gedit ...cannot create backup !!!
by Jatin K
Dear all
suddenly I'm getting this error whenever I try to edit a text file and
click save button
" Could not create a backup file while saving /path/to/file.txt"
gedit could not backup the old copy of the file before saving the new
one.You can ignore this warning and save the file anyway.
but if an error occurs while saving , you could lose the old copy of the
file. Save anyway ?"
yesterday, everything was ok.. and this morning I'm getting this
whats wrong with gedit ?? can anyone help me ?
Regards
--
°v°
/(_)\
^ ^ Jatin Khatri
Registerd Linux user No #501175
www.counter.li.org
No M$
14 years, 2 months
- 4
- 6
New Kernel will not boot
by Lawrence E Graves
On Fri, 2010-04-02 at 02:40 +0000, users-request(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
wrote:
> Send users mailing list submissions to
> users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> users-request(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> users-owner(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of users digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. (no subject) (Don Vogt)
> 2. Re: FPL steps down: what's the real story? (Rahul Sundaram)
> 3. Re: (Steven Stern)
> 4. Re: N wifi broke after kernel update (Mail Lists)
> 5. (charles zeitler)
> 6. Re: (Rahul Sundaram)
> 7. Re: Fox News Channels videos won't play (Aram J. Agajanian)
> 8. Re: gedit ...cannot create backup !!! (Aram J. Agajanian)
> 9. Re: FPL steps down: what's the real story? (suvayu ali)
> 10. Re: FPL steps down: what's the real story? (Marcel Rieux)
> 11. Re: FPL steps down: what's the real story? (Craig White)
> 12. Re: Fox News Channels videos won't play (Temlakos)
> 13. Re: FPL steps down: what's the real story? (Craig White)
> 14. Re: FPL steps down: what's the real story? (Marcel Rieux)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 16:10:21 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Don Vogt <dnvot(a)yahoo.com>
> To: users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> Message-ID: <472611.75616.qm(a)web84102.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> -----------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 21:13:55 +0200
> > From: David Garc?a Granda <dgranda(a)gmail.com>
> > Subject: Re: New Firefox Won't run
> > To: Community support for Fedora users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
> > Message-ID:
> > ??? <g2z7e5980ea1004011213y149d30aayac5e5e72f5d92860(a)mail.gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> >
> > Hi Don,
> >
> > > Yesterday I updated to kernel 2.6.32.9.70 fc12 and to
> > firefox-3.5.9-1.fc12 and now firefox won't start. I get a
> > notice in the bottom bar for a few seconds and then it goes
> > blank.
> >
> > Strange, I have the same package versions and firefox runs
> > fine...
> >
> > > I tried starting firefox in a terminal and it returned
> > "can't load XPCOM"
> > > I tried 'locate XPCOM' and it returned some files in
> > /usr/lib/VirtualBox and
> > /usr/lib/xulrunner-1.9.1/modules/XPCOMUtils.jsm
> >
> > Uhmmm... I don't have virtualbox installed, so this can
> > make the difference.
> >
> > > I have VirtualBox installed, but I am not trying to
> > run firefox in virtualBox, but on the desktop.
> > > ?I just found that xulrunner-1.9.1.9-1.fc12 was
> > installed at the same time as the new firefox so I suspect
> > the problem is between firefox and xulrunner.
> >
> > I think the problem here is VirtualBox.
>
>
> OK, I will try to remove VirtualBox, if I can figure out how
>
>
>
> > > ?I don't know what to try next. I have been using fc12
> > for a long time successfully for quite a while Any help or
> > advice would be appreciated.
> >
> > Is it possible for you to check if XPCOM files related from
> > VirtualBox
> > conflict with Firefox/xulrunner ones?. Maybe something not
> > compatible
> > from VirtualBox is loaded instead of the right one.
>
> I will see what I can figure out about the related files
>
> >
> > HTH,
> >
> > David
> >
> >
>
> >
> > Message: 13
> > Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 14:20:42 -0700
> > From: suvayu ali <fatkasuvayu+linux(a)gmail.com>
> > Subject: Re: New Firefox Won't run
> > To: Community support for Fedora users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
> > Message-ID:
> > ??? <x2gfe3123491004011420o703df7bkad7c5b3dcfde3c12(a)mail.gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> >
> > On 1 April 2010 12:13, David Garc?a Granda <dgranda(a)gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > Hi Don,
> > >
> > >> Yesterday I updated to kernel 2.6.32.9.70 fc12 and
> > to firefox-3.5.9-1.fc12 and now firefox won't start. I get a
> > notice in the bottom bar for a few seconds and then it goes
> > blank.
> > >
> > > Strange, I have the same package versions and firefox
> > runs fine...
> > >
> > >> I tried starting firefox in a terminal and it
> > returned "can't load XPCOM"
> > >> I tried 'locate XPCOM' and it returned some files
> > in /usr/lib/VirtualBox and
> > /usr/lib/xulrunner-1.9.1/modules/XPCOMUtils.jsm
> > >
> > > Uhmmm... I don't have virtualbox installed, so this
> > can make the difference.
> > >
> > >> I have VirtualBox installed, but I am not trying
> > to run firefox in virtualBox, but on the desktop.
> > >> ?I just found that xulrunner-1.9.1.9-1.fc12 was
> > installed at the same time as the new firefox so I suspect
> > the problem is between firefox and xulrunner.
> > >
> > > I think the problem here is VirtualBox.
> > >
> >
> > It is improper methodology to start blaming other "most
> > unlikely"
> > packages before going through the proper troubleshooting
> > steps. I
> > don't have VBox installed and that file is there in my
> > system.
> > xulrunner is what firefox uses for all of its UI and
> > configuration.
> > (at least that is what I know)
> >
> > $ yum deplist firefox | grep xul
> > ???provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> > 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11
> > ???provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> > 1.9.1.9-1.fc11
> > ? dependency: libxul.so()(64bit)
> > ???provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> > 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11
> > ???provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> > 1.9.1.9-1.fc11
> > ? dependency: xulrunner >= 1.9.1.9
> > ???provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> > 1.9.1.9-1.fc11
> > ???provider: xulrunner.i586 1.9.1.9-1.fc11
> > ???provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> > 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11
> > ???provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> > 1.9.1.9-1.fc11
> > ? dependency: libxul.so()(64bit)
> > ???provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> > 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11
> > ???provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> > 1.9.1.9-1.fc11
> > ???provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> > 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11
> > ???provider: xulrunner.i586
> > 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11
> >
> > >> ?I don't know what to try next. I have been using
> > fc12 for a long time successfully for quite a while Any help
> > or advice would be appreciated.
> > >
> > > Is it possible for you to check if XPCOM files related
> > from VirtualBox
> > > conflict with Firefox/xulrunner ones?. Maybe something
> > not compatible
> > > from VirtualBox is loaded instead of the right one.
> > >
>
>
>
>
> > The OP should first try
> > 1. starting firefox in safe mode `firefox -safe-mode' and
> > see whether
> > any of the add-ons are to blame.
>
> Did that - no change
>
> > 2. If that doesn't work, try looking for unreleased lock
> > files for firefox.
> >
> > $ cd ~/.mozilla
> > $ find -type f -name '*lock'
> >
> > If any are found delete them and try again.
>
> found .parentlock files in each profile. Deleted them and got the same result ( unable to load XPCOM)
> 3. If none of the above works try creating a new user and
> > start firefox there.
>
> Created a new user and opened a terminal to run firefox again "unable to load XPCOM"
> >
> > And finally if none of the above work appeal to the
> > collective
> > knowledge of the list with the results from the above.
> >
> >
>
> OK I will attack VirtualBox to see if I can glean any info about dependencies and the look at removing it
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2010 04:40:26 +0530
> From: Rahul Sundaram <metherid(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: FPL steps down: what's the real story?
> To: users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> Message-ID: <4BB527E2.6060701(a)gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 04/02/2010 04:36 AM, Chris Adams wrote:
> > Once upon a time, Sam Sharpe <lists.redhat(a)samsharpe.net> said:
> >
> >> I believe that diverting resources into maintaining older releases
> >> does not further any of the Foundations. It takes resources away from
> >> further the last two principles.
> >>
> > I would say that pushing major updates to older releases takes more
> > resources, not less (at least if it is done correctly, with proper
> > testing on each release).
> >
>
> This really depends on the nature of the package and what problems the
> update solves. I generally prefer not pushing in "major" updates but I
> elected to do so for Transmission bittorrent client because magnet link
> support was in high demand (TPB switched to using it) and it fixed quite
> a number of important bugs that were being reported via ABRT, not to
> mention security and data loss issues. The other option would have been
> selective backporting which would have certainly been much more work and
> upstream projects don't necessarily support that approach.
>
> The right answer is - it depends.
>
> Rahul
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 18:18:52 -0500
> From: Steven Stern <subscribed-lists(a)sterndata.com>
> Subject: Re:
> To: Community support for Fedora users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
> Cc: Don Vogt <dnvot(a)yahoo.com>
> Message-ID: <4BB529DC.3090809(a)sterndata.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
>
> On 04/01/2010 06:10 PM, Don Vogt wrote:
> > -----------------------------------
> >>
> >> Message: 1
> >> Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 21:13:55 +0200
> >> From: David Garc?a Granda <dgranda(a)gmail.com>
> >> Subject: Re: New Firefox Won't run
> >> To: Community support for Fedora users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
> >> Message-ID:
> >> <g2z7e5980ea1004011213y149d30aayac5e5e72f5d92860(a)mail.gmail.com>
> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> >>
> >> Hi Don,
> >>
> >>> Yesterday I updated to kernel 2.6.32.9.70 fc12 and to
> >> firefox-3.5.9-1.fc12 and now firefox won't start. I get a
> >> notice in the bottom bar for a few seconds and then it goes
> >> blank.
> >>
> >> Strange, I have the same package versions and firefox runs
> >> fine...
> >>
> >>> I tried starting firefox in a terminal and it returned
> >> "can't load XPCOM"
> >>> I tried 'locate XPCOM' and it returned some files in
> >> /usr/lib/VirtualBox and
> >> /usr/lib/xulrunner-1.9.1/modules/XPCOMUtils.jsm
> >>
> >> Uhmmm... I don't have virtualbox installed, so this can
> >> make the difference.
> >>
> >>> I have VirtualBox installed, but I am not trying to
> >> run firefox in virtualBox, but on the desktop.
> >>> ?I just found that xulrunner-1.9.1.9-1.fc12 was
> >> installed at the same time as the new firefox so I suspect
> >> the problem is between firefox and xulrunner.
> >>
> >> I think the problem here is VirtualBox.
> >
> >
> > OK, I will try to remove VirtualBox, if I can figure out how
> >
> >
> >
> >>> ?I don't know what to try next. I have been using fc12
> >> for a long time successfully for quite a while Any help or
> >> advice would be appreciated.
> >>
> >> Is it possible for you to check if XPCOM files related from
> >> VirtualBox
> >> conflict with Firefox/xulrunner ones?. Maybe something not
> >> compatible
> >> from VirtualBox is loaded instead of the right one.
> >
> > I will see what I can figure out about the related files
> >
> >>
> >> HTH,
> >>
> >> David
> >>
> >>
> >
> >>
> >> Message: 13
> >> Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 14:20:42 -0700
> >> From: suvayu ali <fatkasuvayu+linux(a)gmail.com>
> >> Subject: Re: New Firefox Won't run
> >> To: Community support for Fedora users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
> >> Message-ID:
> >> <x2gfe3123491004011420o703df7bkad7c5b3dcfde3c12(a)mail.gmail.com>
> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> >>
> >> On 1 April 2010 12:13, David Garc?a Granda <dgranda(a)gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>> Hi Don,
> >>>
> >>>> Yesterday I updated to kernel 2.6.32.9.70 fc12 and
> >> to firefox-3.5.9-1.fc12 and now firefox won't start. I get a
> >> notice in the bottom bar for a few seconds and then it goes
> >> blank.
> >>>
> >>> Strange, I have the same package versions and firefox
> >> runs fine...
> >>>
> >>>> I tried starting firefox in a terminal and it
> >> returned "can't load XPCOM"
> >>>> I tried 'locate XPCOM' and it returned some files
> >> in /usr/lib/VirtualBox and
> >> /usr/lib/xulrunner-1.9.1/modules/XPCOMUtils.jsm
> >>>
> >>> Uhmmm... I don't have virtualbox installed, so this
> >> can make the difference.
> >>>
> >>>> I have VirtualBox installed, but I am not trying
> >> to run firefox in virtualBox, but on the desktop.
> >>>> ?I just found that xulrunner-1.9.1.9-1.fc12 was
> >> installed at the same time as the new firefox so I suspect
> >> the problem is between firefox and xulrunner.
> >>>
> >>> I think the problem here is VirtualBox.
> >>>
> >>
> >> It is improper methodology to start blaming other "most
> >> unlikely"
> >> packages before going through the proper troubleshooting
> >> steps. I
> >> don't have VBox installed and that file is there in my
> >> system.
> >> xulrunner is what firefox uses for all of its UI and
> >> configuration.
> >> (at least that is what I know)
> >>
> >> $ yum deplist firefox | grep xul
> >> provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> >> 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11
> >> provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> >> 1.9.1.9-1.fc11
> >> dependency: libxul.so()(64bit)
> >> provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> >> 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11
> >> provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> >> 1.9.1.9-1.fc11
> >> dependency: xulrunner >= 1.9.1.9
> >> provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> >> 1.9.1.9-1.fc11
> >> provider: xulrunner.i586 1.9.1.9-1.fc11
> >> provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> >> 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11
> >> provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> >> 1.9.1.9-1.fc11
> >> dependency: libxul.so()(64bit)
> >> provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> >> 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11
> >> provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> >> 1.9.1.9-1.fc11
> >> provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> >> 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11
> >> provider: xulrunner.i586
> >> 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11
> >>
> >>>> ?I don't know what to try next. I have been using
> >> fc12 for a long time successfully for quite a while Any help
> >> or advice would be appreciated.
> >>>
> >>> Is it possible for you to check if XPCOM files related
> >> from VirtualBox
> >>> conflict with Firefox/xulrunner ones?. Maybe something
> >> not compatible
> >>> from VirtualBox is loaded instead of the right one.
> >>>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> The OP should first try
> >> 1. starting firefox in safe mode `firefox -safe-mode' and
> >> see whether
> >> any of the add-ons are to blame.
> >
> > Did that - no change
> >
> >> 2. If that doesn't work, try looking for unreleased lock
> >> files for firefox.
> >>
> >> $ cd ~/.mozilla
> >> $ find -type f -name '*lock'
> >>
> >> If any are found delete them and try again.
> >
> > found .parentlock files in each profile. Deleted them and got the same result ( unable to load XPCOM)
> > 3. If none of the above works try creating a new user and
> >> start firefox there.
> >
> > Created a new user and opened a terminal to run firefox again "unable to load XPCOM"
> >>
> >> And finally if none of the above work appeal to the
> >> collective
> >> knowledge of the list with the results from the above.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > OK I will attack VirtualBox to see if I can glean any info about dependencies and the look at removing it
> >
> >
> >
> I have VirtualBox installed and am having no problems with Firefox.
>
> --
> -- Steve
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 19:57:16 -0400
> From: Mail Lists <lists(a)sapience.com>
> Subject: Re: N wifi broke after kernel update
> To: Community support for Fedora users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
> Message-ID: <4BB532DC.9060705(a)sapience.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 03/31/2010 09:15 PM, Mail Lists wrote:
> >
> > Wireless stopped working after latest kernel update.
>
> ...
>
> >
> > Filed bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=578663
> >
>
> Happy to report this has already been fixed (thank you john
> linville!!) in the 2.6.32.10-94.fc12 kernel build available in koji.
>
> gene
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 17:57:42 -0600
> From: charles zeitler <cfzeitler(a)gmail.com>
> To: fedora-users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
> Message-ID:
> <h2t2d6d70f11004011657h94c349b6j5879b946dcd91560(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> --
> Do what thou wilt
> shall be the whole of the Law.
>
> 1) "free and open source software" is redundant ( if it's free software )
>
> 2) does fedora need a "stable release" ?
> (there is already "current" "next" "previous" and "eol")
>
> charles zeitler
>
> Love is the law, love under will.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2010 06:26:18 +0530
> From: Rahul Sundaram <metherid(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re:
> To: users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> Message-ID: <4BB540B2.30600(a)gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 04/02/2010 05:27 AM, charles zeitler wrote:
> > --
> > Do what thou wilt
> > shall be the whole of the Law.
> >
> > 1) "free and open source software" is redundant ( if it's free software )
> >
>
> Not quite. FOSS is a umbrella term and using it is one way of avoiding
> the free beer vs freedom confusion
>
> > 2) does fedora need a "stable release" ?
> > (there is already "current" "next" "previous" and "eol")
> >
>
> Previous and current are "stable" releases. Next is the development
> branch.
>
> Rahul
>
> Ps: Remember to fill up the subject line
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 21:23:31 -0400
> From: "Aram J. Agajanian" <agajan(a)pobox.com>
> Subject: Re: Fox News Channels videos won't play
> To: users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> Message-ID: <20100401212331.1dad1161@pc01>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>
> On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 09:49:27 -0400
> Temlakos <temlakos(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I've come back to this issue of the Fox News Channel videos not
> > wanting to play, because perhaps I have some more information that
> > might provide a clue.
> >
> > Fox News Channel hosts a number of videos, and provides an embedding
> > link to each one. About an hour ago, I went to find one. When my
> > Fedora 12/Firefox 3.5.8 setup wouldn't play nice, I went to another
> > machine that had Windows XP on it. I was able to play the video
> > there, and to get the embedding script. I got it and pasted it into
> > an article I wrote.
> >
> > And when I went to display my article, guess what? The video wouldn't
> > play.
> >
>
> I am using flash 10.0.45.2 (64 bit) and Fedora 11 (with Firefox 3.5.9).
>
> Fox News videos wouldn't play until I uninstalled
> nspluginwrapper.x86_64.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 21:30:31 -0400
> From: "Aram J. Agajanian" <agajan(a)pobox.com>
> Subject: Re: gedit ...cannot create backup !!!
> To: users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> Message-ID: <20100401213031.5edd4812@pc01>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>
> On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 10:38:23 +0530
> Jatin K <ssh.fedora(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Dear all
> >
> > suddenly I'm getting this error whenever I try to edit a text file
> > and click save button
> >
> > " Could not create a backup file while saving /path/to/file.txt"
> > gedit could not backup the old copy of the file before saving the new
> > one.You can ignore this warning and save the file anyway.
> > but if an error occurs while saving , you could lose the old copy of
> > the file. Save anyway ?"
> >
> >
> > yesterday, everything was ok.. and this morning I'm getting this
> >
> > whats wrong with gedit ?? can anyone help me ?
> >
> >
> > Regards
> >
>
> I've seen this error message from gedit when trying to save on network
> filesystems where the uids are not mapped. When using sshfs, the
> following option can help:
>
> -o idmap=user
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 18:45:34 -0700
> From: suvayu ali <fatkasuvayu+linux(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: FPL steps down: what's the real story?
> To: Community support for Fedora users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
> Message-ID:
> <r2gfe3123491004011845sa4f29a3dt9b11f3801d14b192(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 1 April 2010 15:35, Craig White <craigwhite(a)azapple.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 15:13 -0700, suvayu ali wrote:
> >> On 1 April 2010 14:46, Craig White <craigwhite(a)azapple.com> wrote:
> >> > Red Hat is a different company, has their own mail lists, their own
> >> > software packaging, etc. This has nothing to do with Fedora.
> >> >
> >>
> >> And I recently learned they don't even use yum! :-o
> > ----
> > well RHEL 4 doesn't but RHEL 5 does.
> >
> > You can install yum from CentOS 4 on RHEL 4 systems but you have to be
> > vigilant about where packages are being installed from because RHEL 4
> > doesn't have repo information for yum.
> >
>
> Thanks for correcting me. :) Learned something new again! I deal with
> Scientific Linux 4 and 5 systems on a regular basis, hence my surprise
> about this piece of information. Any particular reason for this
> difference?
>
> > Craig
> >
>
> PS: I know my questions are probably OT, but its better than a flame
> war on a vaguely relevant thread. ;)
>
> --
> Suvayu
>
> Open source is the future. It sets us free.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 22:02:34 -0400
> From: Marcel Rieux <m.z.rieux(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: FPL steps down: what's the real story?
> To: Community support for Fedora users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
> Message-ID:
> <y2ja6e58c2d1004011902j75bfa7d9g5940a5bef0e8a512(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 5:42 PM, Craig White <craigwhite(a)azapple.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 17:23 -0400, Marcel Rieux wrote:
> >
>
>
> > as far as I can tell, you seem to be the only one confused about Red
> > Hat/Fedora. Fedora is a completely separate entity with its own
> > management, resources, servers though clearly it was incubated using
> > resources supplied by Red Hat.
> >
>
> Aaaah! So you found them! All along my research, I've been looking for the
> Fedora statutes. Normally, this document should be linked to the home
> page... and I couldn't find it! The best I could get was the composition of
> the board.
>
> So, let's talk. Where are the statutes, where you learned that Fedora is a
> completely separate entity?
>
14 years, 2 months
- 1
- 0
N wifi broke after kernel update
by Genes MailLists
Wireless stopped working after latest kernel update.
It connects and works fine using wired/
It connects and works fine with wireless until I use it for more than
a host check and a ping check.
Shortly after trying to use the connection (heavy load from chrome
restoring a lot of saved tabs) - it stops = NM thinks its ok - ifconfig
wlan0 shows it has an ip - iwconfig looks normal.
However I cannot ping the default route any longer.
/var/log/messages shows nothing iwlagn related - no oops etc
wpa_supplicant remains quiet.
rebooting produces same result with kernel is 2.6.32.10-90 (x86_64).
rmmod iwlagn; modprobe iwlagn ===> does not revive it.
Booting back to older kernel-2.6.9-70 works fine - so problem is
only in the newer kernel.
I did not see this using same computer earlier on a 802.11g network -
so it seesm its only with N.
Filed bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=578663
gene
14 years, 2 months
- 3
- 5
None
by Don Vogt
-----------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 21:13:55 +0200
> From: David Garc?a Granda <dgranda(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: New Firefox Won't run
> To: Community support for Fedora users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
> Message-ID:
> <g2z7e5980ea1004011213y149d30aayac5e5e72f5d92860(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Hi Don,
>
> > Yesterday I updated to kernel 2.6.32.9.70 fc12 and to
> firefox-3.5.9-1.fc12 and now firefox won't start. I get a
> notice in the bottom bar for a few seconds and then it goes
> blank.
>
> Strange, I have the same package versions and firefox runs
> fine...
>
> > I tried starting firefox in a terminal and it returned
> "can't load XPCOM"
> > I tried 'locate XPCOM' and it returned some files in
> /usr/lib/VirtualBox and
> /usr/lib/xulrunner-1.9.1/modules/XPCOMUtils.jsm
>
> Uhmmm... I don't have virtualbox installed, so this can
> make the difference.
>
> > I have VirtualBox installed, but I am not trying to
> run firefox in virtualBox, but on the desktop.
> > ?I just found that xulrunner-1.9.1.9-1.fc12 was
> installed at the same time as the new firefox so I suspect
> the problem is between firefox and xulrunner.
>
> I think the problem here is VirtualBox.
OK, I will try to remove VirtualBox, if I can figure out how
> > ?I don't know what to try next. I have been using fc12
> for a long time successfully for quite a while Any help or
> advice would be appreciated.
>
> Is it possible for you to check if XPCOM files related from
> VirtualBox
> conflict with Firefox/xulrunner ones?. Maybe something not
> compatible
> from VirtualBox is loaded instead of the right one.
I will see what I can figure out about the related files
>
> HTH,
>
> David
>
>
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 14:20:42 -0700
> From: suvayu ali <fatkasuvayu+linux(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: New Firefox Won't run
> To: Community support for Fedora users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
> Message-ID:
> <x2gfe3123491004011420o703df7bkad7c5b3dcfde3c12(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 1 April 2010 12:13, David Garc?a Granda <dgranda(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi Don,
> >
> >> Yesterday I updated to kernel 2.6.32.9.70 fc12 and
> to firefox-3.5.9-1.fc12 and now firefox won't start. I get a
> notice in the bottom bar for a few seconds and then it goes
> blank.
> >
> > Strange, I have the same package versions and firefox
> runs fine...
> >
> >> I tried starting firefox in a terminal and it
> returned "can't load XPCOM"
> >> I tried 'locate XPCOM' and it returned some files
> in /usr/lib/VirtualBox and
> /usr/lib/xulrunner-1.9.1/modules/XPCOMUtils.jsm
> >
> > Uhmmm... I don't have virtualbox installed, so this
> can make the difference.
> >
> >> I have VirtualBox installed, but I am not trying
> to run firefox in virtualBox, but on the desktop.
> >> ?I just found that xulrunner-1.9.1.9-1.fc12 was
> installed at the same time as the new firefox so I suspect
> the problem is between firefox and xulrunner.
> >
> > I think the problem here is VirtualBox.
> >
>
> It is improper methodology to start blaming other "most
> unlikely"
> packages before going through the proper troubleshooting
> steps. I
> don't have VBox installed and that file is there in my
> system.
> xulrunner is what firefox uses for all of its UI and
> configuration.
> (at least that is what I know)
>
> $ yum deplist firefox | grep xul
> provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11
> provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> 1.9.1.9-1.fc11
> dependency: libxul.so()(64bit)
> provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11
> provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> 1.9.1.9-1.fc11
> dependency: xulrunner >= 1.9.1.9
> provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> 1.9.1.9-1.fc11
> provider: xulrunner.i586 1.9.1.9-1.fc11
> provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11
> provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> 1.9.1.9-1.fc11
> dependency: libxul.so()(64bit)
> provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11
> provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> 1.9.1.9-1.fc11
> provider: xulrunner.x86_64
> 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11
> provider: xulrunner.i586
> 1.9.1-0.20.beta4.fc11
>
> >> ?I don't know what to try next. I have been using
> fc12 for a long time successfully for quite a while Any help
> or advice would be appreciated.
> >
> > Is it possible for you to check if XPCOM files related
> from VirtualBox
> > conflict with Firefox/xulrunner ones?. Maybe something
> not compatible
> > from VirtualBox is loaded instead of the right one.
> >
> The OP should first try
> 1. starting firefox in safe mode `firefox -safe-mode' and
> see whether
> any of the add-ons are to blame.
Did that - no change
> 2. If that doesn't work, try looking for unreleased lock
> files for firefox.
>
> $ cd ~/.mozilla
> $ find -type f -name '*lock'
>
> If any are found delete them and try again.
found .parentlock files in each profile. Deleted them and got the same result ( unable to load XPCOM)
3. If none of the above works try creating a new user and
> start firefox there.
Created a new user and opened a terminal to run firefox again "unable to load XPCOM"
>
> And finally if none of the above work appeal to the
> collective
> knowledge of the list with the results from the above.
>
>
OK I will attack VirtualBox to see if I can glean any info about dependencies and the look at removing it
14 years, 2 months
- 2
- 1
New Firefox Won't run
by Don Vogt
Yesterday I updated to kernel 2.6.32.9.70 fc12 and to firefox-3.5.9-1.fc12 and now firefox won't start. I get a notice in the bottom bar for a few seconds and then it goes blank.
I tried starting firefox in a terminal and it returned "can't load XPCOM"
I tried 'locate XPCOM' and it returned some files in /usr/lib/VirtualBox and /usr/lib/xulrunner-1.9.1/modules/XPCOMUtils.jsm
I have VirtualBox installed, but I am not trying to run firefox in virtualBox, but on the desktop.
I just found that xulrunner-1.9.1.9-1.fc12 was installed at the same time as the new firefox so I suspect the problem is between firefox and xulrunner.
I don't know what to try next. I have been using fc12 for a long time successfully for quite a while Any help or advice would be appreciated.
14 years, 2 months
- 3
- 3
New Kernel will not boot
by Lawrence E Graves
I don't know how I can explain this problem. I am not able to record it
or take picture of it and there is just too much information on the
screen. If I can be told what to look for, this might help fix the
problem.
I really don't know what to do.:-S
Lawrence E Graves <lgraves(a)risingstarmbc.com>
14 years, 2 months
- 2
- 1
update help
by Olaniyi Moluga
Hello everyone, I have trying to do a yum -y update on my fedora10 and I keep getting this error below:
[root@localhost olaniyi]# yum -y update
Loaded plugins: refresh-packagekit
http://linux.mirrors.es.net/fedora/updates/10/i386/repodata/repomd.xml:
[Errno 4] IOError: <urlopen error (113, 'No route to host')>
Trying other mirror.
http://ftp.linux.cz/pub/linux/fedora/linux/updates/10/i386/repodata/repom...:
[Errno 14] HTTP Error 404: Not Found
Trying other mirror.
A little help would be highly appreciated.
Regards,
Olaniyi Moluga
+2348034429391
+2348033805852
14 years, 2 months
- 2
- 3
Audio Device Permission setting
by Don KeLzy
I've been using MP3Act, an AJAX based web application that allows you
to organize your music centrally.
The thing is, I've been using the application partially being limited
to streaming mode only.Mp3act has a
jukebox mode too that allows the user to play directly from the web
page. In the installation documentation the user
needs to "set the permissions of the audio device to be writable by
the apache user".
I do not know how to do this, does anyone have any ideas or theories
regarding this???
14 years, 2 months
- 2
- 1
Re: New Kernel will not boot
by Bruno Wolff III
On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 08:35:19 -0600,
Lawrence E Graves <lgraves(a)risingstarmbc.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 09:18 -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 07:33:09 -0600,
> > Lawrence E Graves <lgraves(a)risingstarmbc.com> wrote:
> > > I am having trouble with the installing of the new kernel release about
> > > 2 days ago. When I install it and reboot my system it stops at the
> > > Fedora sign in the middle of the screen. It is hard for me to explain
> > > exactly what is happening because I am not good with the technical terms
> > > used.
> >
> > When you report issues like this please state the kernel version you are
> > using. New kernels come out pretty often and even if we new which Fedora
> > release you are using, we wouldn't be sure which kernel version you are
> > using.
> I guess that would make sense. With all that you have going on, being
> precise would help. The kernel I am talking about is
> 2.6.32.10-90.fc12.x86_64. I am trying to install it on dell inspiron
> 1501 and dell inspiron e1705. Is this enough information? Please let me
> know.
> I am trying to learn.
I am going to push this back over to the users list so that other can
see the information.
14 years, 2 months
- 2
- 1
Re: Upcoming Fedora User & Developer Conferences
by Jeroen van Meeuwen
Max Spevack wrote:
> FUDCon Zurich will be held in Zurich, Switzerland from September 17-19.
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FUDCon:Zurich_2010
>
I've registered! I can recommend anyone to do the same ;-)
-- Jeroen
14 years, 2 months
- 1
- 0