FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 08-05-2008, 02:53 PM
michael
 
Default

I know the box in Q is Fedora but when I've asked concerning issues with
my Debian boxes I've had prompt & v. useful replies so I hope it's okay
to ask the below here too:
-------- Forwarded Message --------
> From: michael <cs@networkingnewsletter.org.uk>
> Reply-To: For users of Fedora <fedora-list@redhat.com>
> To: For users of Fedora <fedora-list@redhat.com>
> Subject: eth0 problems?
> Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2008 15:19:21 +0100
>
> Should I be worried about the following in /var/log/messages and my
> clock being about 20 mins slow now?
>
> Aug 4 18:33:03 veri avahi-daemon[2914]: Withdrawing address record for
> fec0::8:219:d1ff:fee5:62f on eth0.
> Aug 4 18:33:03 veri avahi-daemon[2914]: Leaving mDNS multicast group on
> interface eth0.IPv6 with address fec0::8:219:d1ff:fee5:62f.
> Aug 4 18:33:03 veri avahi-daemon[2914]: Joining mDNS multicast group on
> interface eth0.IPv6 with address 2002:8258:1794:8:219:d1ff:fe
> e5:62f.
> Aug 4 18:33:03 veri avahi-daemon[2914]: Withdrawing address record for
> 2002:8258:1794:8:219:d1ff:fee5:62f on eth0.
> Aug 4 18:33:03 veri avahi-daemon[2914]: Leaving mDNS multicast group on
> interface eth0.IPv6 with address 2002:8258:1794:8:219:d1ff:fe
> e5:62f.
> Aug 4 18:33:03 veri avahi-daemon[2914]: Joining mDNS multicast group on
> interface eth0.IPv6 with address 2002:8258:438d:8:219:d1ff:fe
> e5:62f.
> Aug 4 18:35:59 veri ntpd[2676]: Deleting interface #3 eth0,
> fec0::8:219:d1ff:fee5:62f#123, interface stats: received=0, sent=0,
> dropp
> ed=0, active_time=20701 secs
> Aug 4 18:35:59 veri ntpd[2676]: Deleting interface #5 eth0,
> 2002:8258:1794:8:219:d1ff:fee5:62f#123, interface stats: received=0,
> sent
> =0, dropped=0, active_time=20701 secs
>
>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 08-05-2008, 03:37 PM
Derek Broughton
 
Default

Bart Silverstrim wrote:

> On a personal computer I feel you have a strong case. On a "corporate"
> type system, there may be reasons to not show the multiple OS's...so I'm
> not saying you're wrong, just there are cases where it makes sense that
> aren't that outlandish :-)

I completely agree with that. But I also strongly believe that "corporate"
systems should be customized by the corporation, not relying on the initial
OS distribution. If Ubuntu were to make these decisions for the corporate
user, they'd almost always be wrong :-)
--
derek


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 08-05-2008, 07:41 PM
Jesse Keating
 
Default

Fun email in my inbox. Would the KDE sig care to respond?

-------- Forwarded Message --------
From: S.W. Bobcat <swbobcat@hotmail.com>
To: jkeating@redhat.com
Subject: Question: Will Fedora 10 Contain KDE 3.5.10 or Not?
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2008 19:38:29 +0000

Dear Mr. Keating:

I would appreciate an answer to a question: will Fedora 10 include KDE
3.5.10?? As you are probably aware there is considerable anger out in
the community over the KDE 4 issue.

I have been a loyal Fedora user since Fedora 1. I am also a loyal KDE
user. I was outraged when Fedora 9 was released not only because it
included only KDE 4.0, but the responses from the Fedora devels which a
best could be described as arrogant, and at worst non careing. You do
not build a community with that type of attitude. From what I have read
KDE 4.1 -- which I suspect is going to be one of the "features" in
Fedora 10 -- still sucks, only less that KDE 4.0. There is some
controversy as weither Fedora 10 will also include KDE 3.5.10. All the
major distros have included KDE 3.5.x as an option / or in addition to,
KDE 4.x. I am hoping -- praying -- that the Fedora Project will include
KDE 3.5.10 in Fedora 10. There is no excuse to putting users through the
ringers or make them jump through hoops for them to be able to use KDE
3.5.x simply for them to be able to use the GUI of their choice. The
Fedora Project should not view their users simply as gueina pigs for Red
Hat and RHEL. I have no problem testing out new software etc so long as
I have the ability to default back to a stable and mature version of
said software.

KDE 3.5.10 should be included as a "feature" in Fedora 10 simple because
KDE 4.1 is still nowhere close to being ready for prime time, and still
lacks many of the customization features of KDE 3.5.x While I may want
to tinker with KDE 4.x and evaluate it some more, at the current time I
do not want to rely only on an unproven, buggy GUI no matter how "great"
its potential. Until KDE 4.x becomes more stable and more customizable,
then both KDE 3.5.x and KDE 4.x should be included in Fedora 10 and
future releases ( which probably translates to Fedora 12 or 13 which is
the expected time frame for KDE 4.3 or 4.4 release).

I hope you and/or the Fedora Project leader will address this question
long before Fedora 10 is released.

Sincerely yours,

R.H. Ruskin

'I am the Cat who walks by himself, and all places are alike to me." --
Rudyard Kipling
--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom˛ is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 08-05-2008, 09:52 PM
Michael Schwendt
 
Default

On Tue, 05 Aug 2008 15:41:16 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:

> From: S.W. Bobcat <swbobcat@hotmail.com>

> Sincerely yours,
>
> R.H. Ruskin

Hmmm...?

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 08-06-2008, 02:30 AM
Mike McGrath
 
Default

On Tue, 5 Aug 2008, Jesse Keating wrote:
>
> KDE 3.5.10 should be included as a "feature" in Fedora 10 simple because
> KDE 4.1 is still nowhere close to being ready for prime time, and still
> lacks many of the customization features of KDE 3.5.x While I may want
> to tinker with KDE 4.x and evaluate it some more, at the current time I
> do not want to rely only on an unproven, buggy GUI no matter how "great"
> its potential. Until KDE 4.x becomes more stable and more customizable,
> then both KDE 3.5.x and KDE 4.x should be included in Fedora 10 and
> future releases ( which probably translates to Fedora 12 or 13 which is
> the expected time frame for KDE 4.3 or 4.4 release).
>
> I hope you and/or the Fedora Project leader will address this question
> long before Fedora 10 is released.
>

/me not a member of the sig

As a KDE user I too found some quirks and bugs in KDE 4.0. Lucky for me,
Fedora 8 is still very much supported and I do still use it on some
machines. I look forward to 4.1 which, my understanding is, quit a bit
better. No doubt in some small part because of our decision to present
4.0 to the masses as quickly as possible. I think we did it before any
other major distribution[1].

I think we played this one right. I do think it should be made more
clear somewhere that Fedora is for enthusiasts or early adopters or
something. Some people can't keep up and they shouldn't be using Fedora
thinking that it doesn't move quickly.

-Mike


[1] This is from my memory... didn't research it. Please correct me if
I'm wrong.

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 08-06-2008, 10:27 AM
Michael Schwendt
 
Default

On Tue, 5 Aug 2008 21:30:55 -0500 (CDT), Mike McGrath wrote:

> I do think it should be made more
> clear somewhere that Fedora is for enthusiasts or early adopters or
> something.

... for people who either know how to multi-boot or who can choose
between multiple computers.

> Some people can't keep up and they shouldn't be using Fedora

No, they don't want to keep up. Fedora can't keep up either (or else the
releases would be more ready). To people, who try out Fedora, it becomes
obvious that alpha releases are not much different from the final release
and that a promising final release will look like an alpha release any
time soon after another couple of hundred updates.

> thinking that it doesn't move quickly.

This is only understood partially: the short life-cycle, a new
distribution release every six months, bleeding-edge software, tons of
updates already quickly after installation. What is less obvious is
that not just the development of the distribution moves forward in
general, but that all current releases move forward with way too many
updates, which break stuff that had been working before.

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 08-06-2008, 01:05 PM
Jesse Keating
 
Default

On Wed, 2008-08-06 at 12:27 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> No, they don't want to keep up. Fedora can't keep up either (or else the
> releases would be more ready). To people, who try out Fedora, it becomes
> obvious that alpha releases are not much different from the final release
> and that a promising final release will look like an alpha release any
> time soon after another couple of hundred updates.
>
> > thinking that it doesn't move quickly.
>
> This is only understood partially: the short life-cycle, a new
> distribution release every six months, bleeding-edge software, tons of
> updates already quickly after installation. What is less obvious is
> that not just the development of the distribution moves forward in
> general, but that all current releases move forward with way too many
> updates, which break stuff that had been working before.

The "too many updates" problem is something I've been trying to word so
that others share my opinion that something is wrong here. I haven't
been able to effectively communicate what I perceive to be a problem.
Michael, perhaps you can help me describe what the problem is and how we
as a project might be able to guide our contributors in avoiding this
problem. I too would like to see the Fedora releases return to being
more like stable releases to be trusted and less like rawhide snapshots
to be buried in tonnes of changes.

--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom˛ is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 08-06-2008, 04:36 PM
Thorsten Leemhuis
 
Default

On 06.08.2008 15:05, Jesse Keating wrote:

On Wed, 2008-08-06 at 12:27 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:

>

The "too many updates" problem is something I've been trying to word so
that others share my opinion that something is wrong here. I haven't
been able to effectively communicate what I perceive to be a problem. [...]


My 2 cent: the number of updates is not the problem. In fact lots of new
an up2date software without being to bleeding edge (like rawhide) is
exactly one of the things that make Fedora great imho.


Especially the kernel and driver updates that improve hardware support
over time are fantastic. In the RHL past, the early Fedora days and in
OpenSuse and Ubuntu these days users often have to wait half a year
until new drivers released by kernel.org or x.org are available in a
non-devel distro -- that really sucks if you own hardware that requires
such a driver. And that hardware is quite common, because most of the
time it's newly bought hardware that needs those new drivers -- and we
all buy new hardware now and then.


But yeah, the quality of the updates could be better. One of the
problems imho: The maintainers release new upstream versions to rawhide,
F(current) and F(current -1) at nearly the same time. K, thx to bodhi,
updates-testing and the push overhead there is a small delay for the
released versions, but nevertheless a lot of updates are released to
F(current) and F(current -1) nearly at the same time. So if that new
release from upstream has a serious bug then chances are big that all
our user bases or at least rawhide and -testing user will be hit by it.



I more and more think (and just like Jesse have failed to effectively
communicate/put into words) that we should consider to switch to a more
rolling release scheme with different usage levels. Roughly something
like the following maybe:



Level 1 -- rawhide, similar to how it is today (a bit more stable and
less breakage would be nice, but that's in the works already)


Level 2pre -- things that got tested in rawhide, that are still young,
but known to work well in rawhide; similar to what updates-testing for
F9 is today;


Level 2 -- things that worked fine for some time in 2pre; similar to
what F9 is today


Level 3pre -- things that worked fine for some time in 2

Level 3 -- things that worked fine for some time in 2pre


Level 3pre and 3 are like F8-updates-testing and F8, but with the
difference that everything has to be tested and shipped in level 2 (aka
F9) first.



Just a thought and only some parts of the whole idea that jumps around
in my head. So don't shoot me and read things into the above that are
not written there -- it's just a rough scheme without the boring details
worked out to show the rough concept. tia ;-)


Cu
knurd

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 08-06-2008, 04:42 PM
"Paul W. Frields"
 
Default

On Wed, 2008-08-06 at 18:36 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 06.08.2008 15:05, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Wed, 2008-08-06 at 12:27 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> >
> > The "too many updates" problem is something I've been trying to word so
> > that others share my opinion that something is wrong here. I haven't
> > been able to effectively communicate what I perceive to be a problem. [...]
>
> My 2 cent: the number of updates is not the problem. In fact lots of new
> an up2date software without being to bleeding edge (like rawhide) is
> exactly one of the things that make Fedora great imho.
[...snip...]

> Level 1 -- rawhide, similar to how it is today (a bit more stable and
> less breakage would be nice, but that's in the works already)
>
> Level 2pre -- things that got tested in rawhide, that are still young,
> but known to work well in rawhide; similar to what updates-testing for
> F9 is today;
>
> Level 2 -- things that worked fine for some time in 2pre; similar to
> what F9 is today
>
> Level 3pre -- things that worked fine for some time in 2
>
> Level 3 -- things that worked fine for some time in 2pre
>
>
> Level 3pre and 3 are like F8-updates-testing and F8, but with the
> difference that everything has to be tested and shipped in level 2 (aka
> F9) first.

Interestingly, this is is sort of what Seth Vidal recently did for yum
-- kinks were worked out in upstream and Rawhide, he has done several
useful updates for F-9, and only recently has he bundled it up for an
F-8 update. Hopefully he'll chime in with his thoughts on this
strategy.

--
Paul W. Frields
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
http://paul.frields.org/ - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 08-06-2008, 04:51 PM
seth vidal
 
Default

On Wed, 2008-08-06 at 16:42 +0000, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-08-06 at 18:36 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> > On 06.08.2008 15:05, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2008-08-06 at 12:27 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > >
> > > The "too many updates" problem is something I've been trying to word so
> > > that others share my opinion that something is wrong here. I haven't
> > > been able to effectively communicate what I perceive to be a problem. [...]
> >
> > My 2 cent: the number of updates is not the problem. In fact lots of new
> > an up2date software without being to bleeding edge (like rawhide) is
> > exactly one of the things that make Fedora great imho.
> [...snip...]
>
> > Level 1 -- rawhide, similar to how it is today (a bit more stable and
> > less breakage would be nice, but that's in the works already)
> >
> > Level 2pre -- things that got tested in rawhide, that are still young,
> > but known to work well in rawhide; similar to what updates-testing for
> > F9 is today;
> >
> > Level 2 -- things that worked fine for some time in 2pre; similar to
> > what F9 is today
> >
> > Level 3pre -- things that worked fine for some time in 2
> >
> > Level 3 -- things that worked fine for some time in 2pre
> >
> >
> > Level 3pre and 3 are like F8-updates-testing and F8, but with the
> > difference that everything has to be tested and shipped in level 2 (aka
> > F9) first.
>
> Interestingly, this is is sort of what Seth Vidal recently did for yum
> -- kinks were worked out in upstream and Rawhide, he has done several
> useful updates for F-9, and only recently has he bundled it up for an
> F-8 update. Hopefully he'll chime in with his thoughts on this
> strategy.
>

I think doing the above for every package creates the problem that jesse
is talking about.

It seems like what jesse has talked about in the past is trying to get
package maintainers to realize that we don't need to issue an update for
utterly minor fixes. You can collect a set of things and push them back
in a batch.

The problem is this is based on Jesse's feeling that we're issuing a
bunch of trivial updates and we're having trouble getting a metric on
how accurate his feeling is.

Also the reason why we're conservative on yum updates w/older releases
is simple: if yum breaks the ability to get more updates breaks too,
which is a big problem.

-sv

--
I only speak for me.

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 09:26 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org