I just want to test whether all keys could not be imported. Because I can not import any new keys, e.g. sudo rpm --import http://atrpms.net/RPM-GPG-KEY.atrpms. I have download this rpm file. [sudo] password for aa: error: http://atrpms.net/RPM-GPG-KEY.atrpms: import failed. > > Today's Topics: > > 1. FC10 Error (hejunfeng@xxxxxxxxxx) > 2. Re: F10: Unrequested automatic installation ::rant (dexter) > 3. Re: FC10 Error (Todd Zullinger) > 4. Re: F10: Unrequested automatic installation ::rant (lanas) > 5. Re: F10 Evo filtering unbearably slow (Patrick O'Callaghan) > 6. Re: Boardcom bcm2046 bluetooth problem (Steve Repo) > 7. Re: F10 Evo filtering unbearably slow (Matthew Saltzman) > 8. (Off Topic ) Open Source: The Model Is Broken ?? (Rahul Tidke) > 9. Re: root in FC 10 (Fred Silsbee) > 10. Re: (Off Topic ) Open Source: The Model Is Broken ?? (Tim) > 11. Re: Analog-to-Digital Audio: (Tim) > 12. Re: Analog-to-Digital Audio: (Tim) > 13. Re: root in FC 10 (Todd Zullinger) > 14. Re: root in FC 10 (Tim) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2008 10:52:33 +0800 > From: "hejunfeng@xxxxxxxxxx" <hejunfeng@xxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: FC10 Error > To: fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx > Message-ID: <1228531954.16169.6.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="GB2312" > > Hi My Friends, > There is a problem when install sw to fc10. Do you have any ideas? Below > is the error message: > > [root@laptop ~]# rpm --import /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY* > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-adobe-linux: import failed. > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora: import failed. > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-10-primary: import failed. > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-i386: import failed. > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-ia64: import failed. > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-ppc: import failed. > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-ppc64: import failed. > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-primary: import failed. > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-test: import failed. > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-test-10-primary: import > failed. > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-test-i386: import failed. > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-test-ia64: import failed. > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-test-ppc: import failed. > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-test-ppc64: import failed. > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-test-primary: import failed. > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-test-x86_64: import failed. > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-x86_64: import failed. > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-freshrpms: import failed. > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-livna: import failed. > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-PPTP: import failed. > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-rpmfusion-free-fedora: import > failed. > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-rpmfusion-nonfree-fedora: import > failed. > [root@laptop ~]# rpm --import http://rpm.livna.org/RPM-LIVNA-GPG-KEY > error: http://rpm.livna.org/RPM-LIVNA-GPG-KEY: import failed. > [root@laptop ~]# rpm --import http://freshrpms.net/RPM-GPG-KEY-freshrpms > error: http://freshrpms.net/RPM-GPG-KEY-freshrpms: import failed. > [root@laptop ~]# /msg NickServ VERIFY REGISTER Danfer ykpzrligncer > -bash: /msg: > [root@laptop ~]# rpm -qa | grep key > gpg-pubkey-30c9ecf8-3f9da3f7 > gpg-pubkey-e42d547b-3960bdf1 > gnome-keyring-2.24.1-1.fc10.i386 > gpg-pubkey-49c8885a-4878ddfb > keyutils-libs-1.2-3.fc9.i386 > gpg-pubkey-4f2a6fd2-3f9d9d3b > gpg-pubkey-66534c2b-3e60b428 > xkeyboard-config-1.4-4.fc10.noarch > xorg-x11-drv-keyboard-1.3.0-3.fc9.i386 > system-config-keyboard-1.2.15-4.fc10.noarch > gpg-pubkey-f613cbe8-483c6049 > gnome-keyring-sharp-1.0.0-0.2.87622svn.fc10.i386 > gpg-pubkey-862acc42-42243bfc > gnome-keyring-pam-2.24.1-1.fc10.i386 > coolkey-1.1.0-7.fc10.i386 > gpg-pubkey-4ebfc273-48b5dbf3 > gpg-pubkey-b1981b68-4878de85 > gpg-pubkey-a109b1ec-3f6e28d5 > keyutils-libs-devel-1.2-3.fc9.i386 > coolkey-devel-1.1.0-7.fc10.i386 > gpg-pubkey-0b86274e-48b5dd6f > gpg-pubkey-f6777c67-45e5b1b9 > [root@laptop ~]# rpm --import RPM-GPG-KEY.atrpms > error: RPM-GPG-KEY.atrpms: import read failed(-1). > [root@laptop ~]# > > > Many thanks > > -- > > Please feel free to call me > Best Regards > > > He Junfeng > Mobile: 13911069420 > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > hejunfeng@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > There is a problem when install sw to fc10. Do you have any ideas? Below > > is the error message: > > > > [root@laptop ~]# rpm --import /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY* > > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-adobe-linux: import failed. > > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora: import failed. > > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-10-primary: import failed. > > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-i386: import failed. > > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-ia64: import failed. > > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-ppc: import failed. > > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-ppc64: import failed. > > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-primary: import failed. > > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-test: import failed. > > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-test-10-primary: import > > failed. > > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-test-i386: import failed. > > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-test-ia64: import failed. > > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-test-ppc: import failed. > > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-test-ppc64: import failed. > > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-test-primary: import failed. > > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-test-x86_64: import failed. > > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-x86_64: import failed. > > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-freshrpms: import failed. > > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-livna: import failed. > > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-PPTP: import failed. > > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-rpmfusion-free-fedora: import > > failed. > > error: /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-rpmfusion-nonfree-fedora: import > > failed. > > Out of curiosity, why are you trying to import all of these keys (many > of which are redundant because they are symbolic links)? > > > [root@laptop ~]# /msg NickServ VERIFY REGISTER Danfer XXXXXXXXXXXX > > -bash: /msg: > > Be careful what you copy and paste to a public list. ;) > > > [root@laptop ~]# rpm -qa | grep key > > gpg-pubkey-30c9ecf8-3f9da3f7 > > gpg-pubkey-e42d547b-3960bdf1 > > gnome-keyring-2.24.1-1.fc10.i386 > > gpg-pubkey-49c8885a-4878ddfb > > keyutils-libs-1.2-3.fc9.i386 > > gpg-pubkey-4f2a6fd2-3f9d9d3b > > gpg-pubkey-66534c2b-3e60b428 > > xkeyboard-config-1.4-4.fc10.noarch > > xorg-x11-drv-keyboard-1.3.0-3.fc9.i386 > > system-config-keyboard-1.2.15-4.fc10.noarch > > gpg-pubkey-f613cbe8-483c6049 > > gnome-keyring-sharp-1.0.0-0.2.87622svn.fc10.i386 > > gpg-pubkey-862acc42-42243bfc > > gnome-keyring-pam-2.24.1-1.fc10.i386 > > coolkey-1.1.0-7.fc10.i386 > > gpg-pubkey-4ebfc273-48b5dbf3 > > gpg-pubkey-b1981b68-4878de85 > > gpg-pubkey-a109b1ec-3f6e28d5 > > keyutils-libs-devel-1.2-3.fc9.i386 > > coolkey-devel-1.1.0-7.fc10.i386 > > gpg-pubkey-0b86274e-48b5dd6f > > gpg-pubkey-f6777c67-45e5b1b9 > > [root@laptop ~]# rpm --import RPM-GPG-KEY.atrpms > > error: RPM-GPG-KEY.atrpms: import read failed(-1). > > [root@laptop ~]# > > To see the details for the gpg keys you have imported to the rpm > database, this might be more useful: > > rpm -qa --qf '%{N}-%{V}-%{R}\t%{summary}\n' gpg-pubkey > > It appears that you already have the Fedora 10 key imported. Can you > install any other packages, or do you get an error there as well? If > so, you might have some problem with your rpm database. Right now, > it's hard for me to guess what might be wrong. > > This would be gpg-pubkey-4ebfc273-48b5dbf3, in the rpm -qa output > > -- > Todd OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > A good scapegoat is almost as good as a solution. > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: not available > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 542 bytes > Desc: not available > Url : https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20081205/3158f582/attachment.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 22:31:19 -0500 > From: lanas <lanas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: F10: Unrequested automatic installation ::rant > To: fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx > Message-ID: <20081205223119.77e329a0@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Le Sat, 6 Dec 2008 03:04:10 +0000, > dexter <dex.mbox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> a crit : > > > 2008/12/5 lanas <lanas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > > On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 08:56:00 -0500, > > > Robert Locke <lists@xxxxxxxxx> wrote : > > > > > >> This morning after booting and logging in, a little bubble opened > > >> in the lower right hand corner that said some updates were > > >> complete. I had not requested any updates. Previous updates had > > >> all been done by me typing "yum update" in a gnome-terminal. > > > > > > OK. Microsoft gave $500 millions to Novell for SuSE. How much did > > > they gave to Red Hat, do I ask cynically ? > > > > > > Or worse, is this the result of Windows programmers moving to work > > > on Linux bringing along their great ideas ? > > > > > > If it goes on like that in 3 years from now, major Linux distros > > > will have too many similarities with Windows, and will share the > > > Windows problems of today. All that's left is to remove that darn > > > root account or better (!), have users always with root privileges. > > > > > > But since Linux is what it is, there'll be hope in 'rebel', > > > rock-solid alternative distros that do not push by default > > > unwanted system behaviours to users and stick to proven basics. > > > And that doesn't exclude compiz. > > > > > > I'm suprised this packagekit-whatever default behaviour went into > > > production w/o anyone raising a red light. Even if it's a bug. > > > truly surprising. > > > > > > And how does it update the system exactly w/o root account ? Or > > > does this GUI thing runs always as root with access to both the > > > system and the internet w/o users knowing it ? > > > > > > My rant. > > > > > > Cheers. > > > > These people need to here this: > > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-December/msg00431.html > > Then, to the question that perhaps a dialog box would improve things, a > Fedora guy replied: > > "What would you want the dialog box to say?" > > I have a few things in mind, but to write these I would have to leave > the range of alphanumeirc keys. > > Cheers. > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2008 23:32:35 +1930 > From: "Patrick O'Callaghan" <pocallaghan@xxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: F10 Evo filtering unbearably slow > To: "Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using > Fedora." <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> > Message-ID: > <96da45630812052002u6a4f1189wfb14bcef89473af2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 7:22 PM, Matthew Saltzman <mjs@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > In F10, Evolution's filtering of incoming mail takes forever--much > > longer (according to my impression) than in F8. In addition, I > > frequently see errors related to checking for junk mail along the lines > > of: Pipe to spamassassin failed. The same thing happens if I use > > bogofilter in place of spamassassin. > > > > Anyone else seeing this behavior? Any suggestions for > > fixes/workarounds? > > > > (I use the Exchange connector, so please don't suggest another mail > > client.) > > I'm not seeing this, but I don't use Exchange. (though I do see > problems with virtual folders, e.g. the unread counts are often > wrong). Evo 2.24 has new indexing code which uses SQLite, and some > people seem to be having trouble with it. You might want to file a bug > at http://bugzilla.gnome.org. > > poc > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2008 09:49:36 +0530 > From: "Steve Repo" <scmuser@xxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: Boardcom bcm2046 bluetooth problem > To: "Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using > Fedora." <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> > Message-ID: > <29815d590812052019t6f2daee7wd00838ec238cc5df@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 2:03 AM, Demeter Tibor <tdemeter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi All ! > > > > I have a Dell Studio 1535 notebook and a built-in Broadcom bcm2046 > > bluetooth chipset. I installed to this machine a F10, but the bluetooth > > device is cannot work. I see whit lsusb, but the kernel is not detect > > for this a suitable driver. > > I read a solution,this device is supported the kernel, but i need > > reloading the hci_usb module with a "reset=1" parameter, but this driver > > is not a module in the official f10 kernel. This driver is linked > > statical to the main kernel image. > > Can i modify this parameter whitout rebuilding the kernel? > > > > I'm not sure how that will be done for a driver that is built-in to the kernel. > > However, this issue is known and fixed upstream i think. > http://marc.info/?l=linux-bluetooth&m=122804122705386&w=2 > > Steve > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2008 23:34:34 -0500 > From: Matthew Saltzman <mjs@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: F10 Evo filtering unbearably slow > To: "Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using > Fedora." <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> > Message-ID: <1228538074.8891.189.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Content-Type: text/plain > > On Fri, 2008-12-05 at 19:05 -0500, Tom Horsley wrote: > > On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 18:52:35 -0500 > > Matthew Saltzman <mjs@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > Anyone else seeing this behavior? Any suggestions for > > > fixes/workarounds? > > > > If you are really totally wired to evolution and exchange > > connector, my only advice is to setup a Windows virtual machine > > where you can run outlook just long enough to setup the > > exchange server-side filtering rules, then turn off filtering > > in evolution since the sxchange server will have done it > > for you. > > Server-side filtering would be great. I will look into that. > > > (Too bad no one has ever made a linux interface > > to the filter rules, at least I don't know of one). > > > > Sure you can't use imap to talk to exchange? > > My memory of my experience with IMAP was even worse. And I need the > calendaring and contact lists. > > Thanks for the suggestion. > > > > > > -- > Matthew Saltzman > > Clemson University Math Sciences > mjs AT clemson DOT edu > http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 8 > Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2008 09:56:13 +0530 > From: "Rahul Tidke" <rahul@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: (Off Topic ) Open Source: The Model Is Broken ?? > To: <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> > Message-ID: <DE92260ACAC64883A0DA4E600B2A8DE5@xxxxxxxxxx> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=original > > http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/nov2008/tc20081130_276152.htm > > Any comments from Fedora community?? > > > Regards, > > Rahul. > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 9 > Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 21:02:37 -0800 (PST) > From: Fred Silsbee <fredsilsbee@xxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: root in FC 10 > To: "Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using > Fedora." <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> > Message-ID: <569168.37358.qm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > > > > --- On Sat, 12/6/08, Todd Zullinger <tmz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > From: Todd Zullinger <tmz@xxxxxxxxx> > > Subject: Re: root in FC 10 > > To: fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx > > Date: Saturday, December 6, 2008, 12:04 AM > > Gene Heskett wrote: > > >>Disabling root login is a common security practice. > > Sounds like it's > > >>been disabled by default in F10. That's got to > > be a good thing. > > > > > > Apparently so, but then the install doesn't add > > the one user it asks > > > you to define to the sudoers file, and to fix that > > requires a reboot > > > to single mode. > > > > No it doesn't. You run "su -c visudo" and > > add the user you want. > > > > -- > > Todd OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: > > www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > The best advice I can give is to ignore advice. Life is too > > short to > > be distracted by the opinions of others. > > -- Russell Edson > > > > -- > > fedora-list mailing list > > fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx > > To unsubscribe: > > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list > > Guidelines: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines > > disabling root access is what the root password is for > > I've been logging into root for 11.5 tears on Linux alone without problems > > It is dumb to make it impossible for everybody. > > I understand this disablement can be removed by doing something in pam.d or whatever it is. > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 10 > Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2008 15:46:58 +1030 > From: Tim <ignored_mailbox@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: (Off Topic ) Open Source: The Model Is Broken ?? > To: Rahul Tidke <rahul@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Community assistance, > encouragement, and advice for using Fedora." <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> > Message-ID: <1228540618.6849.3.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Content-Type: text/plain > > On Sat, 2008-12-06 at 09:56 +0530, Rahul Tidke wrote: > > http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/nov2008/tc20081130_276152.htm > > > > Any comments from Fedora community?? > > That computer journalism is generally incompetent, way off the ball, way > out of date, and completely beat up. As a quick example, that article > is about open source *business* model, not about open source. Yet the > title is completely bogus, in a crap attempt to stir the pot. > > The only point of that article is to increase their readership, not to > do anything else beneficial. It's best ignored, like the painful bratty > child in class who wants everyone to "look at me." > > -- > [tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r > 2.6.27.5-41.fc9.i686 > > Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I > read messages from the public lists. > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 11 > Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2008 15:51:02 +1030 > From: Tim <ignored_mailbox@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: Analog-to-Digital Audio: > To: "Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using > Fedora." <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> > Message-ID: <1228540862.6849.7.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Content-Type: text/plain > > Patrick O'Callaghan: > >> Turntables are also available. Ironically, a lot of these actually > >> come with Audacity even though they're marketed for Windows. > > Mikkel L. Ellertson: > > For example: > > http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=TTUSB-PB-R&cpc=SCH > > I'd be very surprised if any of those plastic turntables were anything > but utter crap. But then they're aimed at the MP3/iPod users, where > audio quality is the least thing on their mind... > > -- > [tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r > 2.6.27.5-41.fc9.i686 > > Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I > read messages from the public lists. > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 12 > Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2008 15:59:53 +1030 > From: Tim <ignored_mailbox@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: Analog-to-Digital Audio: > To: "Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using > Fedora." <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> > Message-ID: <1228541393.6849.17.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Content-Type: text/plain > > On Fri, 2008-12-05 at 15:31 -0500, Jeff Maxwell wrote: > > I am in need of a way to process an analog stereo input device > > to digital. > > > > I basically have old cassettes and reel-to-reels that I would > > like to convert to digital. > > I've found Audacity to be one of the better choices, as you have fairly > real time VU meters. That allows you to capture at the best signal > level, in the first place (not too quiet that you lots of noise, and not > too loud that you have distortion). Though, working in audio/video > production, and having other gear to hand, I opted for running the > player through a mixer with really good metering, after making some test > recordings to work out what were the right levels between equipment. > > Another issue is hum and noise. Computers are none-too-quiet, and earth > loops between your computer and audio equipment are going to cause > problems. If your audio equipment is un-earthed, that won't be an > issue. If you get hum loops, then some decent audio transformers > between them will be the easiest solution. > > Resist the urge to attempt to fix hum and noise problems digitally, it's > much better to capture a good signal in the first place. There are some > problems that you just can't get rid of, or the attempt makes yet > another mess out of the audio signal. > > I found the best way of dealing with audio sources with different > sections was to caption the source without any pauses in your capture, > then carve it into the appropriate sections on the computer. Audacity's > fade-in & fade-out filters make it easy to make the hiss neatly > disappear between tracks, so it doesn't go "click" between tracks on CD > recorders and/or players that insist on badly muting between tracks. > > -- > [tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r > 2.6.27.5-41.fc9.i686 > > Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I > read messages from the public lists. > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 13 > Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2008 00:36:43 -0500 > From: Todd Zullinger <tmz@xxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: root in FC 10 > To: fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx > Message-ID: <20081206053643.GS20204@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Fred Silsbee wrote: > > disabling root access is what the root password is for > > Perhaps there's a misunderstanding here. Root access has not been > disabled. What is disabled by default is logging in via GDM as root. > You can still use "su -c 'command'" just fine. That is a far better > method than logging in as root and running a full desktop session. > > > I've been logging into root for 11.5 tears on Linux alone without > > problems > > Yes, it is a problem. The principle of running with the least > privilege needed is a good one. It is one of the reasons that a *nix > system has far less security problems than a Windows system. > > You are free to toss that advantage out the window if you like, but > it's not in any way a good habit to get into. > > > It is dumb to make it impossible for everybody. > > I strongly disagree with you. First, it is not impossible. It is > simply disabled by default. I believe it is a sensible default. You > should not need to login to a full desktop session as root. The > graphical admin tools in Fedora should all be able to prompt you for > the root password as needed when run from a normal user account. > Command line applications can be run as root using su or sudo, as they > have been for years. > > Further, those who really think they need to run as root all the time > should be perfectly able to change the default. If they are not > capable of that, they should question whether running with superuser > privileges is a good idea. > > > I understand this disablement can be removed by doing something in > > pam.d or whatever it is. > > Sure, you turn the safety off on the gun and aim it at your foot if > you like. But it is not a recommended or supported action. ;) > > -- > Todd OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > I figure that if God actually does exist, He's big enough to > understand an honest difference of opinion. > -- Isaac Asimov > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: not available > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 542 bytes > Desc: not available > Url : https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20081206/83b3ac6c/attachment.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 14 > Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2008 16:10:36 +1030 > From: Tim <ignored_mailbox@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: root in FC 10 > To: "Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using > Fedora." <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> > Message-ID: <1228542036.6849.27.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Content-Type: text/plain > > On Fri, 2008-12-05 at 11:56 -0500, homburg@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > Again, I am unable to appreciate a great deal of difference between > > logging in as root and using su providing that you are only logging in > > as root to do system configuration and maintenance. > > The significant difference between them is that when you su from a > normal user, system disasters tend to be the fault of that user doing > something stupid. Compared to logging in graphically as root leaves you > much more open to security flaws in the graphical systems doing much > more than you were doing. Particularly as all of them now have root > power, rather than just the ones you'd fired off through the root > terminal you'd su'd in. > > Newbies tend to paint themselves into a corner when they log in > (graphically) as root, as they create files and settings that only root > can use. If they, later, try logging in as themselves, they find that > their files are badly accessible, and anything they configured was only > configured in the root account, and they have to go through that all > again in their own account, or they just keep on logging in as the root > user because it's too difficult for them. > > If they hadn't done that, they wouldn't have kept on banging their head > against the wall. Unlike Windows, it really is NOT necessary to be root > to get ordinary things done, nor is it necessary for system > administration. Using su - or sudo in the terminal does completely make > you the root user to administer things. GUI configuration tools ask you > to authenticate as root and then actually do run properly. And, in > general, the software is *properly* written to be used by the right > users. Anything that wrongly needs you to be root, instead of an > ordinary user, is faulty, and does get seen to. > -- Please feel free to call me Best Regards He Junfeng Mobile: 13911069420 -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
