Consider using
g_application_run().

If you want to do desktop sharing, then your friend needs to enable that
> in the sharing section of the Gnome settings.


Do you have more specifics on that? I've tried search for "sharing" and
"remote" in my GNOME settings in Cinnamon and nothing is found.

Then you would forward
> port 3389 instead of 5901 and connect to localhost using rdp and the
> credentials that your friend configures.
>
> My current preferred method is to use rustdesk.  There's an rpm
> available from the website.  I run my own server and relay for it, so
> it's completely private.  I've only used it for supporting windows users
> so far, so I'm not sure how well it works for Wayland on the remote
> system.  It works fine with Wayland on the viewing side.
>

It appears rustdesk is only the client, correct? The server is built-in to
Wayland as an RDP server, correct?

Thanks,
Alex
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Marble problem: libicui18n.so.69

[Barry Scott]

> On 10 Mar 2024, at 06:06, ToddAndMargo via users 
>  wrote:
> 
> root@rn6:/home$ marble
> marble: error while loading shared libraries: libicui18n.so 
> .69: cannot open shared object file: No such file or 
> directory

I just installed marble on f39 and its works. I have libicu18n.so 
.73 on my system.

What are you running? Do you have an alias or another "marble" on your PATH?

Does /usr/bin/marble work?

Barry

--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Marble problem: libicui18n.so.69

[Barry]

> On 10 Mar 2024, at 06:06, ToddAndMargo via users 
>  wrote:
> 
> root@rn6:/home$ marble
> marble: error while loading shared libraries: libicui18n.so.69: cannot open 
> shared object file: No such file or directory

Looks like a packaging issue on the surface.

Suggest you report as a bug in fedora bugtracker so
the maintainer can look at it.

Barry
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: ghost town

[Barry]

> On 9 Mar 2024, at 16:27, Tim via users  wrote:
> 
> some tumbleweeds drift through

The majority of user traffic is on https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/ these 
days.

Barry

--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue