Fedora errata and test errata

[Gene C.]

OK, I have been running all of the updates and "test updates" currently posted 
with no problems.

However, I do wonder how bugs should be reported.  Should they be reported 
against Fedora Core 1 with the specific package version/release specified or 
what?  The number of reports updates in the last four days for Fedora Core 1 
make it difficult to see just what is reported.

[Bill Nottingham]

Gene C. ([e-mail]) said:
> OK, I have been running all of the updates and "test updates" currently posted 
> with no problems.
>
> However, I do wonder how bugs should be reported.  Should they be reported 
> against Fedora Core 1 with the specific package version/release specified or 
> what?

Either that or rawhide.

Bill

[Gene C.]

On Monday 17 November 2003 15:46, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Gene C. ([e-mail]) said:
> > OK, I have been running all of the updates and "test updates" currently
> > posted with no problems.
> >
> > However, I do wonder how bugs should be reported.  Should they be
> > reported against Fedora Core 1 with the specific package version/release
> > specified or what?
>
> Either that or rawhide.

I would rather reserve "rawhide" for packages from "development".  I seems to 
me that a new version should be defined in bugzilla (update-testing?).

BTW, bugzilla needs some updating for package names: for example, in Fedora 
Core 1, there is no rpmdb-redhat package; instead the package is rpmdb-fedora 
but there is no such package defined to bugzilla.  I believe I have run 
across another one but do not remember what it is.

[Jesse Keating]

On Monday 17 November 2003 13:06, Gene C. wrote:
> BTW, bugzilla needs some updating for package names: for example, in
> Fedora Core 1, there is no rpmdb-redhat package; instead the package
> is rpmdb-fedora but there is no such package defined to bugzilla.  I
> believe I have run across another one but do not remember what it is.

fedora-logos perhaps?

[Gene C.]

On Monday 17 November 2003 16:20, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Monday 17 November 2003 13:06, Gene C. wrote:
> > BTW, bugzilla needs some updating for package names: for example, in
> > Fedora Core 1, there is no rpmdb-redhat package; instead the package
> > is rpmdb-fedora but there is no such package defined to bugzilla.  I
> > believe I have run across another one but do not remember what it is.
>
> fedora-logos perhaps?

Actually, it was fedora-release but fedora-logos is also missing.  I found 
that fedora-release was missing when I went to file a bug report for 
RELEASE-NOTES which (apparently) should be filed against the *-release 
package.

Evolution and libcom_err.so.3 problems....

[Glen Maeding]

Did anyone have problem with getting Evolution 1.4.5 with ximian (
exchange ) connector to run without any problem?

After struggling to get Red-Carpet to run on this unsupported platform
which Ximian recommends to fix any problems concerning the ximian
connector which Red-Carpet refused to work, i decided to try to
reinstall the ximian connector itself in hope of fixing the problem.

It ended up saying this:
"error: Failed dependencies:
        libcom_err.so.3 is needed by
ximian-connector-1.4.5-0.ximian.6.1"

So I googled this libcom_err.so.3 to see where it was coming from and
check to see if i had it in my system at all, well it pointed to this
krb5-libs file.  So I downloaded the rpm to install it thinking i didnt
have it on my system and attempted to install it.  It reported back:
"Preparing...                ###########################################
[100%]
        package krb5-libs-1.3.1-6 (which is newer than
krb5-libs-1.2.7-14) is already installed"

SO i figured this was what was causing it to not work so i forced
installed it and from that point on, my evolution now will work with the
ximian connector.  So what is different in that new version of krb5-libs
that comes with Fedora Core 1 compared to Redhat 9.0?  Now I have to
watch out for any wierd system responses from this forced install which
i know many of the components depends on this file.  Is there a known
issue on this or is this limited only to Ximian to work this issue out? 
If so then will ximian support Fedora anytime in the future or will that
be limited to Redhat Enteprise Linux only?

Evolution and libcom_err.so.3 problems....

[William Hooper]

Glen Maeding  said:
> Did anyone have problem with getting Evolution 1.4.5 with ximian (
> exchange ) connector to run without any problem?

Why did you post this to the Fedora-test-list?
> So I googled this libcom_err.so.3

Bugzilla would have been a better choice.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102900
> Is there a known
> issue on this or is this limited only to Ximian to work this issue out?
> If so then will ximian support Fedora anytime in the future or will that
> be limited to Redhat Enteprise Linux only?

Ximian needs to recompile their plug-in.  You'll have to ask them what
they plan to support.

Evolution and libcom_err.so.3 problems....

[Glen Maeding]

William Hooper wrote:
> Bugzilla would have been a better choice.
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102900

*Nod*, I did search Bugzilla.

I just wanted to know if there was a known issue with it or not because
i did not see one in Bugzilla related to the specific problem i was
experiencing.
> Ximian needs to recompile their plug-in.  You'll have to ask them what
> they plan to support.

Another thing, Ximian bascially said they do not support any other later
version than they have listed which is stopping at RH 9, no Fedora. Just
listing out what I did so that someone could point out if i did the
wrong thing or something.

I stumbled over this lousy solution and believed it was perhaps some
information that needs to be shared, so perhaps several people who have
the same configurations like i do maybe able to finally use Ximian
Evolution, which by the way comes with Fedora, with the ximian connector
in their workspace for the time being until Ximian finds out why its
acting like it did in the first place.

Also I felt it was relevant to this list because it is happening in
Fedora.  I read that Fedora, some of it's stuff will be used in Redhat
Enterprise Linux WS, so I know this will become an issue.  Just putting
in my two cents so that if people out there ever run to the same
similiar problem, they can do a search and this will come up for them.

But again, I could be digging a bigger hole for myself in responding to
you.  Thank you for pointing out that bugzilla post, interesting. 
Thanks for your help.

Evolution and libcom_err.so.3 problems....

[William Hooper]

Glen Maeding  said:
> Also I felt it was relevant to this list because it is happening in
> Fedora.

But nothing to do with a Fedora Test canidate or testing packages.  Please
take general Fedora issues to the fedora-list.