On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 09:51:13PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Well, what's unfortunate is that HAL got deprecated long before replacements
for all its parts were ready. KDE already waited for quite some time before
implementing the replacements for HAL and was heavily criticized for that
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 9:53 PM, Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com wrote:
On Sat, 20 Nov 2010 18:32:26 +0100
Michał Piotrowski mkkp...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
2010/11/12 Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com:
Any other exciting work in progress that might land in F15 that
people are actively working on?
Bastien Nocera wrote:
On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 15:44 +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 09:35:54AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
* Can we finally remove hal? (xfce4.8 shouldn't need it anymore with
any luck).
Not without a pile of X changes, which themselves are blocking
On Tue, 2010-11-23 at 18:23 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Bastien Nocera wrote:
On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 15:44 +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 09:35:54AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
* Can we finally remove hal? (xfce4.8 shouldn't need it anymore with
any luck).
Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2010-11-23 at 18:23 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
It might not to work for proprietary drivers, but that's those drivers'
problem. KDE basically requires XRandR since at least 4.0.
this is a fairly new thing, AIUI:
http://mjg59.livejournal.com/127103.html
I
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 06:23:10PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Huh? KDE trunk (4.6) already uses XRandR backlight setting in PowerDevil:
http://websvn.kde.org/trunk/KDE/kdebase/workspace/powerdevil/daemon/backends/upower/xrandrbrightness.cpp?revision=1194096view=markup
and it appears to work
Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 06:23:10PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Huh? KDE trunk (4.6) already uses XRandR backlight setting in PowerDevil:
http://websvn.kde.org/trunk/KDE/kdebase/workspace/powerdevil/daemon/backends/upower/xrandrbrightness.cpp?revision=1194096view=markup
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 09:49:42PM -0500, Kyle McMartin wrote:
On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 03:33:56AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Me. And I'm already angry at having to manually modprobe floppy in rc.local:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=567533
If you're angry about a minor
On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 15:44 +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 09:35:54AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
* Can we finally remove hal? (xfce4.8 shouldn't need it anymore with
any luck).
Not without a pile of X changes, which themselves are blocking on
upstream kernel
On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 10:23 -0500, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
On 11/15/2010 10:11 AM, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 09:35 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
* Can we finally remove hal? (xfce4.8 shouldn't need it anymore with
any luck).
Only 30 packages left requiring it,
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 11:39:29 -0500,
Kyle McMartin k...@mcmartin.ca wrote:
Hi Kevin, (and Bruno if you're watching)
Please try this:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2614153
I've been running that kernel for a couple of days on one machine
with floppies. (I am go to
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 11:39:29 -0500,
Kyle McMartin k...@mcmartin.ca wrote:
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 09:49:42PM -0500, Kyle McMartin wrote:
And let me know what the output is on your machine (it uses ACPI to
query the _FDE table in firmware, so hopefully we can only bind to it if
a floppy
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 08:00:55PM -0600, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2614153
I've been running that kernel for a couple of days on one machine
with floppies. (I am go to switch to -62 tonight.) Two other machines
I have with floppies are
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 21:24:41 -0500,
Kyle McMartin k...@mcmartin.ca wrote:
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 08:00:55PM -0600, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2614153
I've been running that kernel for a couple of days on one machine
with floppies.
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 21:24:41 -0500,
Kyle McMartin k...@mcmartin.ca wrote:
(Yes, the messages would be in dmesg.)
[2.691809] acpi_fde: failed to evaluate _FDE
[2.692151] Floppy drive(s): fd0 is 1.44M
[2.724514] floppy: loaded
/dev/fd0 was created.
--
devel mailing list
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 21:16:40 -0600,
Bruno Wolff III br...@wolff.to wrote:
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 21:24:41 -0500,
Kyle McMartin k...@mcmartin.ca wrote:
(Yes, the messages would be in dmesg.)
[2.691809] acpi_fde: failed to evaluate _FDE
[2.692151] Floppy drive(s): fd0 is
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 09:32:09PM -0600, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
[2.691809] acpi_fde: failed to evaluate _FDE
[2.692151] Floppy drive(s): fd0 is 1.44M
[2.724514] floppy: loaded
/dev/fd0 was created.
Yeah, it falls back to the ordinary probing if anything fails.
Can you
Alasdair G Kergon wrote:
An example of the way I see it working is like this:
Say you have a Volume Group VG1 across two PVs, PV1 and PV2, containing
Logical
Volume LV1 containing the root filesystem.
You have a trigger rule saying When you see the whole of VG1, activate LV1
inside it and
Hi.
On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 09:26:58 +0100, Roberto Ragusa wrote
You still need a timeout to avoid waiting for ever for the root
filesystem to appear when one of the PV has been disconnected from
the system.
If you cannot assemble the root file system, what is init supposed to
do instead of
Ralf Ertzinger wrote:
Hi.
On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 09:26:58 +0100, Roberto Ragusa wrote
You still need a timeout to avoid waiting for ever for the root
filesystem to appear when one of the PV has been disconnected from
the system.
If you cannot assemble the root file system, what is init
Le vendredi 19 novembre 2010 à 21:46 -0800, Adam Williamson a écrit :
On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 10:23 -0500, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
libconcord-0:0.21-10.fc14.i686
libconcord-0:0.21-10.fc14.x86_64
I
don't know exactly what that is, but I can't imagine it'd be terribly
hard to port to udev
On Sat, 2010-11-20 at 10:37 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
Le vendredi 19 novembre 2010 à 21:46 -0800, Adam Williamson a écrit :
On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 10:23 -0500, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
libconcord-0:0.21-10.fc14.i686
libconcord-0:0.21-10.fc14.x86_64
I
don't know exactly what
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 5:22 AM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, 2010-11-18 at 14:15 -0700, Linuxguy123 wrote:
I realize that most people on this mailing list are focused on
infrastructure and server/desktop usage.
But some of us are looking forward to using future Fedora
Hi,
2010/11/12 Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com:
Any other exciting work in progress that might land in F15 that people
are actively working on?
How about removing some old unix crud? (he said this and he saw that
some people starts to gather firewood in the stack :))
Anyone uses gopher, uucp?
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 06:32:26PM +0100, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
How about removing some old unix crud? (he said this and he saw that
some people starts to gather firewood in the stack :))
Anyone uses gopher, uucp?
sync:x:5:0:sync:/sbin:/bin/sync
Someone at Red Hat asked me once what
Hi.
On Sat, 20 Nov 2010 17:50:43 +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote
/quote
Interesting. But the short version of that means that all those
users are useless in their current form, and could be removed?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 06:57:16PM +0100, Ralf Ertzinger wrote:
Interesting. But the short version of that means that all those
users are useless in their current form, and could be removed?
An administrator might decide to enable one of these accounts, but I'd
say that would be pretty unwise.
2010/11/20 Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com:
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 06:57:16PM +0100, Ralf Ertzinger wrote:
Interesting. But the short version of that means that all those
users are useless in their current form, and could be removed?
An administrator might decide to enable one of these
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 07:53:40AM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
biosdevname installed by default, used in the installer and at runtime
to rename Dell and HP server onboard NICs from non-deterministic
ethX to clearly labeled lomX matching the chassis silkscreen.
But why ???lomX??? for
On Sat, 20 Nov 2010 18:32:26 +0100
Michał Piotrowski mkkp...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
2010/11/12 Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com:
Any other exciting work in progress that might land in F15 that
people are actively working on?
How about removing some old unix crud? (he said this and he saw that
Adam Williamson wrote:
On the positive side, it doesn't do anything terribly complicated, it
just ships a single HAL rules file which does this:
append key=info.capabilities
type=strlistaccess_control/append merge
key=access_control.file
Michał Piotrowski wrote:
Anyone uses gopher, uucp?
Me.
gopher://www.calcforge.org/1/
Web version: http://www.calcforge.org:70/
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/kio_gopher
(I don't use uucp though, but I see from Kevin Fenzi's reply that there's at
least one person using that
On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 03:33:56AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Me. And I'm already angry at having to manually modprobe floppy in rc.local:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=567533
If you're angry about a minor inconvenience then I think you might
want to seek counsel, but for what
On Sun, 2010-11-21 at 03:19 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Adam Williamson wrote:
On the positive side, it doesn't do anything terribly complicated, it
just ships a single HAL rules file which does this:
append key=info.capabilities
type=strlistaccess_control/append merge
On Thu, 2010-11-18 at 14:15 -0700, Linuxguy123 wrote:
I realize that most people on this mailing list are focused on
infrastructure and server/desktop usage.
But some of us are looking forward to using future Fedora releases on
tablets in vehicular infotainment systems.
To this end,
On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 10:23 -0500, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
libconcord-0:0.21-10.fc14.i686
libconcord-0:0.21-10.fc14.x86_64
This one's a bit tricky, as it does something unique that you can't do
any other way (it lets you program Logitech Harmony remote controls -
Logitech only provide a tool
Once upon a time, Jon Masters jonat...@jonmasters.org said:
I've had a few off-list conversations with various community members
about this. One thing that came up was that the alternative namespace is
necessary,
I'm not sold on this, but:
but also that lom is a sub-optimal choice. One idea
On Monday, 15 November 2010 at 12:29, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
[...]
This is a silly straw-man. No one[1] formats external HDs with
anything other than MS-DOS FAT. Fedora changing the default for the
main hard disk will not make any difference to this case of your
contrarian user giving
On 11/18/2010 8:09, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Monday, 15 November 2010 at 12:29, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
[...]
This is a silly straw-man. No one[1] formats external HDs with
anything other than MS-DOS FAT. Fedora changing the default for the
main hard disk will not make any
On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 09:35 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
* Will NM finally be able to do bridging?
:drool:
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
I realize that most people on this mailing list are focused on
infrastructure and server/desktop usage.
But some of us are looking forward to using future Fedora releases on
tablets in vehicular infotainment systems.
To this end, what are the plans for releasing Meego as part of Fedora in
F15
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 09:32:37AM -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
I've had a few off-list conversations with various community members
about this. One thing that came up was that the alternative namespace is
necessary, but also that lom is a sub-optimal choice. One idea that
did come up was simply
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 08:48:09AM -0600, Chris Adams wrote:
In any case, is this going to be something that can be disabled easily?
We have something like 18 years of Linux networking history that says
ethernet devices are eth[0-9]+, and I'm not really interested in
auditing all the tools and
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 9:16 PM, Matt Domsch matt_dom...@dell.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 09:32:37AM -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
I've had a few off-list conversations with various community members
about this. One thing that came up was that the alternative namespace is
necessary, but
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 09:24:26AM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
Also, I gotta say, it really shouldn't be LAN on Motherboard, since it's
just an adapter, not actually a whole lan. It should clearly be NIC on
Motherboard, or nom. And then you could silkscreen lolcats on to the
servers, which I
2010/11/19 Linuxguy123 linuxguy...@gmail.com:
I realize that most people on this mailing list are focused on
infrastructure and server/desktop usage.
But some of us are looking forward to using future Fedora releases on
tablets in vehicular infotainment systems.
To this end, what are the
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 10:06:17PM +, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 9:16 PM, Matt Domsch matt_dom...@dell.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 09:32:37AM -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
I've had a few off-list conversations with various community members
about this. One thing
On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 09:24 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 07:53:40AM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
biosdevname installed by default, used in the installer and at runtime
to rename Dell and HP server onboard NICs from non-deterministic
ethX to clearly labeled lomX
Le Lun 15 novembre 2010 23:51, Karel Klic a écrit :
Dne 15.11.2010 23:04, Matthew Garrett napsal(a):
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 05:01:30PM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 4:13 PM, Matthew Garrettmj...@srcf.ucam.org
wrote:
Leaving the retracing at the user's end of things
Le Mar 16 novembre 2010 00:15, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson a écrit :
On 11/15/2010 09:27 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Nobody has yet proven that LVM is a problem
Well if you don't consider what Lennart mentioned [1] as a con against
usage of lvm by default
The con was the assumption that LVM
Dne 16.11.2010 11:04, Nicolas Mailhot napsal(a):
Le Lun 15 novembre 2010 23:51, Karel Klic a écrit :
Major advantage of the retrace server is that you can get a good
backtraces even from unfresh coredumps.
And why can't this be done with debuginfofs ? It's the same data.
GDB pretty printers
On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 18:57:19 +0100, Karel Klic wrote:
Dne 16.11.2010 11:04, Nicolas Mailhot napsal(a):
Le Lun 15 novembre 2010 23:51, Karel Klic a écrit :
Major advantage of the retrace server is that you can get a good
backtraces even from unfresh coredumps.
And why can't this be done
On 11/15/2010 02:41 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
LVM's a fantasically useful tool in a wide range of cases, but I don't
think that in the*typical* laptop/desktop install any of that
functionality ever gets used.
That's the essence of what's being discussed here
laptop/desktop/workstation
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 08:53:03AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On 11/15/2010 02:41 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
LVM's a fantasically useful tool in a wide range of cases, but I don't
think that in the*typical* laptop/desktop install any of that
functionality ever gets used.
That's
On 11/14/2010 12:41 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
1. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/NoDefaultLVM
Info on this page is completely obsolete!
| * Certain filesystem features (ext3 barriers) are unavailable when run
| on top of LVM.
No longer true, barriers (resp. flush) are fully
On 11/15/2010 11:29 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
This is a silly straw-man. No one[1] formats external HDs with
anything other than MS-DOS FAT. Fedora changing the default for the
main hard disk will not make any difference to this case of your
contrarian user giving away LVM-formatted USB
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 11:29:06AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
This is a silly straw-man. No one[1] formats external HDs with
anything other than MS-DOS FAT. Fedora changing the default for the
main hard disk will not make any difference to this case of your
contrarian user giving away
On 11/15/2010 02:03 PM, Frank Murphy wrote:
On 15/11/10 13:54, Richard Zidlicky wrote:
snip
there are very good reasons to use anything but DOS-FAT. For example
F10 and F12 automount said filesystems with drastically different options
by default (filename downcasing), using any other FS
On 11/15/2010 02:15 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 08:53:03AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
That's the essence of what's being discussed here
laptop/desktop/workstation installs default to ext4 and experienced
users/sysadmins those that generally know what lvm is
On 11/15/2010 10:11 AM, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 09:35 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
* Can we finally remove hal? (xfce4.8 shouldn't need it anymore with
any luck).
Only 30 packages left requiring it, according to repoquery. smolt's
probably the most interesting one to
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 09:35:54AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
* Can we finally remove hal? (xfce4.8 shouldn't need it anymore with
any luck).
Not without a pile of X changes, which themselves are blocking on
upstream kernel changes that I've submitted but which haven't been
merged.
--
On 11/15/10 8:39 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
I assume that OS-X has not trouble with mounting various LinuxFS given
that it is a *nix breed.
Being unix-ish doesn't really help, you need an actual filesystem driver
for the OS. There is an ext2/ext3 driver for osx (based on the bsd driver
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 10:15:20AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 01:14:18AM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
LVM actually slows down boot considerably. Not primarily because its
code was slow or anything, but simply because it isn't really written in
the way that
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 10:11:52AM -0500, Adam Jackson wrote:
* Some kind of packaged wayland to play with, even if it doesn't do
much?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652746
Which _really_ won't do much at the moment, since we can't build any of
the demo clients yet. I'm
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 02:03:03PM +, Frank Murphy wrote:
On 15/11/10 13:54, Richard Zidlicky wrote:
snip
there are very good reasons to use anything but DOS-FAT. For example
F10 and F12 automount said filesystems with drastically different options
by default (filename downcasing),
On 11/15/2010 05:30 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 03:03:28PM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
Strongly no to this. We need to have fewer choices during the installation
and more flexibility later. LVM provides this.
So we agree on disagreeing.
Let's go the middle path
On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 13:02 +0100, Milan Broz wrote:
On 11/14/2010 12:41 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
1. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/NoDefaultLVM
Info on this page is completely obsolete!
Yes. Note the prominent line reading:
* Last updated: December 17, 2008
The
Dne 12.11.2010 17:35, Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
Any other exciting work in progress that might land in F15 that people
are actively working on?
ABRT with retrace server support, and a retrace server instance up and
running. It will improve the quality of backtraces.
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 07:14:53PM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On 11/15/2010 05:30 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 03:03:28PM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
Strongly no to this. We need to have fewer choices during the installation
and more flexibility later.
Dne 15.11.2010 22:13, Matthew Garrett napsal(a):
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 08:43:39PM +0100, Karel Klic wrote:
ABRT with retrace server support, and a retrace server instance up and
running. It will improve the quality of backtraces.
How does the user verify that there are no passwords or other
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 4:13 PM, Matthew Garrett mj...@srcf.ucam.org wrote:
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 08:43:39PM +0100, Karel Klic wrote:
Dne 12.11.2010 17:35, Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
Any other exciting work in progress that might land in F15 that people
are actively working on?
ABRT with
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 10:01 PM, Colin Walters walt...@verbum.org wrote:
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 4:13 PM, Matthew Garrett mj...@srcf.ucam.org wrote:
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 08:43:39PM +0100, Karel Klic wrote:
Dne 12.11.2010 17:35, Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
Any other exciting work in progress
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 05:01:30PM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 4:13 PM, Matthew Garrett mj...@srcf.ucam.org wrote:
How does the user verify that there are no passwords or other personal
information in the core dump?
I don't think it really works to ask the user to
Dne 15.11.2010 22:31, Matthew Garrett napsal(a):
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 08:43:39PM +0100, Karel Klic wrote:
ABRT with retrace server support, and a retrace server instance up and
running. It will improve the quality of backtraces.
Further, what's the licensing situation here? If I have an
Matthew Garrett píše v Po 15. 11. 2010 v 22:04 +:
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 05:01:30PM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 4:13 PM, Matthew Garrett mj...@srcf.ucam.org
wrote:
How does the user verify that there are no passwords or other personal
information in the
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 11:07:11PM +0100, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
Don't we need the entirety of debuginfo in order to be able to include
parameter and local variable values in the backtrace?
The entirity of it needs to be available, but that's not the same as
requiring the user install it on
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 11:28:33PM +0100, Karel Klic wrote:
Dne 15.11.2010 22:31, Matthew Garrett napsal(a):
Further, what's the licensing situation here? If I have an application
that (at runtime) is a mixture of GPLed and GPL-incompatible code, does
sending this coredump to a remote
Dne 15.11.2010 23:04, Matthew Garrett napsal(a):
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 05:01:30PM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 4:13 PM, Matthew Garrettmj...@srcf.ucam.org wrote:
Leaving the retracing at the user's end of things means that the user at
least has a choice in the matter
On 11/15/2010 09:27 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Nobody has yet proven that LVM is a problem
Well if you don't consider what Lennart mentioned [1] as a con against
usage of lvm by default what pros do you see for having lvm by default
for the novice end user?
JBG
1.
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 11:15:38PM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
Well if you don't consider what Lennart mentioned [1] as a con against
usage of lvm by default what pros do you see for having lvm by default
for the novice end user?
When the novice end user realizes that they made some
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 10:23:37AM -0500, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
On 11/15/2010 10:11 AM, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 09:35 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
* Can we finally remove hal? (xfce4.8 shouldn't need it anymore with
any luck).
Only 30 packages left requiring
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 06:26:27PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 11:15:38PM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
Well if you don't consider what Lennart mentioned [1] as a con against
usage of lvm by default what pros do you see for having lvm by default
for the
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 10:49:24PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 11:28:33PM +0100, Karel Klic wrote:
Dne 15.11.2010 22:31, Matthew Garrett napsal(a):
Further, what's the licensing situation here? If I have an application
that (at runtime) is a mixture of GPLed and
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 01:14:18AM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
LVM actually slows down boot considerably. Not primarily because its
code was slow or anything, but simply because it isn't really written in
the way that things are expected to work these days. The LVM assembly at
boot is
On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 08:34:54PM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 09:35:54AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Greetings.
Fedora 14 was a pretty relaxing and stable release. I'm thinking that
Fedora 15 may be much more exciting. ;)
biosdevname installed by default, used
Le dimanche 14 novembre 2010 à 01:14 +0100, Lennart Poettering a écrit :
Well, there's no doubt that LVM has its uses, but that doesn't mean we
should install it by default on every Fedora installation.
LVM actually slows down boot considerably. Not primarily because its
code was slow or
Return to GRUB2 topic, I wish that GRUB2 landed in Anaconda and become an
option for user. Some Linux fans install two Linux distros, one is rpm-based
distro, another is deb-based distro. Most of deb-based distros has moved to
GRUB2. however, rpm-based distros still stays at GRUB legacy. I can
On 14/11/10 12:18, Liang Suilong wrote:
Return to GRUB2 topic, I wish that GRUB2 landed in Anaconda and become
an option for user. Some Linux fans install two Linux distros, one is
rpm-based distro, another is deb-based distro. Most of deb-based distros
has moved to GRUB2. however, rpm-based
On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 10:11:11PM -0800, John Reiser wrote:
On 11/13/2010 06:34 PM, Matt Domsch wrote:
biosdevname installed by default, used in the installer and at runtime
to rename Dell and HP server onboard NICs from non-deterministic
ethX to clearly labeled lomX matching the chassis
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 11:57:59AM +0100, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 08:34:54PM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 09:35:54AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Greetings.
Fedora 14 was a pretty relaxing and stable release. I'm thinking that
Fedora 15 may be
On Sun, 14.11.10 13:14, Nicolas Mailhot (nicolas.mail...@laposte.net) wrote:
Le dimanche 14 novembre 2010 à 01:14 +0100, Lennart Poettering a écrit :
Well, there's no doubt that LVM has its uses, but that doesn't mean we
should install it by default on every Fedora installation.
LVM
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 12:41 AM, Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 06:26:48PM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
*DE could consider switching the default to use EXT4 directly without
LVM. [1]
1. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/NoDefaultLVM
The
On 11/14/2010 10:42 AM, drago01 wrote:
Yes unless something changed recently the filesystem's discard command
never reaches the drive.
Looks like I'm reformatting and dumping the LVM. Thanks.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Sat, 2010-11-13 at 11:15 -0500, Genes MailLists wrote:
On 11/13/2010 10:45 AM, Owen Taylor wrote:
On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 18:07 -0500, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
Kevin Fenzi writes:
* gnome3 / gnome-shell default
Does anyone happen to know how to mimic the equivalent of panel
Hi.
On Sun, 14 Nov 2010 10:44:06 -0600, Michael Cronenworth wrote
Looks like I'm reformatting and dumping the LVM. Thanks.
Discard aside, btrfs should include all (or most of) the features
that LVM and raid0 were giving you, anyway.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
btfrs providing raid0 functionality.
Does BTRFS have the equivalent of raid 5 ?
gene/
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 11/13/2010 03:41 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Anyway, I think LVM is jolly useful:
[stated advantages snipped]
One design error is that you cannot carve out an ordinary partition
from an LVM. Once a portion of the drive is LVM, then that portion of
the drive is LVM forever until the LVM is
On Sun, 2010-11-14 at 14:07 -0500, Matt McCutchen wrote:
On Sun, 2010-11-14 at 10:38 -0800, John Reiser wrote:
On 11/13/2010 03:41 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Anyway, I think LVM is jolly useful:
[stated advantages snipped]
One design error is that you cannot carve out an
Matt McCutchen wrote:
On Sun, 2010-11-14 at 14:07 -0500, Matt McCutchen wrote:
Oops, that's not completely true: pvresize currently is not smart enough
to move allocated data out of the area to be freed, according to its man
page. But you have other options, e.g., you can attach another disk,
On 11/14/2010 05:44 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
On 11/14/2010 10:42 AM, drago01 wrote:
Yes unless something changed recently the filesystem's discard command
never reaches the drive.
Looks like I'm reformatting and dumping the LVM. Thanks.
You should also file a bug against the tool that
1 - 100 of 142 matches
Mail list logo
