As I understand it, this is a known bug, and whether it appears is a
function of whether one did a clean install or effected an upgrade.
And (as I understand it) it can be repaired either by downgrading
yumex or by altering one's path.
On 06/23/2012 11:17 PM, Eddie G.O'Connor Jr-I wrote:
> Stunned silence..#headspinnig!
If the analogy made your head-spin, then you couldn't have followed
the actual discussion, which involved a significant later omitted by
the analogy (exactly that some participants were not trying to change
Gnome, but trying to change Fedora's relationship to Gnome).
> You my friend would give Dr. Sigmund Freud chills at night and
Were Freud here, I'd be mildly curious as to his theory of why you
keep injecting disorder and insult. If you really don't think that
the discussion should continue, then don't stir the pot.
I have a notebook with an Intel Centrino Advanced-N 6230 wireless
In gentoo (kernel 3.4.3-gentoo) and also in Fedora 17 the connection
through it is of poor quality. ping to the router is getting about 50%
With Ubuntu 12.04 and Windows 7 the connection is ok, without packet
Gentoo, Fedora and Ubuntu are all using the iwlwifi module for the
centrino wireless card.
# lspci -nnv
08:00.0 Network controller : Intel Corporation Centrino Advanced-N 6230 [8086:0091] (rev 34)
Subsystem: Intel Corporation Centrino Advanced-N 6230 AGN [8086:5201]
Flags: bus master, fast devsel, latency 0, IRQ 18
Memory at f2d00000 (64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=8K]
Capabilities: [c8] Power Management version 3
Capabilities: [d0] MSI: Enable- Count=1/1 Maskable- 64bit+
Capabilities: [e0] Express Endpoint, MSI 00
Capabilities:  Advanced Error Reporting
Capabilities:  Device Serial Number 88-53-2e-ff-ff-4f-03-76
Kernel driver in use: iwlwifi
Kernel modules: iwlwifi
On 06/23/2012 07:59 AM, Mike Wohlgemuth wrote:
> Someone claimed that they found gnome bashing tiresome. Your response
> was they should complain to the Gnome developers.
No, that wasn't my response.
If one were going to kill a snake, then I would indeed _suggest_
smashing its head rather than its tail, but all that presupposes that
one should try to kill the snake.
> It seemed sort of
> analogous to ordering a pizza in a restaurant and realizing it has
> anchovies on it. You hate anchovies, but it was clearly labeled as
> coming with anchovies. It seems at this point you could choose to
> take the anchovies off and eat the rest of the pizza. Or you could
> talk to the wait staff about resolving the issue. Or you could
> complain loudly to all the other patrons, and when the other patrons
> express displeasure with your actions, tell them that it is really the
> restaurant's fault.
Well, here's a rather better analogy, reworking yours:
We have a bunch of people who have been going to a pizza restaurant
for some years. And they find the pizza to be quite excellent. Then,
suddenly, it is changed. The old sort of pizza is removed from the
menu, and it is replaced with a new one that a contingent of
"regulars" loathe. So _they_ -- not just one hypothetical patron but
a bloc of them -- begin complaining not only to the staff, but on
Yelp! but in letters-to-the-editor. And people who want to read
_different_ letters-to-the-editor become annoyed, and start
complaining about the complaining.
(Note: You don't have to read this mailing list to use Gnome, nor to
Fedora with or without Gnome. Analogically speaking, the complaining
is _not_ in the restaurant.)
Of course, the restaurant has a right to change its offerings, but the
complainers have a right to complain. And the people complaining
about the complaining -- well, shouldn't they know what they got
themselves in for in reading other people's comments?
One answer to the people who don't like the pizza is to tell them to
go somewhere else (even if there's no other pizza place in town). One
answer to the people who don't like the complaints about the pizza is
to tell them to stop reading Yelp! and the letters-to-the-editor (even
if there's nothing else to read). And these answers aren't either/or;
one could embrace each.
And one could embrace both of these answers, while suggesting that
someone complaining about the complaining might do better to try to
smash the head of a snake than to attempt to stomp on its tail.
> This third option is what I find astonishingly arrogant.
Well, your attempts to interpret my psychology are grossly incompetent.
After screwing around for about an hour trying to build nmap for OS/X, I
decided it was a better use of my time to put a Fedora VM on my Mac and
install nmap* therein.
I started with the 64 bit XFCE live spin and had a working Fedora site
within VMWare Fusion in less than an hour, including the time to do the
subsequent yum updates and install the tools necessary to build the
VMWare Tools drivers.
Well done, folks, well done!
On 06/22/2012 08:10 AM, Mike Wohlgemuth wrote:
> On 06/20/2012 11:01 AM, Daniel wrote:
>> Your fatigue would largely have been avoided had the Gnome
>> developers proceeded differently. So perhaps you should complain
>> to them. ;-)
> Wow. The arrogance in that statement is rather astounding.
Wow. Your resort to personally attacking me is rather astounding, as
also is your imputing arrogance to my making a point of pure logic.
> seriously believe that I should complain to the Gnome developers
> because there are people on a mailing list that is only tangentially
> related to Gnome who can't stop beating a dead horse?
No. I actually don't believe that you should complain to anyone. I
don't believe that you should complain to the developers of Gnome; I
don't believe that you should complain on this list about those who
have a problem with Gnome; I don't believe that you should complain on
this list with those who believe that Gnome should not be the default
choice of Fedora. I don't see how it is that you imagine that the
second group is beating a dead horse and yet you are not. I don't see
how you think that the third group is beating a dead horse.
In any event, I see the second and third groups as trying to move a
horse whom they believe to be alive, whereas I don't know what you
might think that you're doing, but it doesn't look like an attempt to
> 1. No discussion on this list will likely ever impact Gnome
> development. Go to the gnome devel list for that.
I made that point a while back, more than once. But those in the
third group are trying to effect Fedora's relationship to Gnome, given
its development arc.
> 2. The only likely scenario in which discussions on this list will
> impact Fedora development is if one of the development team also
> reads this list and takes it upon themselves to follow up on the
> Fedora devel lists.
And even then, such a developer is unlikely to heed the cries. But
under what scenario do you imagine that people here will respond to
> 3. The vast majority of users of Fedora, whether or not they use
> Gnome, could not care less about your opinions on the Gnome
> development process, and do get tired of the repetition, and
> telling them that it is their fault is insulting.
I'd like to see your polling data. I'd like to see polling dats that
shows that the majority of users _do_ care about most of the threads
on this list. I'd like to see polling data that shows that those
complaining about Gnome are going to respond to your demands that they
So, I'm doing a fresh install of Fedora 17 from DVD. I get to the disk
layout and select custom partitioning.
Partition size: default 500 (MB)
Here's where I have trouble. I need 100 GB. So, 1 GB = 1000MB, so I
should enter 100x1000, no?
I can't believe that Anaconda is so broken, so it must be me.
On 06/23/2012 06:51 AM, Eddie G.O'Connor Jr-I wrote:
>>> Wow. The arrogance in that statement is rather astounding.
>> Wow. Your resort to personally attacking me is rather astounding, as
>> also is your imputing arrogance to my making a point of pure logic.
> Uhh....guys? not to be a pain in the arse or anything, but does it
> matter either way? I have a slew of e-mails of you guys going back and
> forth, let's just leave it as "You have YOUR opinion......and He has
> HIS" which is something we're all entitled to, and should therefore
> respect them. I believe you both have valid points made, and I KNOW
> there are people who feel like either one of you do regarding Gnome, I
> DON'T believe that going "back & forth" will help in any case.....but
> its been entertaining to say the least!...LoL!
Okay, now, go back and read the opinion that Mike Wohlgemuth actually
expressed, which began with the claim that I'm astonishingly arrogant.
Do you think that you're doing a particularly good job playing
peace-maker, when you insist that this is simply a matter of opinion
or that his opinion has a sound basis?
Moreover, when you refer to a "both" and "either" here, it shows that
you haven't been paying attention; there are more than two sorts of
opinions being expressed. Now, it's perfectly all right for you not
to pay attention, but not if you're subsequently going to pop-in and
express some blanket opinion about the merits of all sides.
I suspect that you're best-off just ignoring this particular thread.
On 06/23/2012 11:23 AM, Lowell wrote:
> Three times over the last few days, the Software Update program has
> announced that it has 10 updates it wants to install. I okay this,
> provide the password to approve it, the program gets the list of pkgs.
> (a few SELinux libraries, a microcode reader, an ffmpeg lib, among
> others) downloads, attempts to install, fails and closes; the details
> say "Fail;fail'
> This is Fedora 17 64-bit Gnome on a Toshiba Satellite A665.
> Thought you might like to know of this.
What do you see if you run "sudo yum update" from terminal?