/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/4491
And this is the URL for the blocker bug tracking page:
https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/milestone/21/alpha/buglist
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
, same
problem. Today? Different results. Lovely.
Tim, my FAS credentials don't work on phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org so I
can't close the bug myself.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
I tried this) but it's something about
needing to have a redhat.com bugzilla account associated with the FAS account?
So I switched the FAS email back because my RHBZ account uses
bugzi...@colorremedies.com.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https
, xfs, fat, ntfs, possibly
reiserfs (?).
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
, and it leaves room for distros to agree on a
(variant of ) BootloaderSpec. If there isn't the collective will to fix design
flaws with GRUB2, I don't see how it can be effective to achieve this on the
back end with one distro's release criteria.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test
On Aug 31, 2014, at 11:04 PM, Adam Williamson adamw...@fedoraproject.org
wrote:
On Sun, 2014-08-31 at 18:29 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
Note that we're heavily dependent on upstream code, here - we basically
farm the bootloader detection of other OSes out to grub2, which is what
other
I have this from today:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=7509031
Where do I find the checksum for this ISO?
Once dd'd to two different USB sticks, it fails the boot time media check. So
either two downloads are bad, or two sticks are bad, or we have a bug.
Chris Murphy
On Sep 2, 2014, at 10:43 AM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
I have this from today:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=7509031
Where do I find the checksum for this ISO?
Once dd'd to two different USB sticks, it fails the boot time media check. So
either two
OK so I downloaded TC5 and I have the same problem:
- the downloaded ISO checksum matches the published one
- when dd'd to multiple USB sticks, it fails rd.live.check
And yet in a VM the image passes rd.live.check. Weird. Bit of a WTF moment here.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test
On Sep 2, 2014, at 1:23 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
OK so I downloaded TC5 and I have the same problem:
- the downloaded ISO checksum matches the published one
- when dd'd to multiple USB sticks, it fails rd.live.check
And yet in a VM the image passes rd.live.check
bootloader bugs or design limitations.
}
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Linux would not get boot
entries for that Linux instance; violating the Linux + Fedora criteria if
there's also no OS X on the system. But a Mac without OS X? Rare.
Option b: Patch /etc/grub.d/30_os-prober deleting just the OS X entries
creation.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test
On Sep 8, 2014, at 12:05 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
{
The installer must be able to install into free space alongside an existing
OS X installation, install and configure a bootloader that will boot Fedora;
and if offered, also boot OS X.
}
Revision to if offered
a 2 year old bug, let's squash it.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Got a bug where the upgraded kernel isn't being booted by default. I'm not
exactly sure why, or what release criteria to use, so I set it to final based
on it being a security concern.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1141414
Chris Murphy--
test mailing list
test
On Sep 13, 2014, at 7:25 AM, Gene Czarcinski gczarcin...@gmail.com wrote:
On 09/12/2014 08:18 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Sep 10, 2014, at 1:25 PM, Tom Horsleyhorsley1...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 10 Sep 2014 15:16:18 -0400
Gene Czarcinski wrote:
Personally, I do not use os-prober
On Sep 13, 2014, at 11:03 AM, Adam Williamson adamw...@fedoraproject.org
wrote:
On Fri, 2014-09-12 at 18:18 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
And then also propose that bug for Fedora 21 beta freeze exception.
It's virtually certain it'd pass. I mean, it probably could be
incorporated without
On Sep 14, 2014, at 8:38 AM, Joshua Andrews woodguy552...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com
wrote:
Got a bug where the upgraded kernel isn't being booted by default. I'm not
exactly sure why, or what release criteria to use, so I
On Sep 14, 2014, at 2:51 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
Grrr….
From the anaconda program.log I find a number of commands issued after all the
grub stuff including this line. So I run each of those manually, interlaced
with grub2-editenv list. Nothing changes, it's still
On Sep 14, 2014, at 3:17 PM, Tom Horsley horsley1...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 15:08:24 -0600
Chris Murphy wrote:
So I run each of those manually, interlaced with grub2-editenv list. Nothing
changes
Maybe you could arrange to make grubenv immutable and see when someone barfs
On Sep 14, 2014, at 3:37 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
Now what are the odds that grubby touches grub.cfg at 17:26:41 and has
touched grubenv at the exact same time? I think the odds are high grubby is
doing this. But for whatever reason there's a state change that causes
On Sep 14, 2014, at 3:43 PM, Fred Smith fre...@fcshome.stoneham.ma.us wrote:
On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 02:51:29PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Sep 14, 2014, at 8:38 AM, Joshua Andrews woodguy552...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com
-environment' conversion
after doing the upgrade?
Presumably it'd be for final release, but there's some float between final
go/no-go and actual release day.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
On Sep 17, 2014, at 10:55 AM, Gene Czarcinski gczarcin...@gmail.com wrote:
Have I missed some sort of announcement concerning the distribution packaging
changes starting with Fedora 21?
Where is the equivalent of this
On Sep 17, 2014, at 1:14 AM, Adam Williamson adamw...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Mon, 2014-09-15 at 15:50 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
For reference:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/desktop/2014-September/010657.html
I'm uncertain what this means for F20-F21 testing scope
subvolume on the same Btrfs volume. Right now it's still
the case that /boot can't be on Btrfs.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
on a
handful of layouts (probably fat chance at that) or on a self-describing system
that allows arbitrary yet sane layouts. But right now distros are comfortable
stepping on each others tails (sometimes their own).
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1146306
Seems to me this should be a release blocking bug, but I'm not sure of an
applicable criterion. Still happens with
Fedora-Workstation-netinst-x86_64-21_Beta_TC3.iso
Chris Murphy--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe
without it.
There's actually a whole pile of RPMs not listed in Workstation's SRPMS folders
that are listed for Server and Cloud. I don't get it.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
an
external sata disk to try.
Sounds like https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1024169 so I'd check
that the firmware for the system is current.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
to
to improve Fedora's Secure Boot support (or Linux in general).
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
a bugzilla and attach all relevant information: make/model and
firmware revision of the hardware, the error message(s). File against shim.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
I suggest searching or paying on grub-help@ and maybe their devel list what
ZISD is. Funny though GRUB suggests others not use what GRUB usurps.
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
. grubby get confused. You have to start with a correct grub.cfg made
by grub2-mkconfig for grubby to work in any case; including Gene's version
that's Btrfs subvolume aware.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo
I'm following this:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_upgrade_fedup_cli_previous_desktop
Except that I started with an updated F20 infrastructure server packageset
installation, not previous desktop.
Here's what I get, let me know if any of these need bugs filed. So far it's
OK yeah, this sounds rather dire at the end, but is beyond confusing… x
requires x, y requires y, z requires z. Umm what?
WARNING: problems were encountered during transaction test:
broken dependencies
NetworkManager-wifi-1:0.9.10.0-5.git20140704.fc21.x86_64 requires
On Oct 28, 2014, at 3:27 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
Continue with the upgrade at your own risk.
I rebooted, chose System Upgrade (fedup), it started the upgrade, and I walked
away. When I came back 30 minutes later the laptop had powered off which seems
odd. On cold
On Oct 28, 2014, at 4:27 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
I guess I'll try it again…
I get the same warnings as previously reported. But this time the reboot fedup
environment installs everything, I get a 3.17.1 kernel, and all the right
version badging on the subsequent post
that next go around.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
On Oct 29, 2014, at 10:53 AM, Adam Williamson adamw...@fedoraproject.org
wrote:
On Wed, 2014-10-29 at 10:31 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Oct 28, 2014, at 5:59 PM, Adam Williamson adamw...@fedoraproject.org
wrote:
This shouldn't be a huge issue for non-testers because by the same we
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Bidski bid...@iinet.net.au wrote:
Hi all,
I am having an issue getting F21 to dual boot with Windows 7 on an EFI
system.
The first thing I did was to install Windows 7. This worked fine and had
no issues.
Then I installed F21 from a LiveUSB. After some
queuable trim then it should be fine to set. Otherwise
you're better off with a weekly cron issuing fstrim.
--
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
a repeat
of what's in fstab (typically).
--
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 5:37 PM, Michael Cronenworth m...@cchtml.com wrote:
On 11/23/2014 05:23 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
What's odd is that I'm certain discard worked for root on Btrfs, so I
wonder if this remount limitation is XFS only or if it applies to any
filesystem? In which case, how
very possibly a hardware bug).
--
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
commands as
a comment. Maybe someone can figure out what's blocked, or otherwise
misbehaving, if it's kernel related.
--
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
AccuracySec=1h
Persistent=true
[Install]
WantedBy=multi-user.target
[root@f21s ~]# cat /usr/lib/systemd/system/fstrim.service
[Unit]
Description=Discard unused blocks
[Service]
Type=oneshot
ExecStart=/usr/sbin/fstrim -a
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Robert Moskowitz r...@htt-consult.com wrote:
On 11/25/2014 05:36 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
Maybe this bug:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722
maybe.
Try to provide any information you can.
Same hang when I boot from the Server install
, which dumps to kernel message. That is, those echo commands
won't actually appear to do anything. Their result is in dmesg.
--
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
this?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1169269
--
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
be BTest1, BTest2, BTest3,
and the last one, which meats beta release criteria, it is renamed to Beta?
*shrug* OK. I am however confused on the distinction between TC's and RC's.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman
have a
link to screenshot here:
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/3253801/F18alphaTC2textinstallnopartitionfail.png
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
WAS: Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora 18 Alpha Test Compose 2 (TC2) Available Now!
On Aug 16, 2012, at 11:48 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
I am not. Upon choosing a completely unformatted/unpartitioned disk, anaconda
appears to implode and the VM reboots.
If the disk is partitioned in advance
/NewInstallerUI
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
options. Choosing one gets me
to the hub and choosing the other gets me back to the MIA child (partitioning
in this case) window. Crisis averted.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
, and I haven't explored kickstart enough to know if I can tell it to
just target an existing configuration without modification, or if it's going to
get fussy about this too.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman
, that has some
significant changes with respect to btrfs at least and I suspect other areas as
well.
https://www.redhat.com/archives/anaconda-devel-list/2012-September/msg00029.html
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org
On Sep 17, 2012, at 10:09 AM, Zoltan Boszormenyi wrote:
No partitions would be a hint of a GPT partitioning scheme.
A protective MBR would still be in place and identify a single partition, type
0xEE, and that would still be visible. Rather than no partitions.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing
manufacturers use 10^12 instead of 2^40 for
terabytes, the problem doesn't reveal itself in the real world until you get
to disks labeled as 2.5TB or larger. They not all that big in a gaming, dual
booting, or photography context.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
the door, is my understanding. A
lot of changes to come in beta, is what I'm expecting.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/NewInstallerUI
I think we're after merging, so reversion at this point is probably
impractically more work.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test
OS. A small limitation is that the HFS+ bootloader partition is named
Untitled in the Mac OS GUI. You can rename it if you want with no ill effect.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
results indicate FreeBSD is on
hd0,msdos1.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
, for the MBR gap in which GRUB2 is inserted. Modern tools start
partition 1 at 2048. So one of these days this might become an issue, i.e. if
you use LVM or btrfs, GRUBs core.img will get too big to be stuffed into merely
61 sectors.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
install and it wasn't included so I had to
install it. But then 'systemctl enable sshd.service' followed by 'systemctl
start sshd.service' worked.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
On Sep 28, 2012, at 7:32 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Sep 28, 2012, at 4:29 PM, Antonio Olivares wrote:
Dear folks,
running Fedora 18 alpha and have seen new kernel releases, but the older
kernel still boots :(
How can one make sure that the lastest kernel is booted?
I don't know
, OpenSSH wasn't installed by default so
I had to install it first.
What do you get for
systemctl status sshd.service
Chris Murphy--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
requirements related to anaconda for F18.
So even if F18 ends up being a regression in this respect, I'm willing to bite
that bullet for another 6 months. *shrug*
Chris Murphy
[1] For the record, since this is a court of law, I point out that neither
Windows nor Mac OS installers format
On Oct 1, 2012, at 3:04 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
On 10/01/2012 06:38 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
I'm very hesitant to expand release requirements related to anaconda for F18.
Should it not be sufficient for us to have our release criteria be on par
what other os installers ( Like
.
That seems kind of excessively specific for a release criterion, maybe?
I agree that newUI should probably do it, though - have you filed an
RFE?
I think it's a good design goal to get to, eventually, but I don't think it
should be a release requirement for F18.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
to.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
On Oct 1, 2012, at 3:58 PM, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote:
On 10/01/2012 11:53 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
I think it's a good design goal to get to, eventually, but I don't think it
should be a release requirement for F18.
Disk partitioning resembles open heart surgery. The patient
there was one for F17, but then
firewalld was reverted back to iptables before final. I'm wondering if
firewalld needs another test day since this is going to be its first Fedora
release instead of iptables?
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https
.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
of the daemon aren't
needed for behavior changes to be applied, unlike iptables.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
In /boot/grub2 do you have a grub.cfg.new? Compare cfg with cfg.new, does new
have all kernels but cfg doesn't?
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
then is what GRUB is actually being used as a bootloader and where is
it pointing? The grub bootloader has a prefix baked into it, so that is the
likely source of the problem. I would try running:
grub2-install /dev/sda
And then report back.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test
On Oct 4, 2012, at 6:20 AM, Antonio Olivares wrote:
I ran that command and now I have the newer kernel which only appears not the
older ones. How many kernels should appear here?
As many as appear in /boot
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe
On Oct 4, 2012, at 8:17 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 22:11 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 06:17:54PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
I don't see why it can't be UTC with no timezone offset however, because
ultimately local is subjective. I myself tend
Installing : kernel-3.6.0-3.fc18.x86_64
96/190
grubby fatal error: unable to find a suitable template
The new kernel is not added to the grub.cfg. This is grubby-8.20-1.fc18.x86_64.
Anyone else seeing this?
Chris Murphy
--
test
as a kernel parameter.
So I'm not sure what part it's getting hung up on.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
On Oct 8, 2012, at 2:15 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Oct 7, 2012, at 11:38 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Oct 7, 2012, at 7:32 AM, John Reiser wrote:
Installing : kernel-3.6.0-3.fc18.x86_64
96/190
grubby fatal error: unable
criterion reads:
If there is an embedded checksum on any release medium, it must be correct
Also it seems a small problem to have a requirement for an increasing number of
cases where a memory test utility does not exist.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Oct 9, 2012, at 11:07 PM, Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R wrote:
Did a netinstall of TC3 on a Core I5 system with an Nvidia GTX 460 SE.
Looks similar to:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=860477
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
I don't understand the question, or the problem. Removing kernels doesn't seem
like it will help you troubleshoot them.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
the question, or the problem. Removing kernels doesn't
seem like it will help you troubleshoot them.
Chris Murphy
--
The problem is that non of those kernels work! The only one that boots is
the one that is output from
`uname -r`.
I removed them and I can add them at any time
:/#_
and it just sits there. Very much like the TC3 and Nightly Build LiveCDs
which I have tested :(
Oh that sounds like you hit a dracut bug. If you rebuild their initramfs files
with the current dracut then they will probably work.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test
not, in my view, be dicking
around with reviewers trying to infer why a bug was proposed as blocker. I'd
relegate such bugs to last call or see those bumped to an unscheduled day.
Something like that.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https
of blockers on the one hand by reducing obscurity for proposing
them; while also ensuring some minimum amount of justification for the proposal
in the first place.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
This button is new in TC3. But appears to be superfluous in that it does
nothing (yet?), but more importantly I don't understand why it would even be
needed. Would anyone like to address my confusion?
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https
On Oct 10, 2012, at 5:42 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2012-10-10 at 17:24 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
This button is new in TC3. But appears to be superfluous in that it
does nothing (yet?), but more importantly I don't understand why it
would even be needed. Would anyone like
include of a concise explanation of the operational or user
experience consequences of this bug.
3. Click the Save Changes button.
The NTH section on proposing probably needs a similar update.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https
.
Is the metadata that anaconda downloads for netinstall possibly affecting how
this portion of the UI is drawn? File a bug against anaconda or is this in the
realm of really obvious someone must see it?
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https
, the installer must allow removal of user selected partitions.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
, compared to RAID 5.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
On Oct 11, 2012, at 12:21 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
For Beta? Is it really sufficiently crucial that RAID-10 work in Beta
that we would delay the release until it does?
No, but using that logic I'd demote RAID 5 too.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Oct 11, 2012, at 11:45 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
The installer's automatic partitioning must create a functioning partition
layout using disk free space, for disks with a valid mbr or gpt disklabel.
Pre-existing partitions, and their contents, must remain unmodified, and the
bootloader
On Oct 14, 2012, at 4:48 PM, Andre Robatino wrote:
Chris Murphy lists at colorremedies.com writes:
What is the correct behavior of date/time synchronization between host and a
VM?
With VirtualBox, if you have the guest additions installed, it should
automatically synchronize the guest
, virtualize. Especially when testing.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
have parity with md so long as
that raid level is offered in the UI. If some unforeseen weirdness pops up, I
think the feature should be removed from the UI.
Ergo, if offered, it should work. If it doesn't work, don't offer it.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
information on exactly where
the oops or panic occurred, if that's even what's happening. Be prepared to
take photos of your screen if you can't dump text to a network or USB stick -
no one can infer what problem you're having without more information.
Chris Murphy
--
test mailing list
test
1 - 100 of 1155 matches
Mail list logo
