Re: saned and root question

On 10/3/18 4:00 pm, ToddAndMargo wrote: On 03/09/2018 07:19 PM, ToddAndMargo wrote: On 03/09/2018 07:16 PM, ToddAndMargo wrote: Hi All, Okay, now this is "scary". Both xsane and Simple Scan work locally. I can not get saned to work, UNLESS, I edit /etc/group and add the following to root

FXAA Antialias Query With Nvida Devices

Hi,     I use an Asus Geforce GTX 1070 nvidia card with 8 GB of memory. I am also using the nvidia driver source from negativo17 for version 390.25. Within Nvidia X Server Configuration I have selected FXAA Antialiasing within the opengl settings and that has caused an issue in my F27

Re: saned and root question

On 03/09/2018 07:19 PM, ToddAndMargo wrote: On 03/09/2018 07:16 PM, ToddAndMargo wrote: Hi All, Okay, now this is "scary". Both xsane and Simple Scan work locally. I can not get saned to work, UNLESS, I edit /etc/group and add the following to root root:x:0:saned Without it, I get $ xsane

Re: saned and root question

On 03/09/2018 07:16 PM, ToddAndMargo wrote: Hi All, Okay, now this is "scary". Both xsane and Simple Scan work locally. I can not get saned to work, UNLESS, I edit /etc/group and add the following to root root:x:0:saned Without it, I get $ xsane net:localhost:epkowa:interpreter:001:007

saned and root question

Hi All, Okay, now this is "scary". Both xsane and Simple Scan work locally. I can not get saned to work, UNLESS, I edit /etc/group and add the following to root root:x:0:saned Without it, I get $ xsane net:localhost:epkowa:interpreter:001:007 Access to resource has been denied Now what am

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

Samuel Sieb wrote: > On 03/09/2018 03:06 PM, Todd Zullinger wrote: >> In the git package, there aren't symlinks. Within /usr/bin, >> the git binaries which are identical are hardlinked to each >> other. And separately, within /usr/libexec/git-core, the >> git binaries which are identical are

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On 03/09/2018 03:06 PM, Todd Zullinger wrote: Samuel Sieb wrote: In the git package, there aren't symlinks. Within /usr/bin, the git binaries which are identical are hardlinked to each other. And separately, within /usr/libexec/git-core, the git binaries which are identical are hardlinked to

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On Sat, 2018-03-10 at 09:57 +1100, Stephen Morris wrote: > No, what I was mentioning here is what I have read as standard linux  > functionality with copying, when a file is copied, and it doesn't > matter where to, rather than create a 2nd copy of the file, the > "copy" is created as a hard link

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

Samuel Sieb wrote: > On 03/09/2018 01:27 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote: >>that was my understanding -- as long as the files are within >> precisely the same directory, hard links could still be used, but any >> cross-directory links (even if within the same filesystem) will use >> symlinks. is

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On Sat, 10 Mar 2018, Stephen Morris wrote: > On 9/3/18 9:11 am, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > > On Fri, 2018-03-09 at 07:59 +1100, Stephen Morris wrote: > >> It is my understanding that currently when a file copied to any > >> location, a physical copy is not produced, the copy is a hardlink > >>

Re: given /usr/bin/rpm2cpio, why exists /usr/lib/rpm/rpm2cpio.sh?

On Fri, 9 Mar 2018, Tom H wrote: > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 4:51 PM, Robert P. J. Day > wrote: > > On Fri, 9 Mar 2018, Tom H wrote: > >> On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 4:09 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: > >>> On 03/10/18 03:38, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > >

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On 9/3/18 9:11 am, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: On Fri, 2018-03-09 at 07:59 +1100, Stephen Morris wrote: It is my understanding that currently when a file copied to any location, a physical copy is not produced, the copy is a hardlink to the original file, until such time as one of the "copies"

Re: given /usr/bin/rpm2cpio, why exists /usr/lib/rpm/rpm2cpio.sh?

On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 4:51 PM, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > On Fri, 9 Mar 2018, Tom H wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 4:09 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: >>> On 03/10/18 03:38, Robert P. J. Day wrote: subject says it all ... what is the purpose of

Re: given /usr/bin/rpm2cpio, why exists /usr/lib/rpm/rpm2cpio.sh?

On 03/10/18 05:55, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > or perhaps i'm just curious about the purpose of package components. > seriously, And for these types of questions, which are so narrowly focused, you really should be going to the folks that supply it to multiple distros.  Your kinda like asking

Re: given /usr/bin/rpm2cpio, why exists /usr/lib/rpm/rpm2cpio.sh?

On 03/10/18 05:51, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > yes, i grok that, but given the existence of the rpm2cpio > executable, is there any additional functionality provided by that > script? why is it there? what purpose does it serve above and beyond > the rpm2cpio program? You really should go ask

Re: given /usr/bin/rpm2cpio, why exists /usr/lib/rpm/rpm2cpio.sh?

On Sat, 10 Mar 2018, Ed Greshko wrote: > On 03/10/18 05:39, Tom H wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 4:09 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: > >> On 03/10/18 03:38, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > >>> subject says it all ... what is the purpose of the file > >>> /usr/lib/rpm/rpm2cpio.sh

Re: given /usr/bin/rpm2cpio, why exists /usr/lib/rpm/rpm2cpio.sh?

On Fri, 9 Mar 2018, Tom H wrote: > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 4:09 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: > > On 03/10/18 03:38, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > >> > >> subject says it all ... what is the purpose of the file > >> /usr/lib/rpm/rpm2cpio.sh given the existing binary executable > >>

Re: given /usr/bin/rpm2cpio, why exists /usr/lib/rpm/rpm2cpio.sh?

On 03/10/18 05:39, Tom H wrote: > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 4:09 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: >> On 03/10/18 03:38, Robert P. J. Day wrote: >>> subject says it all ... what is the purpose of the file >>> /usr/lib/rpm/rpm2cpio.sh given the existing binary executable >>>

Re: change user id

On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 7:38 PM, Ranjan Maitra wrote: > > I am on a single-account F27 system with an user id 1000. I want to > change this user id. From what I understand, I should do the following: > > sudo usermod -u 54321 > > However, when I do this, I get: > > usermod: user

Re: given /usr/bin/rpm2cpio, why exists /usr/lib/rpm/rpm2cpio.sh?

On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 4:09 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: > On 03/10/18 03:38, Robert P. J. Day wrote: >> >> subject says it all ... what is the purpose of the file >> /usr/lib/rpm/rpm2cpio.sh given the existing binary executable >> /usr/bin/rpm2cpio? > > The best place to ask

Re: given /usr/bin/rpm2cpio, why exists /usr/lib/rpm/rpm2cpio.sh?

On 03/10/18 03:38, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > subject says it all ... what is the purpose of the file > /usr/lib/rpm/rpm2cpio.sh given the existing binary executable > /usr/bin/rpm2cpio? The best place to ask would be at one of the resources list here  http://rpm.org/community.html -- I

Re: given /usr/bin/rpm2cpio, why exists /usr/lib/rpm/rpm2cpio.sh?

On Fri, 9 Mar 2018, Rick Stevens wrote: > On 03/09/2018 11:38 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > > > subject says it all ... what is the purpose of the file > > /usr/lib/rpm/rpm2cpio.sh given the existing binary executable > > /usr/bin/rpm2cpio? > > I believe /usr/lib/rpm/rpm2cpio.sh validates

Re: given /usr/bin/rpm2cpio, why exists /usr/lib/rpm/rpm2cpio.sh?

On 03/09/2018 11:38 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > subject says it all ... what is the purpose of the file > /usr/lib/rpm/rpm2cpio.sh given the existing binary executable > /usr/bin/rpm2cpio? I believe /usr/lib/rpm/rpm2cpio.sh validates that the given file IS an RPM in the first place, then

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On 03/09/2018 01:27 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote: that was my understanding -- as long as the files are within precisely the same directory, hard links could still be used, but any cross-directory links (even if within the same filesystem) will use symlinks. is that about right? From what you

given /usr/bin/rpm2cpio, why exists /usr/lib/rpm/rpm2cpio.sh?

subject says it all ... what is the purpose of the file /usr/lib/rpm/rpm2cpio.sh given the existing binary executable /usr/bin/rpm2cpio? rday ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

[389-users] Re: Configuring single-master replication from the cli

On 03/09/2018 05:27 PM, Julian Kippels wrote: Am Fri, 09 Mar 2018 17:23:39 +0100 schrieb Ludwig Krispenz : did you look into chapter 15.2: Configuring Replication from the Command Line ? Somehow I feel incredibly stupid right now… no, it's always ok to ask

[389-users] Re: Configuring single-master replication from the cli

Am Fri, 09 Mar 2018 17:23:39 +0100 schrieb Ludwig Krispenz : > did you look into chapter 15.2: Configuring Replication from the > Command Line ? > Somehow I feel incredibly stupid right now… ___ 389-users mailing list --

[389-users] Re: Configuring single-master replication from the cli

did you look into chapter 15.2: Configuring Replication from the Command Line ? On 03/09/2018 04:47 PM, Julian Kippels wrote: Hi Is it possible to configure single master replication from the cli? In the documentation it is only described using the admin-server interface:

[389-users] Configuring single-master replication from the cli

Hi Is it possible to configure single master replication from the cli? In the documentation it is only described using the admin-server interface:

Replica issue

Hi, I want to install replica server but I have errors. Replica server: System: CentOS Linux release 7.4.1708 (Core) IPA: VERSION: 4.5.0, API_VERSION: 2.228 What I do: ipa-client-install --mkhomedir This process ran without a problem Next [root@auth02 ~]# ipa-replica-install Password for

changing mount point of USB dongle on Fedora when using automount

Hello, Fedora users, How do I change the mount point of a USB dongle on Fedora when using automount ? When I insert a USB dongle, it is automounted under /run/media/root/4031-0655 I want it to be automounted on /mnt/sdb1 Regards, Kevin ___ users

Re: why would "rpm -V setup" show /etc/fstab with changed mode?

On Fri, 9 Mar 2018, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > another question based on something that tripped me up last week > teaching, when i tried a simple demo and was confused by the result. > > was demonstrating how "rpm -V" could verify an installed package, > and randomly chose the "setup" package

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On Thu, 8 Mar 2018, Samuel Sieb wrote: > On 03/08/2018 12:59 PM, Stephen Morris wrote: > > On 9/3/18 6:13 am, Todd Zullinger wrote: > >> Robert P. J. Day wrote: > >>> ... ah, so the replacement of those cross-directory hardlinks > >>> with symlinks will happen in F28, is that what you're saying?

why would "rpm -V setup" show /etc/fstab with changed mode?

another question based on something that tripped me up last week teaching, when i tried a simple demo and was confused by the result. was demonstrating how "rpm -V" could verify an installed package, and randomly chose the "setup" package since it consists of numerous fundamental system