Re: how long does dnf system-upgrade take?
Tim: >> Let's be clear, we're not talking about annoying changes to how the >> desktop looks, that can be put up with. But when you find essential >> software and/or hardware doesn't work anymore, or doesn't exist >> anymore, and support libraries are incompatible, that's a deal-breaker. >> >> It's a part of the reasons Linux gets minimal support with hardware >> (printers, graphics cards, scanners, whatever). Those manufacturers >> don't want to be dealing with ever-changing infrastructure where >> someone else is making all these changes. And there's every chance >> that by the time they've developed their gadget and software for it, a >> Linux distro has changed OSs twice. Samuel Sieb: > The only reason this is a problem for some manufacturers is because they > want to keep it proprietary. Printers and scanners (and any other > hardware) that use open standards or provide open-source drivers work > great with Linux. Compare the difference between NVidia and AMD or > Intel. How often do you see people having issues with AMD or Intel > graphics compared to the never-ending issues with NVidia drivers? I don't agree. It's a PART of the reason, sure. But not the only reason. When you're developing anything computing or electronics, there's often years between conception of the idea and (allegedly) finished product. That's hard to do when you're trying to fit into someone else's product that keeps changing. You have to learn how it works before you can develop for it, but then *it* changes and you have to start again. Certainly, open standards help, but many of them don't exist when you start, and others come into being in the middle. In both electronics and computing you have developers who want things done their way, and rival techniques vie for pole position. Linux seems very bad at continually re-inventing the wheel. How many different sound systems have we had over the years? -- uname -rsvp Linux 3.10.0-1160.114.2.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Wed Mar 20 15:54:52 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: crippling nvidia display issue.
On 15/04/2024 20:02, home user wrote: On 4/11/24 11:19 AM, home user wrote: After a few days of being seriously side-tracked, I can try to get back to this. Those who explained the kernel numbering: thank-you. (f-38; stand-alone work station; nvidia graphics card; dual monitor; kmod 4xx driver) I just finished doing a "dnf upgrade" as a prerequisite step to upgrading from f-38 to f-39. There were no hints of any problems. The kernel and the graphics driver were replaced during this "dnf upgrade". The akmods did finish before I rebooted. The shutdown took 5 minutes because it ran akmods (a second time?!). During the boot-up, there was a message that it was failing back to nouveau. The display is not working properly; only one monitor is being used and everything is oversized in the display. I am not comfortable proceeding with the f-38 to f-39 upgrade with the work station in this condition. Important: I have only one old kernel. I have no rescue kernel. How do I get this workstation working properly? A. nvidia's proprietary drivers. There's 1. (Thomas) I finally just nuked all the RPMFusion packages and downloaded the drivers directly from https://www.nvidia.com/download/index.aspx and ran the installer from there. It works fine again. (Todd) I can tell you that building the 2 or 3 nvidia 470xx packages works well for the later 6.7 and current 6.8 kernels. and there's 2. (John) AIUI we are moving from X11 graphics towards Wayland, which the nvidia driver will not support... (Michael) So, not sure if this is a kernel issue, or the driver issue, but seems neither rpmfusiong or nvidia's driver will work any longer? These seem to me to be inconsistent with each other. What am I missing? B. nvidia and Fedora. From posts in this thread, I gather that 1. nvidia users can no longer use Fedora, and 2. Fedora users can no longer use nvidia. Is this correct? I don't think your summaries are correct. But although technical fixes may exist for the immediate problems the situation at rpmfusion looks more difficult. See this Bugzilla and in particular Comment 5. https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6904 John P -- ___ 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: crippling nvidia display issue.
On 4/15/24 14:02, home user wrote: On 4/11/24 11:19 AM, home user wrote: There's 1. (Thomas) I finally just nuked all the RPMFusion packages and downloaded the drivers directly from https://www.nvidia.com/download/index.aspx and ran the installer from there. It works fine again. (Todd) I can tell you that building the 2 or 3 nvidia 470xx packages works well for the later 6.7 and current 6.8 kernels. and there's 2. (John) AIUI we are moving from X11 graphics towards Wayland, which the nvidia driver will not support... (Michael) So, not sure if this is a kernel issue, or the driver issue, but seems neither rpmfusiong or nvidia's driver will work any longer? These seem to me to be inconsistent with each other. What am I missing? B. nvidia and Fedora. From posts in this thread, I gather that 1. nvidia users can no longer use Fedora, and That's not AT ALL what I said. I was able to use the NVidia drivers from NVidia's web site just fine. Others mentioned they did the same. 2. Fedora users can no longer use nvidia. Again, I didn't see ANYTHING that intimated that. Is this correct? Nope. I've been using Linux since 1995. NVidia drivers have ALWAYS been problematic. RPMFusion has done amazing work trying to make it less onerous, but often times NVidia makes changes that catch third parties like RPMFusion unawares. I *feel* like this is just another case of this. It stinks, but it's not the end of the world. Either wait til this gets fixed by the volunteer developers at RPMFusion (and be cool to them, most are working out of love for the community), or install the NVidia drivers from NVidia web site. You'll be fine. -- 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: crippling nvidia display issue.
On 4/11/24 11:19 AM, home user wrote: After a few days of being seriously side-tracked, I can try to get back to this. Those who explained the kernel numbering: thank-you. (f-38; stand-alone work station; nvidia graphics card; dual monitor; kmod 4xx driver) I just finished doing a "dnf upgrade" as a prerequisite step to upgrading from f-38 to f-39. There were no hints of any problems. The kernel and the graphics driver were replaced during this "dnf upgrade". The akmods did finish before I rebooted. The shutdown took 5 minutes because it ran akmods (a second time?!). During the boot-up, there was a message that it was failing back to nouveau. The display is not working properly; only one monitor is being used and everything is oversized in the display. I am not comfortable proceeding with the f-38 to f-39 upgrade with the work station in this condition. Important: I have only one old kernel. I have no rescue kernel. How do I get this workstation working properly? A. nvidia's proprietary drivers. There's 1. (Thomas) I finally just nuked all the RPMFusion packages and downloaded the drivers directly from https://www.nvidia.com/download/index.aspx and ran the installer from there. It works fine again. (Todd) I can tell you that building the 2 or 3 nvidia 470xx packages works well for the later 6.7 and current 6.8 kernels. and there's 2. (John) AIUI we are moving from X11 graphics towards Wayland, which the nvidia driver will not support... (Michael) So, not sure if this is a kernel issue, or the driver issue, but seems neither rpmfusiong or nvidia's driver will work any longer? These seem to me to be inconsistent with each other. What am I missing? B. nvidia and Fedora. From posts in this thread, I gather that 1. nvidia users can no longer use Fedora, and 2. Fedora users can no longer use nvidia. Is this correct? -- ___ 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
[389-users] Re: Permission of log files
Julian The ldif below will do the trick, replace the add: with replac;e if the attributes already exist. Rob dn: cn=config changetype: modify add: nsslapd-accesslog-mode nsslapd-accesslog-mode: 644 - add: nsslapd-errorlog-mode nsslapd-errorlog-mode: 644 -Original Message- From: Julian Kippels Sent: Monday, April 15, 2024 4:51 AM To: General discussion list for the 389 Directory server project. <389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org> Subject: [389-users] Permission of log files ✉External message: Use caution. Hi, I am looking for a way to configure the default permission of the log files in /var/log/dirsrv//* All the files there belong to dirsrv:dirsrv with the permission of 0600. I would like to have the default permission to be 0644 so that my external log-monitoring can access the files. Julian -- ___ 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to 389-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/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[389-users] Re: Permission of log files
Welp, just call for help and you find a way to help yourself.
I was only looking in the cockpit-webinterface for an option. I just
found out that there is a configuration parameter I can set with dsconf
in the cli called nsslapd-{access,error,…}log-mode= where I can do the
exact thing I want to do.
Julian
Am 15.04.24 um 09:50 schrieb Julian Kippels:
Hi,
I am looking for a way to configure the default permission of the log
files in /var/log/dirsrv//*
All the files there belong to dirsrv:dirsrv with the permission of 0600.
I would like to have the default permission to be 0644 so that my
external log-monitoring can access the files.
Julian
--
___
389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 389-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/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
--
-
| | Julian Kippels
| | M.Sc. Informatik
| |
| | Zentrum für Informations- und Medientechnologie
| | Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf
| | Universitätsstr. 1
| | Raum 25.41.O1.32
| | 40225 Düsseldorf / Germany
| |
| | Tel: +49-211-81-14920
| | mail: kipp...@hhu.de
-
smime.p7s
Description: Kryptografische S/MIME-Signatur
--
___
389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 389-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/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[389-users] Permission of log files
Hi, I am looking for a way to configure the default permission of the log files in /var/log/dirsrv//* All the files there belong to dirsrv:dirsrv with the permission of 0600. I would like to have the default permission to be 0644 so that my external log-monitoring can access the files. Julian smime.p7s Description: Kryptografische S/MIME-Signatur -- ___ 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to 389-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/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
