On Thu, 2012-04-19 at 13:09 -0500, Michael Hennebry wrote: > On Wed, 18 Apr 2012, Michael Hennebry wrote: > > > On Wed, 18 Apr 2012, Adam Williamson wrote: > > >> I wouldn't be hugely worried about any of them. Try doing a full install > >> and I suspect a lot of the above 'weirdness' would go away. > > > > Will do. > > Done. > > The problems that I am aware of so far: > > I seem to be stuck with KDE though I specified at least two other desktops. > The login screen did not have an obvious option for another desktop. Do you know if you have KDM or GDM? If GDM, you get to pick a desktop *after* you pick a username - there's a drop-down selector below the password entry box. > I have a terminal window set for 80 characters across and an 11pt font. > When I sshed into another machine, I got a bigger font and fewer characters. > The preferences are still set for 11pt monospace. > Does this mean that the remote site sent some control characters? Don't know anything about this. > Which of these should I worry about? > [root@localhost ~]# grep -v stall install.log > warning: fontpackages-filesystem-1.44-2.fc15.noarch: Header V3 RSA/SHA256 Signature, key ID a82ba4b7: NOKEY > /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.70BdJf: line 1: /usr/sbin/update-alternatives: No such file or directory > warning: %post(tomcat-servlet-3.0-api-0:7.0.26-1.fc16.noarch) scriptlet failed, exit status 127 > /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.pKiL8w: line 1: /usr/sbin/update-alternatives: No such file or directory > warning: %post(tomcat-jsp-2.2-api-0:7.0.26-1.fc16.noarch) scriptlet failed, exit status 127 > /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.NaLh0X: line 3: find: command not found > /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.hawg7Q: line 1: /usr/sbin/update-alternatives: No such file or directory > warning: %post(tomcat-el-2.2-api-0:7.0.26-1.fc16.noarch) scriptlet failed, exit status 127 Not quite sure what's going on there; alternatives is a mechanism for allowing multiple providers for a given file or set of files, basically. update-alternatives is the tool to specify which one should be used, and some packages use it in scripts, obviously. I'm not sure why it wouldn't be present when they're trying to run it; badly stated deps in the packages or some kind of issue with usrmove maybe. I _doubt_ the consequences would be critical, but it's hard to be sure. > Running in chroot, ignoring request. > SELinux: Could not downgrade policy file /etc/selinux/targeted/policy/policy.26, searching for an older version. > SELinux: Could not open policy file <= /etc/selinux/targeted/policy/policy.26: No such file or directory > load_policy: Can't load policy: No such file or directory What does 'getenforce' say now? -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
