Re: Distrowatch: What went wrong with Fedora Core 4

From: Gene Heskett (gene.heskett_at_verizon.net)
Date: 07/15/05

  • Next message: Ted Gervais: "Re: GPG signature"
    Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 20:41:03 -0400
    To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@redhat.com>
    
    

    On Thursday 14 July 2005 19:30, Michael A. Peters wrote:
    >On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 19:18 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
    >> On Thursday 14 July 2005 18:45, Justin Zygmont wrote:
    >> >No, don't discuss this any further. This is far off topic, and
    >> > has wasted enough time already.
    >>
    >> Well, from my own experience, I do believe its a valid question.
    >>
    >> Look, sometimes an ego is going to get bruised, even if its mine
    >> because I didn't read all the caveats, or hold my chew in the
    >> correct side of my mouth, any one of a thousand things. But when
    >> one application (yum) consistently fubars the system, I don't care
    >> whose ego is bruised, it still needs to be fixed. If I'm running
    >> it wrong, then so be it, I can be directed.
    >
    >yum has never messed up my system.

    Count your good luck charms & see if I can borrow one or two.
    >
    >> But first, I have to get somebodies attention so they can tell me
    >> where I screwed up if indeed I did.
    >>
    >> Put this way, I let yum update 290 some packages. To get that
    >> far, I had to mv Pubkeys and rebuild the rpm database to restore
    >> it. When it was done, the kernel it installed won't boot, and
    >> when booted to the older version, now X complains it doesn't have
    >> perms to run, and I'm root doing the startx. If those facts
    >> bruise an ego, then I'm sorry, but it doesn't change the FACTS.
    >
    >Those don't sound like yum bugs to me - sound like bugs in either
    > the software or the packages. Or am I missing something?

    No, I don't think you are. I *think* I'm trying to shoot the
    messenger.

    The real question seems to me, how did this new kernel get past
    testing if it won't even boot? Thats now vmlinuz-2.6.12-1.1390_FC4,
    the matching initrd, System.map etc. The .1-1369 seems to be ok if I
    don't want to run X.

    And, what broke X?

    And, what broke kde's kicker panel? On a previous install, there was
    a report from yum that kde3/launcher_panelapplet.so errored, and it
    was repeated during this most recent yum session. That I believe is
    part of kdebase, which yum replaced everytime I could get a boot that
    could run yum. I think the kde3/launcher_panelapplet.so is related
    to the loss of the kicker panel at the bottom of the x screen that I
    had after the first yum update a week and about 7 installs back,
    correct?

    I just tried both gnome and kde, neither will run x. At this point, I
    don't think its an x problem or it would log an error. It is not now
    logging any errors.

    -- 
    Cheers, Gene
    "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
     soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
    -Ed Howdershelt (Author)
    99.35% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
    Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above
    message by Gene Heskett are:
    Copyright 2005 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
    -- 
    fedora-list mailing list
    fedora-list@redhat.com
    To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
    

  • Next message: Ted Gervais: "Re: GPG signature"