On 11 Jan 2026 at 13:33, Samuel Sieb wrote: Date sent: Sun, 11 Jan 2026 13:33:42 -0800 Subject: Re: Fedora 43 lshw-gui doesn't work correctly? To: [email protected] From: Samuel Sieb <[email protected]> Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users <[email protected]>
> On 1/11/26 8:02 AM, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote: > > Works fine on Fedora 42, but on Fedora 43 only shows first > > column. > > I expect that's related to this: > (gtk-lshw:3449314): Gtk-WARNING **: 13:07:17.932: Could not find signal > handler 'on_lshw_map'. Did you compile with -rdynamic? > > (gtk-lshw:3449314): Gtk-WARNING **: 13:07:17.932: Could not find signal > handler 'on_treeview3_cursor_changed'. Did you compile with -rdynamic? > > (gtk-lshw:3449314): Gtk-WARNING **: 13:07:17.932: Could not find signal > handler 'on_treeview3_row_activated'. Did you compile with -rdynamic? > > (gtk-lshw:3449314): Gtk-WARNING **: 13:07:17.932: Could not find signal > handler 'on_treeview2_cursor_changed'. Did you compile with -rdynamic? > > (gtk-lshw:3449314): Gtk-WARNING **: 13:07:17.932: Could not find signal > handler 'on_treeview2_row_activated'. Did you compile with -rdynamic? > > (gtk-lshw:3449314): Gtk-WARNING **: 13:07:17.932: Could not find signal > handler 'on_treeview1_cursor_changed'. Did you compile with -rdynamic? > > (gtk-lshw:3449314): Gtk-WARNING **: 13:07:17.932: Could not find signal > handler 'on_treeview1_row_activated'. Did you compile with -rdynamic? > > > I suggest filing an issue in bugzilla. Did some more looking. Download from git shows version on one screen as version as B.02.20 but other shows B.02.20.10 On Fedora 42 rpm shows lshw-B.02.20-6.fc42.x86_64 lshw-gui-B.02.20-6.fc42.x86_64 On Fedora 43 shows lshw-B.02.20-9.fc43.x86_64 lshw-gui-B.02.20-9.fc43.x86_64 So running the B.02.20-10 git clone version with no problem on both, but rpm still shows the old version from Fedora repos. Sent email to the Fedora two maintainers, but no response from site https://project.ezix.org/ bad gateway. Will try bugzilla in a few days if no response. Looks like just creating an rpm with the B.02.20-10 version to replace the B.02.20-9 version. Thanks. > > -- > _______________________________________________ > users mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] > Do not reply to spam, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue +------------------------------------------------------------+ Michael D. Setzer II - Computer Science Instructor (Retired) mailto:[email protected] mailto:[email protected] mailto:[email protected] Guam - Where America's Day Begins G4L Disk Imaging Project maintainer http://sourceforge.net/projects/g4l/ +------------------------------------------------------------+ -- _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
