Miloslav Trmač wrote:
I can't really see who is the expected user of ~/.local/bin . From my
POV the whole point of ~/.local is to store data that is hidden from
users - it is application data, not user data.
I am. I'm using that for years and I'm very happy that bin/ doesn't clutter my
Please read:
https://kparal.wordpress.com/2011/08/05/autoqa-0-6-released/
Kamil
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Matthew Garrett wrote:
Unless the checking is part of autoqa this simply isn't
sufficient. There's a huge benefit to implementing it in the way
that's
easiest for maintainers.
The earlier a problem is detected, the cheaper it is to fix. If I have
understood AutoQA right, it gets
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 01:02:26AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2011-09-12 at 08:56 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
I thought AutoQA was going to do this, but it's been
disappointing.
I haven't read the whole thread, but I also feel the rate of AutoQA development
is slow.
Am I right in saying that AutoQA is basically mired in the muck and
going nowhere at the moment?
--
Doug Ledford dledf...@redhat.com
Our progress is very slow at the moment, correct. We will happily welcome some
help. We don't have many tasks that you could do in a free afternoon, however.
Hi everyone!
Is there a way of forcing systemd not to mount an encrypted partition
when booting the system? I have one encrypted partition (on LVM) on
my laptop, which I do not want to have mounted automatically. I'm
mounting it only when I need it with a simple script.
With F15, masking
Dear Rahul,
I'm a community moderator at Ask Ubuntu. And I was talking to some
people
about what mistakes we think Ask Fedora and Ask Debian have made, so
I
thought I'd give you some feedback.
That is great feedback. All of those proposals are very reasonable.
--
devel mailing
my kernel options: ro root=/dev/mapper/vg_nb-lv_root
rd_LVM_LV=vg_nb/lv_root rd_NO_LUKS rd_NO_MD rd_NO_DM
You want to use rd.luks.uuid kernel option. See man
dracut.kernel.
rd_NO_LUKS (or rd.luks=0) disables LUKS detection
entirely. I believe this is not about initrd...
Jan
Greetings,
An OpenSCAP Test Day is coming up tomorrow - Thursday 26th August:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2010-08-26_OpenSCAP
OpenSCAP is a tool for maintaining the security of systems, such as
automatically verifying the presence of patches, checking system security
configuration
this upcoming Fedora 14 feature.
See you on the next test day,
Kamil Paral
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2010-08-26_OpenSCAP
___
test-announce mailing list
test-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman
Dear Fedora Comunity,
We would like to draw your attention to forthcoming Fedora Test Day focused on
OpenLDAP [1] with TLS encryption.
The crypto implementation for TLS/SSL was recently changed from OpenSSL to
Mozilla Network Security Services (MozNSS). And there are 88 packages
depending on
Hello,
thanks everyone for participation in OpenLDAP/NSS Test Day [1]. The
participation was little low, but it was somehow expected, because
this was a non-trivial topic. Anyway, a few bugs were discovered
(and other stuff was confirmed to work ok):
641946 - slapd init script gets stuck in an
The entire QA team (and the entire anaconda team, for that matter) is
currently spending virtually all its time trying to help bash the new
anaconda into something vaguely resembling shape for a fairly
arbitrary
release deadline, so we can ship something called 'the Fedora 18
stable
* A release for general users with low volume of security fixes and
important bug fixes.
** Bug fixes would be pushed monthly and QA would be performed on
this monthly batch of updates.
Some packages need more than bug fix updates (unless you are taking a
very
broad view of what a bug is).
This tool is still not going to be able to do magic and there will
be
config
things that still need to be redone. Third party repos will still
be
an issue.
It's a clean installation, I don't think it needs any magic. Also
third-party repos are not a problem, we just ignore them and
# F18 Beta Blocker Review meeting #7
# Date: 2012-11-07
# Time: 17:00 UTC
# Location: #fedora-qa on irc.freenode.net
Note: The UTC time was changed. If your country switched from summer time to
winter time the last weekend, your local time of the meeting should stay the
same.
Keeping with what
So, here's a proposal for a semi-informal group linking different
stakeholders interested in curating the @core package selection:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Minimal_Core
I wonder whether Core is a good word for Fedora Minimal installation SIG.
Because currently the minimal
I wonder whether Core is a good word for Fedora Minimal
installation SIG. Because currently the minimal installation uses
@base yum group. @core group is included always, whether you want
it
or not. If you really want to have a_core_ system, you must use
kickstart like this:
Affected Voters:
- Do you vote on blocker status in bug comments?
If necessary, but I don't like it much. In my experience the discussion in the
meeting is often very helpful to understand the nature of the bug, and it can
shift my opinion substantially.
Also I don't like spamming bugzilla
Is it the meeting itself which you find helpful or the discussion and
information during the review meetings? Could you see asynchronous
conversation (exact method TBD) being as useful?
The discussion is very helpful. It can be asynchronous, of course. It won't be
as efficient, but that's a
On Tue, 2012-12-04 at 23:24 -0500, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Hi
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Ville Skyttä ville.sky...@iki.fi
wrote:
IMO if a maintainer of a shared lib package goes as far as
submitting a
koji build without noticing a soname bump in it, the
Here's what our policies say:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#All_patches_should_have_an_upstream_bug_link_or_comment
All patches should have an upstream bug link or comment
All patches in Fedora spec files SHOULD have a comment above them
about
their upstream
- Forwarded Message -
From: He Rui r...@redhat.com
To: test list t...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 8:12:57 AM GMT +01:00 Amsterdam / Berlin /
Bern / Rome / Stockholm / Vienna
Subject: Fedora 13 Alpha TC Validation Test (Thu 02-11 to Wed 02-17)
Greetings,
Hello,
I have been (together with the QA team) working on a 'Package
update policy' proposal. Because Matthew Garrett yesterday
presented his own proposal regarding this topic, we decided
to also present our proposal, albeit still unfinished.
The proposal is here:
- Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
There actually already *is* a review point
prior to moving to -updates, but it's currently owned by rel-eng and
is
not highly publicized, and very little gets rejected. It is there,
though: rel-eng explained this earlier in the threads, and
- Jesse Keating jkeat...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 12:21 -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
Paul: Jesse Keating provided a draft policy for what updates should
be
done. Board will take this into consideration, if necessary, in
another round of discussions (not this meeting).
Yes, it’s here again, the April Fools’ Day [1]! If you don’t have your
own plans already, let me propose one for you – participate on the
ABRT test day!
ABRT is a tool that helps reporting program crashes with a few simple
mouse clicks. It is a significant part of Fedora operating system and
its
This is a post-event review of the ABRT test day [1].
Thank you everyone who contributed to ABRT testing. Unfortunately
there weren't many attendants, probably because it was really close
to Easter holidays. But still there were some bugs discovered,
the list is here (and I'm sure even more bugs
I might be a little confused now. Yesterday, or Friday I did
sudo fedup-cli --network 19
and I got F20, and I'm up on F20 at the moment.
That is highly unlikely, that would indicate a bug in fedup. Are you sure you
used 19 and that you really are on 20?
Now am I to do a ...--network
A bit late, but forwarding here anyway.
- Forwarded Message -
From: Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us
To: devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Wednesday, September 4, 2013 7:24:40 AM
Subject: Fedora 20 Alpha Change freeze
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi all,
as
On 09/06/2013 10:15 AM, Jiri Eischmann wrote:
Can this not be done automatically? If the system fails to boot because
of significant hardware changes, it's an obvious option to regenerate
initramfs. I can't image a normal user go to the rescue mode and run
dracut --regenerate-all. Not
On 09/09/2013 11:48 AM, Kamil Paral wrote:
On 09/06/2013 10:15 AM, Jiri Eischmann wrote:
Can this not be done automatically? If the system fails to boot because
of significant hardware changes, it's an obvious option to regenerate
initramfs. I can't image a normal user go to the rescue
Right, Tim fixed the issue and updates in Bodhi should once again receive
comments regarding depcheck and upgradepath checks.
There's an opt-in support for rpmlint/rpmguard checks for every package built
(the emails are sent to their maintainers), but I'm not clear whether this
opt-in support
I've been kicking this idea around for a bit and have chatted a little
with people on IRC but as we're looking to start up development on
taskbot, I want to have a larger discussion on two issues: where do we
host code and what do we want to use for dev support tools (issue
tracking, code
With the conversation we've been having and the persona developments, I
propose the following:
- create FAS groups for git-taskbot-core and git-taskbot-tasks which
will control access to the git repos
What will git-taskbot-tasks be used to? I thought we were going to have
decentralized
= TAP =
TAP is not unittest-specific, and is human-readable plaintext format.
It also has just PASS/FAIL logic, but there is a possibility to add YAML
'metadata' to any result (since TAP v. 13).
The real issue with TAP is Python support.
There is a TAP-consumer library created as an
A lot of autoqa rpmlint jobs crash lately. Just to let you know, this is a
problem in rpmlint and I reported it here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026328
___
qa-devel mailing list
qa-de...@lists.fedoraproject.org
The Printing Test Day for Fedora 20 is today.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2013-11-05_Printing
This test day is for testing all aspects of printing, including setting
up the printer, sharing printers on the network, and printing jobs.
The changes in Fedora 20 are relatively minor:
Forwarding an invite from Jan Scotka:
Hi,
There is planned Power Management testday today. If you are interested to see
capabilities of your machine or measure power consumption please join us, you
will see what your HW know.
Everybody with various HW configuration welcomed (Old New Obscure
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 10:33:34PM +0100, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
The beauty of ecryptfs is that I can encrypt one dir - not whole file
system.
What's the concern with encrypting the whole filesystem? It's better
for you because you leave significant personal information all over
the
On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 07:52:04PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
No. There's a bad one, which is AutoQA. The problem with it is it's more
or less considered obsolete now as far as new development goes; the devs
are working on Taskotron to replace it, but I don't believe it's ready
for
I've finally read it as well :) Comments below.
At the moment, that task yaml file for rpmlint [1] looks like:
dependencies:
- rpmlint
- libtaskbot
input:
args: envr,arch
These arguments are provided by the event trigger, right? So, the event trigger
offers a set
If you're a Fedora package maintainer, you will be surely interested in this
topic.
AutoQA [1] is a framework for automatic test execution written for Fedora
needs. It is developed by Fedora QA [2] team. We have finally reached the state
where we can experimentally share some tests results
Fedora QA holds Test Day regarding ABRT 2 and Retrace Server
on March 31:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2011-03-31_ABRT_Retrace_Server
This test day will focus on Retrace Server feature [1] in
Fedora 15 as well as ABRT 2.0. Refreshed and bright new
test cases are prepared for your
As you probably noticed not so long ago we announced [1] that AutoQA [2] would
be sending comments to Bodhi [3] and inform package maintainers about the
results of important test cases (depcheck and ugpradepath). We enabled the
functionality and disabled it again very soon due to a number of
Hi,
I built two sets of security updates for f13/f14/f15 and autoqa
rejected
the f13/f14 packages. It looks like autoqa is waiting for the packages
to be properly pushed to fN+1 stable before green-lighting the
matching package for fN.
I suppose you're talking about upgradepath test.
On Mon, 2011-04-18 at 04:35 -0400, Kamil Paral wrote:
I built two sets of security updates for f13/f14/f15 and autoqa
rejected
the f13/f14 packages. It looks like autoqa is waiting for the
packages
to be properly pushed to fN+1 stable before green-lighting the
matching package
I've created a short blogpost about this issue:
http://kparal.wordpress.com/2011/04/18/autoqa-upgradepath-vs-updates-to-multiple-fedora-releases/
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Here is the update:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libguestfs-1.6.2-1.fc13.7
Here's the failed test result:
http://autoqa.fedoraproject.org/results/87921-autotest/qa03.c.fedoraproject.org/upgradepath/results/output.log
This is pretty confusing.
Why does it mention other
Hi fellow Fedorans.
Recently, AutoQA has been introduced to catch typical problems early
in
the update process. In general, I appreciate that effort, but
currently
I find myself in a phase of conditioning ignorance towards AutoQA,
essentially because it is drowning me in irrelevant
Keeping the current way will just make me (and possibly others) add
filters to throw away messages from AutoQA. Please be aware of how
much
contributor time you waste by making them hope through useless
(because
the tests have passed and no information is gained) mails. I realize
you
want
Please read:
http://kparal.wordpress.com/2011/04/29/autoqa-0-4-7-released/
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
AutoQA 0.5.0 has just been released and deployed. Package maintainers will see
some notable changes. Please read the whole description here:
http://kparal.wordpress.com/2011/06/29/autoqa-0-5-0-released/
Comments welcome.
Kamil
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Today I've followed instructions from
http://jlaska.wordpress.com/2010/06/01/fedora-package-maintainers-want-test-results/
is that right?
I've run:
autoqa-optin UpTools F-15
Tell me if I'm wrong
That is correct if you want to receive rpmlint/rpmguard test output for every
new build.
However in the meantime for F17, is the installer Easter egg hunt
still on? It's way too obscure presently.
I did some minor tweaks, posted the code here:
https://github.com/kparal/InstallFedoraButton
and prepared a patch for fedora-live-desktop.ks.
I want to post the patch to
I did some minor tweaks, posted the code here:
https://github.com/kparal/InstallFedoraButton
and prepared a patch for fedora-live-desktop.ks.
I want to post the patch to anaconda-devel this week.
What do you thing about moving the icon to the left?
This has already been raised in
On Thu, 2012-04-19 at 16:24 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
That is obscure UI design, and therefore doesn't resolve the
current
UI obscurity. So I see very little efficacy in the idea.
To contribute something positive here, I went ahead and implemented
the
'oscurity'. See attached.
I
There seems to be at least some consensus that:
* The notification, unless permanent, is not an ideal solution here
because once it goes away, the user is in the same situation of
confusion as to how to install the Live Image to disk.
* The extension as proposed is not an ideal solution
but they don't push on any other solutions.
A link from the http://fedoraproject.org/get-fedora page directly
to
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/16/html/Installation_Quick_Start_Guide/Fedora_Live_Desktop.html
?
I've spent 5 minutes looking for that direct link and I haven't
I'd also suggest merely indefinite article a instead of any.
Simper for translation.
How are the translations going to be handled, Kalev? How do you get it into
spin-kickstarts? Is there enough time to set up project in transifex (or
whatever is Fedora using) and have this translated before
Hi all,
Yesterday night I noticed an IRC conversation on #fedora-desktop
about this, and suggested that an actual window would be a lot
better than a notification.
Kalev, Matthias and the people there agreed with me, so I went
ahead and wrote some code that does just that [1].
Is there enough time to set up project in
transifex (or whatever is Fedora using) and have this translated
before F17 release?
Perhaps we can. Not sure if there's enough time for that.
What's the use case for translations? I'll note that there's no way
to
select the language in the
On Fri, 2012-05-04 at 10:31 -0400, Kamil Paral wrote:
Cosimo, can you please make sure the whole window can be closed
easily
just by pressing the Escape key? That will help really help those
of
us who run LiveCDs many times per day, and it will not hurt other
people in any way
The one complaint I
still have is that the window is really huge. I mean, it's taking
up, what, 80% of the desktop real estate?
That is just perfect, it's the welcome screen. It should receive complete
attention. In Ubuntu there are even no panels/widgets shown until you make the
selection.
On Wed, 2012-05-09 at 04:51 -0400, Kamil Paral wrote:
Cosimo, can you please also make sure that the Close button gets
keyboard focus automatically after I click on Try Fedora?
I now fixed this here [1], but it will need to be applied to the copy
of
that code that lives in anaconda now
I'd like to brought to wider attention the bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=693180
What's the matter?
If you install wine, it brings as a dependency wine-tahoma font, that
is
then included in system wide fonts list. This causes the font to be
used
by applications like
Andreas wrote:
Hi,
first I would like to point out that I am totally open for a
discussion
about this. IMO bugzilla is just not the right place for it.
Thanks, that's great.
Chris wrote:
Well, no they don't. They are requesting the font Microsoft calls
Tahoma, not a Wine-provided
We could of course aim for a dual-solution: Let
wine-tahoma-fonts put the fonts in the wine font dir (mandatory for
wine) and add a wine-tahoma-fonts-system package (names suggestions
welcome) which also puts the fonts in the system wide font path
(optional).
I believe this would be the best
Andreas Bierfert wrote:
We could of course aim for a dual-solution: Let
wine-tahoma-fonts put the fonts in the wine font dir (mandatory for
wine) and add a wine-tahoma-fonts-system package (names suggestions
welcome) which also puts the fonts in the system wide font path
(optional).
If you are knowledgeable about UEFI, I'll welcome your advice. This is the
issue I encountered:
1. I enabled UEFI mode in BIOS in Lenovo X220 (more exactly I set UEFI as the
preferred method).
2. I installed Fedora 17.
3. Fedora item appeared in BIOS in Boot order and also in the boot manager
Having sent that mail it became obvious that what's happened is that
your
new x220 board doesn't have the efi boot variable set. Some machines
allow
you to boot from a file, in which case it'll be
/efi/fedora/grubx64.efi .
If your firmware doesn't have that, you'll need to boot some
Just an idea I had and wanted to float it out to the group...
I think it would be nice to get an informational (obviously, not a
blocking type check) to get changes in the requires or provides of a
package. It would be a hassle to check it manually but I hope it
would
be fairly easy to
On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 11:17 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 10:37 AM, Kamil Paral kpa...@redhat.com
wrote:
Something like this? [1] [2]
Yup! Something a lot like that! I did look over the AutoQA wiki
before
posting but didn't know enough about rpmguard to know
hi,
i need help, because the AutoQA DepCheck fails on the package
speed-dreams,but the package was pushed anyway.
AutoQA DepCheck log:
http://autoqa.fedoraproject.org/results/418027-autotest/virt04.qa/depcheck/results/speed-dreams-2.1.0-1.html
the problem was already discussed on
Following this track: if I look into the build log for the 64-bit f17
build [1], it seems that the package doesn't require anything but
the
libenet-1.3.3(64-bit). So; in my simple eyes, this looks like AutoQA
doesn't really understand the situation if it says it needs the
32-bit
As per the Fedora 18 schedule [1], Fedora 18 Alpha Test Compose 6
(TC6)
is now available for testing.
Please note that Live images are mislabeled (contain 'TC5' in their name), but
they are TC6 content.
___
test-announce mailing list
Thanks for the pointers.
By running this command, I have signed up for iwhd-related
notifications in F-16 and rawhide:
ssh fedorapeople.org autoqa-optin iwhd devel F-16
With this command you will subscribe for rpmlint and rpmguard test results for
every new build [1].
Depcheck and
On 02/21/2012 10:48 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
the rats_install test runs an entirely automated test of the Fedora
installer daily, against the daily installer composes provided by
release engineering. It provides detailed logs and pinpoints where
failure occurs if the installation
On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 16:37:50 -0600
Mike Chambers m...@miketc.net wrote:
Noticed that x86_64 tree is still NOT installable, as in no
boot.iso
or anything. Is this going to remain that way for awhile?
Well, it's going to stay that way until the bug that prevents it
working is fixed.
There will be a GNOME Shell and Extensions Test Day on Thursday!
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2012-03-15_Gnome_Shell_and_Extensions
Here's an introduction from Vitezslav Humpa, who's in charge of this event from
QA perspective:
While Fedora 17 Test Day cycle is starting to take
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 1:25 PM, Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Richard Shaw
hobbes1...@gmail.com wrote:
Darn... I was hoping that wouldn't bite me :) I'm assuming I can
ignore the error though? Or does it need to be fixed?
Fix. :(
Which
There will be a GNOME Shell Software Rendering Test Day on Thursday!
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2012-03-29_Gnome_Shell_Software_Rendering
Here's an introduction from Vitezslav Humpa, who's in charge of this event from
QA perspective:
This week brings a second installment of Fedora
So I really see two options for improving these situations:
1) https://fedorahosted.org/bodhi/ticket/663 I opened this ticket two
months ago (to silence). The idea would be to add the ability for
bodhi
updates to mark other updates as a dependency, so that in the example
above, Firefox could
I was quite depressed how hard it can be for a layman to find a way to install
Fedora from LiveCD environment. If you don't recognize the icon in Gnome Shell
Overview mode, it can give you quite some work to find it. Since OSS philosophy
is if you don't like it, fix it, I did. In the last two
On Apr 3, 2012, at 7:26 AM, Kamil Paral wrote:
You can see it here:
http://kparal.fedorapeople.org/misc/InstallFedoraButton.png
What do you think? Better than default?
How about Install Fedora since it could be installed to SSD or
iSCSI etc.
I pull that string from default anaconda
So, we decided for F16 that we don't want to add extensions like that
to
the shell that we ship on the live cd. It should be the default
experience.
Can't be 100% default, because installer is a slightly different use case,
isn't it.
For the 'make installing obvious' problem, what we
To summarize, I see two major paths:
a) Make installer launcher more visible:
e.g. http://kparal.fedorapeople.org/misc/InstallFedoraButton.png
-or-
b) Use a proxy window asking which use case is relevant for you:
e.g. http://i.imgur.com/I26vS.png
Both approaches are fine in my view and
Actually... would it make sense to force a notification event about
the install option on live CD login? It pops up for a few seconds in
the message tray telling you this media can be used for a full
install..and then the message lives in the message tray until
dismissed.
That is a good
That is a good idea that can be probably implemented very easily.
However, what is the benefit over a persistent button in the top
panel?
I believe its adequately provides a solution to meet all constraints
so far expressed in this discussion.
1) Notice on login with buttons!
2)
The discussion died off, so I'll sum it up:
* Almost everyone agreed that current situation is highly unsatisfactory.
* We have several ideas how to remedy it, which include: top bar button,
notification and welcome screen.
* We have just a single implementation, which is the top bar button.
nonamedotc nonamedotc at gmail.com writes:
Could someone please tell me why the install DVD for F17 is smaller
than
that for earlier releases. The install DVD is 2.3 GB whereas the
one for
F16, for example, is 3.5 GB. Thanks.
AFAIK no one has completely figured this out yet. I
Having this implemented manually would be great. In the future I'd
like to replace it with automatic process managed by AutoQA. AutoQA
would say Bodhi this update can be only pushed together with this
other update, because the first one depends on the second one. The
maintainer wouldn't
In addition, I had fixed the script to properly support
updates-testing
repositories eons ago (should not compare fn-1-updates-testing with
fn-
updates), but my patch (attached) was never merged because the script
was to
be obsoleted by AutoQA anyway according to Jesse Keating.
AutoQA
One angle on this that didn't get pointed out, I guess because
anaconda
team apparently isn't reading, is that at least one person on the
anaconda team - I forget who - hates liveinst with a passion and has
been proposing forever to kill it and replace it with a choice on the
live image boot
- Clovis Tristao clo...@agr.unicamp.br wrote:
How do I increase size the boot partition, with LVM?
My partition:
FilesystemSize Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/sda1 190M 39M 142M 22% /boot
Can anyone help?
Thanks a lot,
Clóvis
I think the easiest
- Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 13:18 +0800, Luming Yu wrote:
Hi there,
After yum upgrade from f12 to f13, I see the video play back stop
working (play back window is black and the progress bar seems to be
always at 0) with banshee and totem.
Hello,
we would like to help Package Maintainers to increase public participation in
their activities. We believe that an important step in achieving that is in
rewarding the most active participants with fame in different top
tens, ladders and charts. Therefore we would like to extend the
Hi,
since we opened the question of the most buggy applications I would
like
to introduce you the Fedora crash statistics generated from ABRT
reports. It actually doesn't show the most buggy applications, but
the
number of crashes per application encountered by users in some period
of
Are you going to let bugzilla maintainers know somehow? I would
assume that once the crash count surpasses a certain threshold,
you could add a comment to the bugzilla report:
This has crashed for 100 users, see [FAF URL] for details.
This has crashed for 1000 users, see [FAF URL] for
Dne 1.3.2013 14:09, Jaroslav Reznik napsal(a):
Hi all! (and sorry for post to sooo many lists)
As we already have a final schedule (for a three weeks now) and
we're
getting closer to release windmills - I'd like to make the schedule
easy to use for everyone (and that means for me too),
1 - 100 of 586 matches
Mail list logo
