test February 2009

test@lists.fedoraproject.org

162 participants
254 discussions

NVIDIA Question
by David St.Clair 17 Jan '22

17 Jan '22

This may be a dumb question, but why can't Redhat distribute NVIDIA binary drivers? In NVIDIA's licence (http://www.nvidia.com/object/nv_swlicense.html) it says: "2.1.2 Linux Exception. Notwithstanding the foregoing terms of Section 2.1.1, SOFTWARE designed exclusively for use on the Linux operating system may be copied and redistributed, provided that the binary files thereof are not modified in any way (except for unzipping of compressed files)." So, what's keeping RedHat from putting the drivers in the distribution? If it's a GPL thing, would it be easy to just download it during installation or at least give the option to the user? Thanks, -- David St.Clair dstclair(a)cs.wcu.edu

10 20

Mouse goes crazy
by Jonathan Villa 17 Jan '22

17 Jan '22

Ok, I have had Yarrow working well for a while now, but yesterday I started experiencing some odd issues with my mouse. All of a sudden it stops working correctly. The only thing that seems to fix is to kill X and run mouse-test, then restart. Any ideas? Also, I have FC 1 running on a desktop which is hooked up to a KVM switch. Whenever I go to another PC, and return, the same thing happens, the mouse goes crazy. ???

8 7

Re: digikam and kipi-plugins?
by Rex Dieter 22 Nov '15

22 Nov '15

Per Bothner wrote: > The Rawhide version of digikam is the very latest (0.10.0-rc1), > but it fails to find any of the "Kipi plugins", even though I've > installed the kipi-plugins package. This might be an upstream > issue, since 0.10.0 is pretty bleeding edge and the kipi-plugins > may even more bleeding-edge. Gwenview does seem to be see the > plugins, so I'm wondering if there is there might be a > Fedora-specific problem before I complain upstream ... The f10 builds seem to work fine for me (finding the plugins), so perhaps this is rawhide-specific? To be clear, digikam's Settings -> configure digikam -> Kipi Plugins is empty? -- Rex

2 1

Re: rawhide report: 20050419 changes
by Ray Strode 22 Nov '15

22 Nov '15

Hi, > Will yelp in FC4 be able to search and display man/info pages Yea, man and info pages work for me. --Ray

2 2

Mouse Wheel gone
by Christian Menzel 22 Nov '15

22 Nov '15

Since the latest xorg-X11 upgrade I receive the already mentioned XKB error and the mouse wheel is not working anymore. Has anybody seen this behavior? Regards Chris

3 3

Re: NFS failure
by Fulko.Hew＠sita.aero 22 Nov '15

22 Nov '15

Damian Menscher <menscher(a)uiuc.edu>@redhat.com on 04/07/2004 04:57:13 PM wrote: > On Wed, 7 Apr 2004, Jeff Elkins wrote: > > > I'm getting failure messages on my nfs mounts i.e. : > > > > mount to NFS server 'music.elkins' failed: server is down. > > > > nsfd appears to be running and I didn't see anything suspicious in the logs. > > The servers are up and running and have other clients connected. > > You didn't mention what steps you took to debug it: > > Can you ping the server? > What is the output of rpcinfo -p servername? > Does the server have access restrictions (firewall, TCP Wrappers, etc)? I have the same symptoms... rpcinfo says that nfs et.al. are running. Something has changed in test 2, since the same PC running RH9 accesses that host just fine.

7 9

QA group activities + goals discussion
by Adam Williamson 28 May '09

28 May '09

Hi, all. Just before I left the Raleigh office after my week for orientation and getting to know the rest of the QA team, we had a meeting to try and set some goals for Fedora QA for this year. 'We' is myself, James Laska, and Will Woods. In the spirit of community that I am supposed to be bringing to the team, I wanted to throw these topics open to the list to try and get your feedback on the same topics we discussed. Off the top, we should be honest and open: Red Hat pays Will, James and now myself to work on Fedora QA full time. In my case, what RH want from me is quite purely and simply to try and help the community - external contributors - to improve the quality of Fedora as a project. In Will's and James's cases, though, things are slightly different. Part of their value is to produce tools and work on processes that, as well as contributing to Fedora QA, also contribute to the process that ultimately improves the quality of Red Hat's other products. In addition to that, they're real engineers who know how to write stuff, and all engineers like to come up with ideas and implement them. So, given that, there are always going to be things that the internal QA guys are working on that are decided by RH or by themselves. No matter how open and community-friendly we are, it will never be the case that the work and goals of those paid by RH are entirely determined by the collaborative process. However, bearing that in mind, it's still very valuable to RH, Fedora, and the Fedora QA community to hopefully get all your opinions on these issues, and it can certainly help to set my goals and help everyone involved in this project think about what they're doing, what they'd like to do, and how we can all work together towards the ultimate goal of making Fedora an even better project. So, to the topics! We set ourselves three simple questions 1. What does Fedora QA do? 2. What should it do? 3. What should it do first? We'd like all of your input on these questions - just let us know what you think. Broadly, we identified several things we - as a project - do: * Exploratory testing: simply using Fedora, updates-testing, or Rawhide, and complaining when stuff breaks. We agreed that this is at least as important as anything else QA does, but sometimes isn't treated as such. We agreed we should always emphasize that this is important and valuable, try to help ensure it can be done as effectively as possible (through things like the Bugzappers project), and try to always communicate to everyone that simply doing this kind of testing is an important and valued contribution to the QA project. * Structured testing: this is the more in-depth testing we do, such as regular testing of specific functions based on test plans, the use of automated tools such as Beaker and Nitrate (once they're ready), and test days. It also covers the case where another group contacts us with a request to do specific testing on a certain function. A lot of discussion here covered the Beaker and Nitrate projects; my take on this, as a new guy, is that they sound like really great tools that will help us a lot when they're ready. * Bug zapping: all the great work done by the Bugzappers team, mainly triaging and following up bugs to ensure they're properly handled from report through to released update. * Tooling: this is the work done, particularly by Will, to write the tools that allow structured testing to take place. We agreed that it would be good to get more contributions to this area, and that it's important to communicate the tools we do / will have available so they can be used to their full ability. This is important for things like Bodhi - we'd like to make sure that kind of system is more widely used. We also had discussions on things arising from the above, like the importance of Rawhide, and meta-tasks like documentation and community relations, which are important in attracting and enabling people to do the actual tasks. We also identified some specific goals. See also this Wiki page I created: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Goals 1. Increase participation in Rawhide: it provides a huge benefit in terms of identifying issues and having them fixed quickly and early in the cycle. I am going to work on communication and documentation issues around that, and Will is going to work on producing a tool which simply tests, every day, whether you can a) install Rawhide fresh and b) update from latest stable+updates to Rawhide. This serves two purposes: it both lets you know whether it's worth actually attempting to install Rawhide that day if you wanted to know, and if we track the results over time, it provides an incentive to the developers to improve the reliability of Rawhide. 2. Make release testing more accessible Encompasses many sub-tasks. * defining what role QA serves in the release process * defining what QA can do during the release process * how can the community get involved? * who tests what, when, and how? This is what we're doing at present with the Wiki cleanup: the purpose of this is to make it easier for people to get involved and know what we do. 3. Strengthen the QA tools portfolio: aim to have Nitrate available in prototype form by June, as we believe it will be really useful both in improving the amount and quality of testing we're able to do, and providing a fun and easy-to-use system that will get more people involved with QA. There's also Beaker, which may take longer. This is what wwoods is mainly working on. So, what's your opinion on the above? Do you have anything to add to the lists of what QA does, or should be doing? Do you feel there are any specific problems stopping us performing at our full potential, that should be solved as soon as possible? Do you have any ideas on making QA more accessible and getting more people involved? Please let us know. Thanks! -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net

10 23

clock riddle
by Michal Jaegermann 20 Mar '09

20 Mar '09

If you would have a Linux system where in a default configuration everybody with a desktop session would be able to modify at will such "insignificant" system settings like values of a hardware clock and a system clock, not mentioning such details like global changes to a configured timezone, then would you think that this is: - how it should be - a minor boo-boo - somewhat troublesome - or a really serious problem of a system integrity with security consequence too (messed up logs but not only)? Now knowing that various programs will be seriously affected by sudden changes in clock various, and ntpd is very careful when doing clock adjustments, would you think that the situation described in the previous paragraph is something which does not happen on Fedora or maybe it does? Michal

11 39

BugZappers wiki cleanup - comments and questions
by Christopher Beland 11 Mar '09

11 Mar '09

1.) In an effort to start cleanup, I merged [[BugZappers/GettingStarted]] into [[BugZappers/Joining]] and cleaned up links from the front page. [[BugZappers/HelpWanted]] should also be trimmed and merged in there. I also renamed [[BugZappers/TakingAction]] to [[BugZappers/How to Triage]], so it has a clearer purpose. 2.) The subpages under [[BugZappers/HouseKeeping#Task_Breakdown]] should probably be merged into the master page. 3.) [[BugZappers/components]] and [[BugZappers/FindingBugs]] are both serving the dual purpose of tracking what needs to be worked on and providing links to BugZilla to find bugs that need work. Any objections to merging to [[BugZappers/Tracking]]? 4.) [[BugZappers/Joining]] and [[BugZappers/ActiveTriagers]] have somewhat contradictory advice: "This does mean certain components are reserved. If you are unfamiliar with a component and someone is very active there, it is probably a good idea to pick a different component." vs. "It is okay for more than one person to cover the same component" We need to have clearer advice. I also see that [[BugZappers/Special Procedures]] has a note arguing that special opt-outs for certain developers are not scalable I think it would actually be a good idea if we took the list at [[BugZappers/components]] and merged in the list of people who are working on a particular component. (Adding a second list for non "key" components if people are claiming those.) The clearest indication for new triagers would be to add a column to indicate for each column whether or not more help is wanted for that component ("Yes") or if the existing triagers or developers think they have it covered ("No"). But there are other ways to present this information. 5.) As for the other content on [[BugZappers/Special Procedures]], [[BugZappers/How to Triage]] is the main instruction page, but we also have [[BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow]] and lots of advice on [[BugsAndFeatureRequests]] (which is oriented toward bug filers, not bug triagers). Clearly we need the One True List of Things Every Bug Should Have, which filers should supply and triagers will request if they don't. (This varies by component, and type of bug - e.g. crashes vs. misspellings vs. feature requests.) The ASSIGNED section of [[BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow]] has some of that info, which can be removed and replaced with a link to the canonical place. BugStatusWorkFlow can then just be an explanation of Bugzilla states. [[BugZappers/How to Triage]] and [[BugsAndFeatureRequests]] then need to be harmonized and streamlined. This is the crux of the problem of making a minimal set of instructions that bug filers and triagers can actually follow. 6.) [[BugZappers/Meetings]] and the front page don't mention that Triage Days are held immediately after meetings. Has that been decided for certain? -B.

4 15

emacs redisplay dead slow in latest update
by Per Bothner 10 Mar '09

10 Mar '09

After updating Rawhide today Emacs redisplay is dead slow. The problem is when scrolling: even when only scrolling by a single line, the whole window is redisplayed, and it is done so very slowly - taking about two seconds. This is only a problem with the default "Gnome window" emacs - it is not a problem with emacs -nw (i.e. Emacs in a terminal window), or other text editors I've tried (kate, gedit). -- --Per Bothner per(a)bothner.com http://per.bothner.com/

3 5

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

test February 2009