I just upgraded to 2.6.16-1.2069_FC4smp, and noticed the i82860_edac module
appears to be compiled to output debug messages:
messages:Mar 30 12:06:02 lucy kernel: i82860 init one
messages:Mar 30 12:06:02 lucy kernel: EDAC MC0: Giving out device to
"i82860_edac" i82860: PCI 0000:00:00.0
The ring buffer rapidly fills up with:
MC0: drivers/edac/i82860_edac.c: i82860_check()
messages. Bugzilla search showed no bugs. Shall I submit one?
On Mar 29, 2006, at 6:18 PM, fedora-devel-list-request(a)redhat.com wrote:
>> NT, Mac OS < X ). Not included is Linux, which is not a depreciated
> depreciate v. t.
> To lessen in price or estimated value; to lower the worth of;
> to represent as of little value or claim to esteem; to undervalue.
> deprecated adj.
> Said of a program or feature that is considered obsolescent and in
> the process of being phased out, usually in favor of a specified
Thanks for correcting me.
>> platform ( which is good ). That means the Linux Flash Player version
>> has the above vulnerability, and a fix will not be available until
>> Player 8.5 is available for Linux.
> Thankfully, no.
Our company has a distribution license, so I get installers from a
I had looked only at the date in the read me file of the Linux
installer ( January 2006 ) and not specifically at the version number.
Again I stand corrected, thank you.
System Admin - Silver Oaks Communications
After installation and reboot, I get (on my IBM X40):
mount: could not find filesystem '/dev/root'
and then errors mount /proc, /sys, and finally a kernel panic.
I am using kernel-2.6.16-1.2080_FC5.i686
Please help me: I would like to avoid reinstalling...
Many thanks in advance,
Alan Cox wrote:
> Gconf doesn't need gnome. The reverse is true however. The XML format also lets
Thats true. But the problem is GConf is too many dependencies, and a
design oriented to the desktop only. So the idea is to keep GConf, but
attach to it a backend capable of doing global configurations, as
> you work with prefences using styles and XML XSLT and the like which is very
> powerful when working with a large number of systems. Really nobody has
> scratched the surface of what it can do.
XML is good for external representation of data, but not for storage.
XML storage makes GConf damn slow.
On Mar 28, 2006, at 7:08 AM, Casimiro de Almeida Barreto wrote:
> Flash for Linux literally sucks... it is slow
As someone that has spent a good deal of time benchmarking Flash
performance, this is not true. On the exact same hardware, the Linux
Flash Player 7 plug-in plays as fast as the version 7 plug-in on
However, the Flash Player ActiveX control is more highly optimized than
the plug-in, so if you compare Flash performance on Windows in IE to
Flash performance on Linux with Firefox, Windows is faster in that
case. If you use Firefox as the browser on both platforms, the
performance is as close as my measurements could show. Since the
current Flash Player for Windows is version 8, that throws another
issue into the mix. My tests show version 8 to be up to 15% faster than
version 7 using the same configuration. If you compare Flash
performance using a Windows version 8 ActiveX control to a Linux
version 7 plug-in, you are indeed comparing apples and oranges.
> and again there is no support for shockwave. People says that's
> due to the needs of using ActiveX for ShockWave run
Shockwave is available as both an ActiveX control and a plug-in on
Windows. Unlike Flash, both versions have the same performance ( a
plug-in is available for Macintosh too). The Shockwave group within
Adobe is completely separate from the Flash development group. The
usage base and defined goals of the Shockwave group must indicate
little need for a Linux player. I of course disagree with that, but I'm
not the Shockwave development manager ;)
For those hoping for a 64-bit Flash Player for Linux, the indications
for the upcoming Flash Player 8.5 show no support planned for x86_64 on
Windows, so I doubt it will appear on Linux.
Flash users on Linux should be aware that there is no plan for a
version 8 Linux Player. The Flash group is working instead on a version
8.5 Player. This effects Linux users because Adobe recommends upgrading
to the most recent version 8 ( 8.0.24 ) to resolve several security
issues. With the most recent issue ( CVE-2006-0024 ), Adobe is
releasing fixes back-ported to version 7 players for depreciated
platforms ( Win 95, Win NT, Mac OS < X ). Not included is Linux, which
is not a depreciated platform ( which is good ). That means the Linux
Flash Player version 7 has the above vulnerability, and a fix will not
be available until Player 8.5 is available for Linux.
I know many of you won't touch Flash with a ten meter pole, but for
those who do, be careful out there.
System Admin - Silver Oaks Communications
I'd like to know where to report problems with key mappings.
On my hardware (Dell Inspiron 6000) there are 'media buttons' (mute,
vol+/-, play, next, prev, stop) which are detected as keypresses with an
I can find the keycodes using xev, then I can map them to something
useful using xmodmap, then compatible applications (eg. rhythmbox) do
the right thing when the buttons are pressed.
The first problem is that the keys are initially unmapped; a secondary
problem is that some controls (eg. volume popup) don't respond to the
volume keys when they probably should.
So, where can I tell someone about this mapping? Which package needs
some extra config? I should be able to provide a patch.
On Tue, 2006-03-28 at 21:29 -0500, sean wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:51:14 -0800
> David Lutterkort <dlutter(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> > While I agree in theory, the reality of config files with different
> > formats makes it extremely hard to get there. One approach that is being
> > pushed by a number of players to achieve uniform management of configs
> > is CIM/WBEM, an enormous standard that IMHO too much tool-specific
> > knowledge to see wide adoption.
> > A lighter-weight approach seems more promising: encapsulate most of the
> > config-file specific knowledge in simple script wrappers that can be
> > controlled by a declarative description of the configuration you want to
> > achieve and the logical interdependencies between them. This is what
> > puppet does, and why I find it very attractive.
> Okay, so your script wrappers do all the config-file specific work etc.
> We talked about making a tool earlier in this conversation that would
> know how to handle all the different config file formats, so i'm with
> you up to there.
The pain of parsing different config file formats is only part of the
problem: the bigger problem are the semantics of all the config entries,
which the user still needs to understand.
> But what is the advantage of building an entire new config language
> around these wrappers? Couldn't they be manipulated just as easily
> with shell or python?
There are lots of advantages of a domain specific language over doing
this with basic scripts:
* It's easy to provide infrastructure for common tasks (like
logging or notification if changes are detected)
* The user expresses what they want to achieve rather than how to
* The description represents the config in metadata and can be
processed by other tools. For comparison: since kickstart has a
well-defined file format, it's possible to write UI tools to
manipulate them, which wouldn't be possible if a kickstart file
was a shell script with some supporting utility scripts
* Some things that are hairy to express in scripts can be clearly
expressed in the language, e.g., dependencies between components
(put a custom httpd.conf into place before starting httpd; when
httpd.conf changes, httpd needs to be restarted) and logical
grouping of components for reuse (this is what I mean when I say
'webserver' or 'mailserver')
> Can the administrator make simple ad-hoc command line config file changes?
If you allow ad-hoc changes, you allow systems to deviate from the
predefined configuration; that may or may not be what you want. If it is
what you want, you should use the config mgmt tool only for the initial
setup, and then do your changes as you always would, without using the
tool. But if you are interested in keeping the config of several
machines in sync, you are better off making the changes in the config
mgmt tool's description.
I know I'm late jumping into this thread.
I also realize I am a lurker for the most part, but I felt I should
On 3/28/06, Eric S. Raymond <esr(a)thyrsus.com> wrote:
> Good thing the fourth: A combination of increased polish in various
> distro components and significant upstream developments (one biggie
> being OpenOffice 2.0) has, to my observation, inched FC across an
> important functional threshold. My wife can use it with as little
> pain as Windows now, rather than merely tolerating the crap because
> she believes in what the Linux community is trying to do.
For some users this happened in the FC3/FC4 timeframe.
> First, a relatively minor issue that is nevertheless quite annoying.
> It's the Fedora distribution art, the images in Anaconda and the
> Fedora-customized graphics in the admin tools and elsewhere. It has
> never been much better than mediocre, and in FC5 it hits a new low
> with backgrounds that look like a Teletubby hocked loogies into a
> dish full of soap scum.
Constructive criticism would do more.
What kind of imagery would be better, considering the same goals and
parameters the designers were given ? Without _constructive_ criticism,
the comments seem like something from Simon Cowell.
> And whose bright idea, I have to wonder, was
> it to abandon the attractive and recognizable Fedora icon for
> something that's...not a fedora?
The Fedora project does need to come out from the shadow of Red Hat.
Establishing a new visual identity is an important part of that.
Whether the new identity is hitting its goals is a different question,
but the change needed to happen.
> original BlueCurve wasn't much to cheer about compared to the
> decorative art on a Windows or (especially) a Mac -- acceptable, but
> not a competitive plus,
Personally I have a negative reaction to the Windows XP interface
graphics, I think the FC5 interface at least as appealing. With the
different themes available. our users are happy they have a choice to
configure the interface, which a stock Windows install has less
latitude and is harder to find for our users.
> That means high-quality art, art that makes people actually *want* to
> look at the screen because it's a significant aesthetic experience.
Graphics are not art. Graphics are the prostitution of art concepts and
techniques to get a specific desired reaction for the benefit of the
party paying for the graphics.
Successful graphics need to have goals established and the success of
the graphics is measured against those goals. Many times looking
"pretty" is a low priority goal for graphics. "Pretty" graphics can be
a pleasant side benefit of successful graphics. When considering the
goals for graphics, it is possible for _one_ of those goals to be
> But the art problem pales compared to the issue that everyone has been
> ducking, which is Fedora's support for DVDs and proprietary audio and
> video and web-streaming formats and Java applets.
> AVI. Quicktime. ASF. MPEG. DVD playback. Flash. Java. These are
> *not optional* in 2006
Flash is available for x86 Linux with the same licensing terms for the
other OS's Adobe supports. That says Adobe treats Linux on equal
footing to other OS's, or what I could call a level playing field. Why
should Linux get special treatment ? A stock install of Windows does
not include Flash, although it may be bundled by an OEM hardware
Sun's JRE is available for x86 with the same licensing as other OS's.
Again Linux is treated the same as other OS's, not as a special
stepchild. A stock install of Windows does not include a JRE, or if one
is included it is Microsoft's crusty old thing that is much worse than
the free stack provided with Fedora.
A stock install of Windows does not include DVD, MPEG2, or MPEG4
playback. These are provided by bundles of third party software the
hardware manufacturer includes on top of the OS. Remember, a WMV file
that uses a MPEG4 codec is not a standard MPEG4 file. A file that
adheres to the MPEG4 standard is not playable with WMP as shipped by
Even on commercial operating systems, video playback is a crapshoot. As
a graphics professional, determining the best digital video format to
use is a project-by-project set of trade-offs. I really don't expect it
to be any easier with Linux. Several of our clients now lean to Flash
video because a player exists for Linux in addition to the other big
two commercial OS's.
If I was Michael Dell, I wouldn't be complaining about how many
different Linux distributions there are, I would be putting money into
developing applications that provide this "last mile" media
functionality to Linux, and providing an OS bundle that matches the
functionality provided by the Windows bundles they offer. It is needed,
and there is a business opportunity to provide an out-of-the-box
experience for Linux similar to Windows. It is my opinion that it is
the hardware manufacturer that is to provide the solution to that gap
<emphasis> as it does with other operating systems </emphasis> not the
To look at the media playback "deficiency" from _my_ perspective, I
consider the absence of media players to be an advantage.
Yes, an advantage.
For the same reasons I remove the games installed by default on
Windows, I do not want media players on company systems. I do not want
employee time wasted viewing streaming video or audio. I don't want
employees to watch the telly at work, and I don't want them consuming
other media via the computer in front of them at work either. It is an
unnecessary distraction. I also don't want the liability of digital
media files of unknown source residing on company systems. Those
problems are solved by removing or not providing media players.
In the home environment, that is different, however I don't care what
someone does in their own home. It is possible that Fedora is not
suitable for some home users who require media playback without their
hardware OEM providing it for them in a bundle, like what happens with
commercial OS's. It _is_ suitable in a business environment in its
present form _because_ this media functionality is not present.
System Admin - Silver Oaks Communications