a couple of bugs with development software
by Rui Miguel Silva Seabra
Hello,
I've found two annoying bugs (but not critical) with gnome-terminal
and evolution.
They could be upstream bugs, but I wanted to make sure they're not FC
development only bugs first:
a) gnome-terminal
ignores tab related shortcuts unless menubar is visible
(example: alt+n or ctr+pgup or pgdn)
b) evolution
unable to (configure to?) use maildirs
I have a fairly large mail folder, if it's an mbox file than
evolution needs almost the double of the free space to alter the mbox
(for example, deleting a spam message).
[rms@roque rms]$ rpm -q gnome-terminal evolution
gnome-terminal-2.5.1-1
evolution-1.5.3-1
20 years, 4 months
I found 2 packages that put a .pc file in /usr/share/pkgconfig/
by lupus
I found 2 packages that put a .pc file in /usr/share/pkgconfig/
I think pkgconfig only uses /usr/lib/pkgtool/ I thought?
Bug or not?
[root@d5e03ed8 lupus]# cd /usr/share/pkgconfig/
[root@d5e03ed8 pkgconfig]# ls
gnome-icon-theme.pc gtk-doc.pc
[root@d5e03ed8 pkgconfig]# rpm -qf gnome-icon-theme.pc
gnome-icon-theme-1.1.5-1
[root@d5e03ed8 pkgconfig]# rpm -qf gtk-doc.pc
gtk-doc-1.1-3.1
[root@d5e03ed8 pkgconfig]#
Lupus (Kristof Vansant Belgium)
20 years, 4 months
Re: Firefox as default browser in Fedora
by Jef Spaleta
Luciano Miguel Ferreira Rocha wrote:
> I'd be more happy if that information, or a link to the FAQ, was
> available at installation time. I haven't gone through an
> installatation lately so I don't know if there's such an info on FC
> installs.
I seriously doubt this will happen ever...
I seriously doubt that ANY mention of specific 3rd party repositories
will be included in any install time documentation or any instructions
that come as part of Fedora Core.
There are several reasons I could argue. but I'll stay away from
commenting on the legality of providing information or links to
repositories containing software that is affected by the DMCA in the
united states. I doubt few here are qualified and informed enough about
the scope of the legal issues surrounding the DMCA to have a
constructive conversation about the liabilities involved. Frankly it's
not worth arguing about, because legal hurdles are not subject to the
whim of public opinion.
Let me instead say, that personally, I don't think its appropriate to
single out a few 3rd party repositories for inclusion in a default
config file. I think 3rd party repositories have to build their own
brand and name recognition, and I don't think its appropriate for Fedora
Core to comment on which 3rd party repos are of value by placing them in
the default configs.
Instead, maybe there is a way to build a process by which it is easy for
users to go to a repository website, click a single link, or drag and
drop a link, to configure a new repository.
-jef
20 years, 4 months
Re: Firefox as default browser in Fedora
by Jef Spaleta
stark wrote:
> It's important that we offer a stable environment with
> maximal technology offerings, but it's also important that
> users should be able to try out that technology in the
> form that they're most comfortable with....
Core can not offer all things to all people...
if you want to TRY OUT technology..you use the yet to be officially
created fedora extras repository when it becomes available.
Core can not have 17 different gecko base web browser
Core can not have 17 different wysiwyg editors
Core can not have 17 different instant message apps.
Core can't even possibly have all possible functionality one could
possibly want without serious bloating the number of cd images....
If Firefox only makes sense because its "the future"
then it should be considered for Core in "the future"
We can NOT keep adding more and more applications into Core without
seriously affecting the ease of installation. 7 packed binary disks
isn't something i look forward to downloading for fc4. People need to
think hard about the legitmate technical merit guidelines to use for
throwing things in and out of Core once Extras opens up. Having this
debate package by package, for every possible package that could be
included/exclude from Core is going to go no where fast.
-jef"i can't wait till Core takes up 3 dvd isos"spaleta
20 years, 4 months
dbus-0.20.2 vs cups-1.1.20-3
by Luciano Miguel Ferreira Rocha
Hello,
I've just upgraded my system to latest development packages, and afterwards
the dbus system refused to start, complaining about
"Failed to start message bus: Attribute "send" is invalid on <allow> element
in this context"
I tracked the offending element to /etc/dbus-1/system.d/cups.conf (the error
message _could_ be a little more informative), and I fixed the error by
changing "send=" to "send_destination=" and "receive=" to "receive_sender=".
I don't know if those are the correct changes, but it seemed so from the
dbus' configuration files.
Regards,
Luciano Rocha
20 years, 4 months
Fedora site and lists
by Alexandre Strube
I don't know if fedora-devel is the right place to discuss this, but
seems it is.
The thing is: it's not easy to search for anything on fedora-lists (and
redhat in general). If you go to fedora.redhat.com, you have to crawl to
participate, communicate, fedora-list and then fedora-archive links.
Preety much clicks for an newbie search why that video card won't start
X on fedora install.
Besides that, there's a "search red hat" on the top of every page, and
looking on it does not seem to produce very much relevant results, as
every page returns something as unuseful as "Red Hat -- Linux, Embedded
Linux and Open Source Solutions"...
I'm speaking for several people, which are not that dumb, but just are
not able to find the answers for their doubts.
--
[]s
Alexandre Ganso
500 FOUR vermelha - Diretor Steel Goose Moto Group
20 years, 4 months
XFree86 @devel vs @updates
by Luciano Miguel Ferreira Rocha
Hello,
I've been tracking fedora-devel for some weeks, but I also track FC1 updates &
updates-testing.
Today I updated my fedora-devel mirror and I see XFree86-4.3.0-45.0.2
packages, but on FC1 updates-testing there are XFree86-4.3.0-50, that rpm
and yum consider above the development version.
So which should I use? Which one is the more up to date?
Regards,
Luciano Rocha
20 years, 4 months
heads up: grub-0.94-1.i386.rpm doesn't boot...
by Mark Mielke
PIII 800Mhz fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 sep mtrr pge mca cmov
pat pse36 mmx fxsr sse
After installing grub, and doing the normal "root (hd0,0)\nsetup (hd0)\n"
grub did not function properly. At boot time I see a blinking cursor at the
top-right of a blank screen. I experimented a little, and finally restored
grub-0.93-7.i386.rpm from yarrow. It wouldn't boot until I issued another
"root (hd0,0)\nsetup (hd0)\n". So, it looks like the boot sector is bad,
at least, that the boot sector doesn't work with my hardware.
The above is really a simplified explanation. I had to fiddle quite a
bit as I didn't have a boot disk handy, but I do have a second disk in
the machine with a slightly out-of-date working image, with a valid
grub boot sector, and a BIOS that lets me re-order my disks for
booting and enumeration processes... :-)
Anybody is staying on devel-latest may wish to watch out for
grub-0.94.1. Have a boot disk handy, and keep a copy of
grub-0.93-7.i386.rpm to restore from!
Cheers,
mark
--
mark@mielke.cc/markm@ncf.ca/markm(a)nortelnetworks.com __________________________
. . _ ._ . . .__ . . ._. .__ . . . .__ | Neighbourhood Coder
|\/| |_| |_| |/ |_ |\/| | |_ | |/ |_ |
| | | | | \ | \ |__ . | | .|. |__ |__ | \ |__ | Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them, one ring to bring them all
and in the darkness bind them...
http://mark.mielke.cc/
20 years, 4 months
