F18: ~/.vnc/xstartup example
by Fernando Gozalo
Please,
could someone copy-paste a working ~/.vnc/xstartup so I can have a gnome3
session when I access my computer using VNC?
The ~/.vnc/xstartup I used in F17 doesn't work in F18.
Thanks,
Fernando.
11 years, 2 months
F17, audacity recording what you hear
by Frank Elsner
Hello,
on my Lenovo C200 I've no Problem to record what I hear using audacity.
But ... on my Lenovo X121e the recording sounds really bad.
It sounds like a tin can. But is not clipped. The level is also ok.
Any idea what might be the reason?
--Frank Elsner
11 years, 2 months
Uptime in FC18 XFCE panel
by Bill Davidsen
A simple question about options. My panel in FC16 shows uptime with days on one
line and HH:MM fractional days on the next. In FC17 and FC18 only days are
shown. I looked through .config/xfce4/panel files for the answer, but in every
case the uptime is just enabled and works (or not) as I wish.
I did some searching, but haven't found the right info, how do I set thisd?
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen(a)tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
11 years, 2 months
f18+gnome3: mail-notification problem
by Dario Lesca
When I run mail-notification and add some Evolution folder to
monitoring, the application crash with this error:
> [lesca@dodo ~]$ mail-notification
>
> (mail-notification:24093): GLib-GObject-CRITICAL **: g_object_ref: assertion `G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed
>
> (mail-notification:24093): Gtk-CRITICAL **: _gtk_widget_list_devices: assertion `GTK_IS_WIDGET (widget)' failed
>
> (mail-notification:24093): GLib-GObject-WARNING **: instance of invalid non-instantiatable type `<invalid>'
>
> (mail-notification:24093): GLib-GObject-CRITICAL **: g_signal_emit_valist: assertion `G_TYPE_CHECK_INSTANCE (instance)' failed
>
> (mail-notification:24093): GLib-GObject-CRITICAL **: g_object_unref: assertion `G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed
>
> (mail-notification:24093): GLib-GObject-CRITICAL **: g_object_ref: assertion `G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed
>
> (mail-notification:24093): Gtk-CRITICAL **: _gtk_widget_list_devices: assertion `GTK_IS_WIDGET (widget)' failed
>
> (mail-notification:24093): GLib-GObject-CRITICAL **: g_object_unref: assertion `G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed
>
> (mail-notification:24093): GLib-GObject-CRITICAL **: g_object_ref: assertion `G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed
>
> (mail-notification:24093): Gtk-CRITICAL **: _gtk_widget_list_devices: assertion `GTK_IS_WIDGET (widget)' failed
>
> (mail-notification:24093): GLib-GObject-CRITICAL **: g_object_unref: assertion `G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed
And show an error panel with this message:
"A fatal error has occurred in Mail Notification"
"A GConf error has occurred: Type mismatch: Expected list, got int."
It's possible to fix this error?
There is another apps for check evolution mail local folder?
Many thanks
--
Dario Lesca - sip:dario@solinos.it
(Inviato dal mio Linux Fedora18+Gnome3)
11 years, 2 months
Re: Upgrade disaster F16->F17 (planned to go to F18)
by Wade Hampton
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sam Varshavchik <mrsam(a)courier-mta.com>
To: Community support for Fedora users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
Cc:
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:06:10 -0500
Subject: Re: Upgrade disaster F16->F17 (planned to go to F18)
Wade Hampton writes:
« HTML content follows »
I finally decided to update my main home computer to F18.
It was F16 so I had to use preupgrade to go to F17. After
several reboots it is up, sort-of, on the F16 kernel. I have
had the following problems.
[snip]
Any idea on how I can fix YUM?
# cat /etc/redhat-release
Fedora release 17 (Beefy Miracle)
# yum update
Loaded plugins: langpacks, presto, refresh-packagekit
Error: Cannot retrieve metalink for repository: fedora/16/x86_64.
Please verify its path and try again
Any idea how I can fix grub to boot into the F17 kernel?
First, run
rpm --rebuilddb
This will run a consistency check on the RPM database. Then run
rpm -q fedora-release
Your yum error suggests that you have fedora-release-16 installed,
irrespective of what your motd announces. If so, mount the F17 install
media, go into the Packages/f directory and run
rpm -UvhF fedora-release*
to manually update your fedora-release package to 17.
THANKS: I had not thought to rebuild rpmbuild. I'll try the
manual update of the fedora-release as well when I get
home tonight and attempt to fix this mess.
--
Wade Hampton
11 years, 2 months
F18 Mate Desktop on DVD?
by Frank Murphy
I have a query from a non-subscriber.
Is Mate Desktop included in F18-DVD.
--
Regards,
Frank
http//www.frankly3d.com
11 years, 2 months
system monitoring applet
by Rafnews
Hi,
i'm looking for a good system monitoring for fedora 18.
i found something about standard applet package called
"gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet
rpm"
AFAIK it will be displayed on the top bar close to clock/date.
but i was think is the one displayed on the theme (
http://forum.pinguyos.com/Thread-How-to-Use-Tint2-Instead-of-Docky-in-Shell)
on the right side bar is not the same.
is there someone who know if it's the same ?
thx
--
Alain
-----------------------------------------------------------
Windows 7 x64 / Fedora 17 x64
MySQL 5.5.28
Apache 2.4.3 / OpenSSL 1.0.1c
Tomcat 7.17
PHP 5.4.8
11 years, 2 months
Lack of things in Gimp
by Sylvia Sánchez
Hello everybody!
I found that Gimp in Fedora has less functions that in other
distributions (like Fuduntu or Ubuntu). In example, I can find video
and animation edition, and a lot of scripts.
Why is this happening? How can I solve it?
Thank you very much!
Lailah
11 years, 2 months
Lenovo laptop media keys
by Konstantin Svist
Is there a way to fix keys that don't generate "release" event?
My Lenovo laptop has touch-sensitive media keys that apparently only
send "press" events (as seen by showkey) and don't send "release"
events. As a result, pressing VolumeUp once starts an infinite loop of
increasing volume.. causing all kinds of trouble.
"Press" even repeats if the button is held down, but "release" never works.
11 years, 2 months
Re: humble suggestion to Fedora developers
by Philip Rhoades
People,
> Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 15:18:40 -0500
> From: "Eddie G. O'Connor Jr." <eoconnor25(a)gmail.com>
> To: Community support for Fedora users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
> Subject: Re: humble suggestion to Fedora developers
> Message-ID: <51058BA0.8020509(a)GMail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
> On 01/23/2013 02:59 PM, James Freer wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 7:34 PM, Joe Zeff <joe(a)zeff.us> wrote:
>>> On 01/23/2013 06:53 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>>> because first new anaconda was approved and integration
>>>> all over the distribution started and after that damage
>>>> was done people realized "hm new anaconda is not ready"
>>>
>>> So what you're saying is, it was approved before it was ready.
>>> Judging from
>>> what else you wrote, the devs didn't realize it when they approved
>>> it. This
>>> suggests to me that approval came too early in the process, before
>>> proper
>>> testing was done and that important parts of the program hadn't been
>>> completed. If so, is there anything that can be done to prevent
>>> this from
>>> happening yet again?
>> I have the greatest respect for the developer's that put in
>> considerable effort for each release. The problem with 6 month
>> release
>> cycle is too little time. I've used linux now for almost 6 years with
>> Ubuntu and Fedora. Some distros use a two year release which is too
>> long. One or two use an annual release which i think is about
>> right...
>> development and testing can fully take place. Why not consider an
>> annual release which would give appropriate time for all to take
>> place?
>>
>> james
> I would have to agree with you James, it might not be a bad idea for
> them to stretch their release time out a bit? I would have positives
> from all sides. First,....the developers would be able to REALLY put
> their apps and what-not through a GRUELING testing session, this
> way...when they say it works.....IT WORKS! Second,.....the public
> wouldn't find themselves scurrying to acquire the latest version, and
> slamming it onto their machines without knowing that things won't
> crash
> & burn un-necessarily......also it would give the public time to
> "adapt"
> and become comfortable with the latest release, instead of going into
> shock at the arrival of a new desktop environment...or new
> feature-sets
> that were not there before. I guess it's just a matter of someone (or
> a
> LOT of someone's) voicing their opinion loud enough to be heard by the
> higher-ups? I don't know that they would actually change things around
> like that....(it would be NICE!) but eventually they might get
> restless
> enough to completely flip thing around and have longer time frames
> between releases.
Maybe we should try out, say, a nine month cycle and if it doesn't suit
- go back to six months? I am conscious though of the human tendency to
put off things when there is more time to get them done . .
Regards,
Phil.
--
Philip Rhoades
GPO Box 3411
Sydney NSW 2001
Australia
E-mail: phil(a)pricom.com.au
11 years, 2 months