Fedora Core 5 Status
by Jeremy Katz
Due to circumstances outside of our control, we're going to be unable to
keep to the scheduled date of March 15th for the release of FC5 and
instead are going to have to make the release date Monday, March 20th.
While unfortunate in some ways, this gives us the opportunity to pull in
the final GNOME 2.14 tarballs which should be available on Monday
assuming the changes are suitably minor.
Jeremy
18 years, 3 months
Re: Fedora Core 5 Status
by Philippe Rigault
> Due to circumstances outside of our control, we're going to be unable to
> keep to the scheduled date of March 15th for the release of FC5 and
> instead are going to have to make the release date Monday, March 20th.
> While unfortunate in some ways, this gives us the opportunity to pull in
> the final GNOME 2.14 tarballs which should be available on Monday
> assuming the changes are suitably minor.
>
> Jeremy
I have two problems with this:
The first is that FC5 will be released essentially _untested_ after two of its
main components were upgraded to a stable release after FC5test3:
- gcc 4.1.0
- glibc-2.4
It could be argued that FC5 will be _released_ with a stable release of its
compiler and C library, but not that this had been tested.
The second goes the same way, arguing that if test3 is the latest test
release, any new major component should _not_ be upgraded to a new release,
which is particularly true for a big beast like GNOME.
Here are comments from Jesse and Alan made after I raised the very point of
GNOME 2.14:
> On Sat, 2006-02-04 at 11:57 -0500, Philippe Rigault wrote:
> >
> > I also very much hope that this will be an opportunity for re-assessing
the
> > relevance of March 15 as the release date for FC5-final, which I see a the
> > worst possible choice in March, given the following release dates:
> > March 15 GNOME-2.14, koffice-1.5
> > March 17 KDE-3.5.2
> >
>On Sat, 04 Feb 2006 10:15:54 -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:
> Unfortunately large changes such as the ones above would generally
> require another test release before making it final. We're trying to
> get all our major changes in before test3 so that the time between test3
> and final is spent fixing all the BUGS found in test3 rather than
> introducing more new software and more new bugs.
>
>--
>Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net)
>Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org)
>GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub)
>
>On Mon, 6 Feb 2006 10:37:30 -0500, Alan Cox wrote:
>It would need to be a large delay because moving to major new versions means
>invalidating a lot of the testing work in T1/T2. If sliding test2 a bit to
fit
>these would have worked then maybe there would be a practical way to do it,
but
>test3 > final is about polishing critical final bugs.
>
>Alan
In conclusion, I think that:
1. There should be a new test release, so that gcc/glibc are tested before
FC5 final
2. Since GNOME 2.14 may happen before this test release, it could be
included.
Cheers,
Philippe
18 years, 3 months
Issues with system-config-httpd and apache mods
by Misha Kononov
Alright, trying to get httpd up and running for a local testing server.
I removed everything related, then used yum to install httpd and
system-config-httpd.
[misha@panoz etc]$ sudo ./init.d/httpd start
Starting httpd: [ OK ]
[misha@panoz etc]$ sudo ./init.d/httpd stop
Stopping httpd: [ OK ]
Looks good so far, then I used system-config-httpd to make some changes
(default root directory and server name, nothing else) and upon trying
to start it again I get
[misha@panoz etc]$ sudo ./init.d/httpd start
Starting httpd: httpd: Syntax error on line 170 of
/etc/httpd/conf/httpd.conf: Cannot load /etc/httpd/modules/mod_access.so
into server: /etc/httpd/modules/mod_access.so: cannot open shared object
file: No such file or directory
[FAILED]
Haven't really played around with it much yet, but initially feels like
either a packaging issue or an issue with the way s-c-httpd is writing
the httpd.conf.
--Misha
18 years, 3 months
FC5 Boot errors after 2.6.15-1.1948
by Andrew Stephen
Hi
After updating to Kernel 2.6.15-1.1948 I getting the following error. I
have tried all kernels since with the same error and the last good kernel
was 2.6.16-1.1939. Any suggestions as to where I should start would be
appreciated.
Loading ext3.ko module
Trying to resume from LABEL=SWAP-hda3
No suspend signature on swap, not resuming.
Creating root device.
Mounting root filesystem.
Kjournald starting. Commit interval 5 seconds
EXT3-fs: mounted filesystem with ordered data mode.
Setting up other filesystems.
Setting up new root fs
setuproot: moving /dev failed: No such file or directory no fstab.sys,
mounting internal defaults
setuproot: error mounting /proc: No such file or directory
setuproot: error mounting /sys: No such file or directory Switching to new
root and running init.
umounting old /dev
umounting old /proc
umounting old /sys
ERROR opening /dev/console: No such file or directory Trying to use fd 0
instead.
WARINING: can't access (null)
Exec if init ((null)) failed!!!. Bad Address Kernel panic - not syncing:
Attempted to kill init!
[<c011a3b6>] panic+0x3e/0x170 [<c011cf66>] do_exit +0x71/06cf
[<c011d648>] sys_exit_group+0x0/0xd [<c0102bc1]
syscall+call+0x7/0xb
Cheers
Andrew
18 years, 3 months
which drivers compiled in wpa_supplicant
by Roger Grosswiler
Hey,
which drivers are compiled in the rpms of wpa_supplicant?
As i know, the following are supported:
Host AP driver for Prism2/2.5/3(WPA and WPA2)
Linuxant DriverLoader with Windows NDIS driver supporting WPA (WPA, but
not WPA2)
Agere Systems Inc. Linux Driver (Hermes-I/Hermes-II chipset) (WPA, but not
WPA2)
madwifi (Atheros ar521x)
ATMEL AT76C5XXx
Linux ndiswrapper
Broadcom wl.o driver
Intel ipw2100
Intel ipw2200
Wired Ethernet drivers
BSD net80211 layer (e.g., Atheros driver) (FreeBSD 6-CURRENT and NetBSD
current)
Windows NDIS drivers (Windows; at least XP and 2000, others not tested)
...but you have to fiddle out the .config-file. So i really just want to
know, for which drivers it has been compiled.
Roger
18 years, 3 months
unable to update software using graphical tool
by LarryT
Hi all :)
Few days ago i post a bug about my problem ([Bug 183685] ), but im not
sure it is really a bug :-/
When i try to run both graphical update software (=application/add
remove software & software updater) , it returns an error message :
/unable to retrieve software information/
If i run the both softs from a shell, i get something else :
/Cannot find a valid baseurl for repo: development
Error: Cannot find a valid baseurl for repo: development/
But if i use yum, it works.
NEVERTHELESS, i must precise that i have to use a proxy. Configuring the proxy _directly_ in yum.conf, doesn't work at all. I have to edit my .bashrc and add those two lines :
/http_proxy=http://user:passwr@ipaddress:port/
export http_proxy/
Would it be a way to add proxy information to the both graphical tools, or is there any other way to update my fc5 using graphical mode ?
thx !
Larry
18 years, 3 months
reboot and reboot after instalaltion fc5 test3 on ext3 fs
by LarryT
Trying to install fc5 on ext3 fs.
Installation was ok, but after i reboot, kernel doesnt work : it reboots
and reboots ....
Then i decided to instal it on LVM, and it is okay.
Is there a way to install it on ext3 ?
larry
(arch : x64)
18 years, 3 months