Unable to connect to the Internet through wireless
by jinwei
first sorry about my poor English ! i try my best to explain my problem
clearly!
i use the broadcom4312(14e4 4315) 802.11b/g wireless adapter
i have compiled the source code from the broadcom's official website
acroding to their help file(read me)!
Now the mod is loaded & i can see the wifi
but the problem is i can not access to any wifi,instead,it always
show"be accessing to"& a few seconds later,failed!
Dose anyone happen to the same situation before? Help Me!
12 years, 8 months
- 2
- 1
Re: F14, google-chrome won't launch after yum update
by Jackson Byers
Daniel J Walsh replied
>This is definitely something in SELinux. The current upstream google
>chrome is a little strange from an SELinux point of view. Have you
>tried chromium?
>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Chromium
well, no. Advice on this llist over last year or so is that
google-chrome is better.
I can always fall back on firefox....
At least I know my problem is Selinux.
And in this case evidently something that can't be fixed.
I would think this will be viewed by many fedora users
as a real black mark on Selinux.
Unless google-chrome is at fault.
More detail on how I was running:
from a backup copy of F!4
I had just done a yum update.
If I now go back to my main F14
(and dont do the yum update)
then google-chrome works as it has been.
so it was some glltch in the yum update
Jack
12 years, 8 months
- 4
- 3
How to get both T520 trackpoint and touchpad working in F15
by Alexander Volovics
I am trying to get both trackpoint and touchpad of the Lenovo
T520 UltraNav working, preferably at the same time as under Windows 7.
cat /proc/bus/input/devices shows:
- SynPS/2 Synaptics Touchpad
- TPPS/2 IBM Trackpoint
After install of F15 the trackpoint works but not the touchpad.
The scroll feature of the trackpoint (hold down middle button
and move the stick) does not work.
After installing 'gpointing-device-settings' the trackpoint
can be configured so that scrolling with 'middle button & stick
does work.
I can however find no way to get the touchpad working.
This would make scrolling much easier.
Can anybody tell me the magic incantation.
Alexander
12 years, 8 months
- 2
- 2
difference between "ping -I INTERFACE" and "ping -I IPADDRESS" ?
by Franta Hanzlík
(sorry if this mail arrive in this list once more, I sent it
by mistake cca 90 minutes ago from unregistered e/mail address)
hello Fedora networking gurus,
I always thought that using ping with specifying source interface is
exact equivalent as specifying its IP address - but it is evidently
not true. What I'm getting on my Linux Fedora 14 i686 box:
# ping -I 10.128.254.2 -c 3 -nn 90.183.38.60; echo -e '\n\n';\
> ping -I eth1 -c 3 -nn 90.183.38.60
PING 90.183.38.60 (90.183.38.60) from 10.128.254.2 : 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 90.183.38.60: icmp_req=1 ttl=56 time=4.66 ms
64 bytes from 90.183.38.60: icmp_req=2 ttl=56 time=12.7 ms
64 bytes from 90.183.38.60: icmp_req=3 ttl=56 time=4.50 ms
--- 90.183.38.60 ping statistics ---
3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 2003ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 4.502/7.310/12.769/3.861 ms
PING 90.183.38.60 (90.183.38.60) from 10.128.254.2 eth1: 56(84) bytes of data.
>From 10.128.254.2 icmp_seq=1 Destination Host Unreachable
>From 10.128.254.2 icmp_seq=2 Destination Host Unreachable
>From 10.128.254.2 icmp_seq=3 Destination Host Unreachable
--- 90.183.38.60 ping statistics ---
3 packets transmitted, 0 received, +3 errors, 100% packet loss, time 1999ms
pipe 3
Interface eth1 has IP address 10.128.254.2 :
# ip addr show
1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 16436 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN
link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00
inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host lo
2: eth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UNKNOWN qlen 1000
link/ether 00:30:4f:39:4b:49 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
inet 10.128.254.2/29 brd 10.128.254.7 scope global eth1
3: eth2: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UP qlen 1000
link/ether 00:08:c7:25:c7:53 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
inet 10.3.60.10/24 brd 10.3.60.255 scope global eth2
4: eth3: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UP qlen 1000
link/ether 00:08:c7:19:3b:94 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
inet 10.0.1.254/24 brd 10.0.1.255 scope global eth3
5: eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UP qlen 1000
link/ether 00:1e:8c:94:05:cd brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
inet 192.168.0.254/24 brd 192.168.0.255 scope global eth0
6: ppp0: <POINTOPOINT,MULTICAST,NOARP,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1492 qdisc pfifo_fast state UNKNOWN qlen 3
link/ppp
inet 90.187.57.21 peer 78.103.210.66/32 scope global ppp0
At all interfaces are only IPv4 addresses, they have not any IP aliases,
iptables are stopped. eth1 is NATed 1:1 to public IP at ISP site.
Know anyone why ping (from iputils-20100418-3.fc14.i686 package)
behaves in such way? May this be somehow related with system routin tables?
Thanks, Franta
12 years, 8 months
- 3
- 8
Developers responsibillity to Fedora Users
by Aaron Konstam
Alan Cox is exactly right that the users of Fedora products get them
free and one can make a strong case that therefore Fedora developers
have no responsibility to listen to user's complaints.
However, the Fedora users provide a service to the ReHat company of
identifying bugs that otherwise would show up to annoy the paying users
of RedHat Enterprise .
This is probably a weak argument to support the developers of Fedora
software listening to its users but what is clear is the current
situation leaves a bad taste in the mouths of the current Fedora
user-base. Clearly developers can ignore our complaints, but I have no
evidence that the paying Enterprise customers will be more tolerant of
the strange direction that RedHat is taking.
--
=======================================================================
timesharing, n: An access method whereby one computer abuses many
people.
=======================================================================
Aaron Konstam telephone: (210) 656-0355 e-mail: akonstam(a)sbcglobal.net
12 years, 8 months
- 28
- 87