Broken Fedora mozilla ppc packages (and the fix)
by Joel Barrios
Yes, I know it's really crazy, but I wanted to test the fedora PPC
stuff.
After installing PPC packages from Fedora in an iMac DV (I just avoided
initscripts, devlabel, gpm and mkinitrd), I was wondering why everything
worked fine except for mozilla/epiphany. I even rebuilt from SRPMs
several 1.4.1 SRPMs releases with 100% of negative results, until I
examined the mozilla spec file and found out why Fedora's mozilla RPMs
for PPC are broken:
# build mozilla - XCFLAGS is for NSS which can't use CFLAGS for
# various reasons
%ifarch ia64
OPTFLAGS=-O0
%else
OPTFLAGS=-O2
%endif
XCFLAGS=-g \
CFLAGS=-g \
%ifarch ia64
CXXFLAGS="-fno-inline -g" \
%else
CXXFLAGS=-g \
%endif
Guess the PPC mozilla packages were built just doing rpmbuild --rebuild.
So, <http://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/rawhide/ppc/Fedora/RPMS/>
has mozilla _PPC_ binary pacakges built with OPTFLAGS=-O2 and
CXXFLAGS=-g (!?!).
After removing these lines from the spec file, that really should
consider other architectures, and doing rpmbuild -bb, I could
successfully build mozilla packages that actually _work_ on PPC.
Joel Barrios D.
Linux Para Todos
http://www.linuxparatodos.net/
20 years, 5 months
Re: Release on monday?
by Patrick
That's not what I meant.
Check the release-schedule. All date so far are mondays.
PatrickM
--- On Mon 11/03, rg < grant(a)tuins.ac.jp > wrote:
From: rg [mailto: grant(a)tuins.ac.jp]
To: fedora-test-list(a)redhat.com
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 10:05:34 +0900
Subject: Re: Release on monday?
>>According to the Fedora site, a new (test) release is scheduled on
>>monday. Why?
>Is this correct? A new 'test'? I didn't see any mention of a new 'test,' >just the a delay for the public non-test release.
_______________________________________________
No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding.
Introducing My Way - http://www.myway.com
20 years, 5 months
RHEL 3.0 or Fedora for a 'production environment' ?
by Oscar A. Valdez
I've been trying to digest the bifurcation of Red Hat Linux into two
different releases. For personal and home use, Fedora is the logical
choice. But for my 50 servers and desktops at work, I have allowed
myself to be victimized by FUD (ie, Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt).
I've followed discussions on rebuilding a distribution from RHEL 3.0
source RPMs (see http://www.mail-archive.com/rhel-rebuild-l@uibk.ac.at
or http://caosity.org/pipermail/caos), and they are riddled with doubts
about the legality of doing so.
And then: "Red Hat Enterprise Linux creates a reliable, secure, high
performance platform designed for today's commercial environments--with
capabilities that match or surpass those of proprietary operating
systems."
Does this statement from Red Hat mean that I can't get the same from
Fedora? I don't think so. As long as Fedora provides stable, compatible
packages, bug and security fixes and upgrades, I think I can live with
it in my 'production environment'
Anyone care to comment?
--
Oscar A. Valdez
20 years, 5 months
RE: Seawolf -> Fedora?
by Patrick
--- On Tue 11/04, Kevin Weslowski < weslowsk(a)accesscomm.ca > wrote:From: Kevin Weslowski [mailto: weslowsk(a)accesscomm.ca]To: fedora-test-list(a)redhat.comDate: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 23:44:35 -0600Subject: Seawolf -> Fedora?
>Hi everyone,
>
>Just a couple questions I have for this group...I am on a demo subscription >for RHN for RH 7.1
>Does Fedora maintain errata/updates in the same way (i.e. using up2date)? Do >I keep my RHN subscription?
>
>Kevin
Interesting question!!
PatrickM
_______________________________________________
No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding.
Introducing My Way - http://www.myway.com
20 years, 5 months
Crossover Office 2.0 not working on FCT3
by Pankaj Jain
Folks,
I'm completely up2date with all the recent packages and once again, I
cannot start Quicken using CXOffice. My .xsession-errors file shows the
following error. Is this a kernel issue ( running 2115 right now )?
I'm not really sure where else to look so any help would be greatly
appreciated.
/opt/cxoffice/bin/wineloader: could not load 'C:\Program
Files\Quicken\qw.exe' as Win32 binary
thanks
Pankaj
--
Pankaj Jain <pjain001(a)covad.net>
20 years, 5 months
fedora
by Dominic Sgro
Does anyone know what the problem is with:
http://www.redhat.com/download/mirror.html
I haven't been able to get any response over the last two
days..............
_____________________________________
Dominic Sgro
Systems Administrator
School of Information Technology
Deakin University
Geelong, Australia
Email: mickg(a)deakin.edu.au
Web: http://www.cm.deakin.edu.au/~mickg
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Important Notice: The contents of this email transmission and any
attachments may contain privileged and confidential information and are
intended for the named addressee only. If you have received this email
in error, please notify the sender and delete this email immediately.
Any confidentiality, privilege or copyright is not waived or lost
because this email has been sent to you in error. It is your
responsibility to check this email and any attachments for viruses.
20 years, 5 months
Much Excitement & Delay Clarification?
by Gord Busse
Delayed due to respin for several days, will be available as soon as
possible.
In the above sentence, what does the word "respin" mean or refer to? And
does "several days" mean two weeks, three weeks, next month or next
week? Sorry, but I am almost bursting from the anticipation of
installing Fedora Core 1.0 final release.
Thanx,
Gord
20 years, 5 months
Slow boots with kernel-2.6.0-0.test9.1.67
by James Drabb
I just did some stop watch timings with kernels
kernel-2.6.0-0.test9.1.67 and kernel-2.4.22-1.2115.nptl
with regards to boot times.
kernel-2.4.22-1.2115.nptl
-------------------------
w/rhgb: 1:11
wo/rhgb: 1:07
kernel-2.6.0-0.test9.1.67
-------------------------
w/rhgb: 1:47
wo/rhgb: 1:42
I turned off kudzu. The big problem with 2.6 seems to be
in rc.sysinit when it runs depmod -A:
INITLOG_ARGS= action $"Finding module dependencies: " depmod -A
On the 2.6 kernel this took about 37 seconds and on the 2.4 kernel it
was only 3-5 seconds. Is there any reason for depmod to be close to 10
times slower on a 2.6 kernel? Also, is there really a need to rebuild
the module dependency file at each reboot? Isn't this step performed
when the kernel is built?
Jim Drabb
--
James Drabb
Senior Programmer Analyst
Davenport, FL USA
20 years, 5 months
Release on monday?
by Patrick
Hello everybody!
According to the Fedora site, a new (test) release is scheduled on a monday. Why?
Now we all have to wait eagerly until it's monday, should a release on friday not be better (it's a good way to start the weekend)????
PatrickM
_______________________________________________
No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding.
Introducing My Way - http://www.myway.com
20 years, 5 months