Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Kindly enable SELinux and make sure it works rather than disabling it
during the test releases thereby ensuring that problems dont get
fixed. Reports bugs and post to this list if required. Firstboot stuff
is optional. So the installer becomes more streamlined. If you want to
change the developer's mind you need to provide detailed reasons.
I have run into too many selinux only bugs to leave it enabled,
especially with httpd. By it's very nature selinux goes against the KISS
principle. I understand that part of the point of releasing and using
test releases is for such testing, but why try to fix what is broken by
design?
2. What is up with x86_64 kernels always being SMP enabled? I noticed
a comment in the release notes, but no reason given as to why. I
would think this could be problematic for debugging unless there is
some boot option that makes the kernel act 100% like it would with a
UP kernel.
That is the intention. It doesnt make much sense anymore to run x86-64
system with a UP kernel. I will try and add a more detailed
explanation to the release notes. Remind me again after before test3
if you see problems.
I have since thought that users could just revert to i386 UP kernels if
they had to, but on the flip side I have thought of situations were SMP
only could be a real problem. One example would be a driver a user needs
that is known to not play well with SMP. Their only recourse is to
either wait till the driver is fixed, or revert to a i386 install.
3. Where are the x86_64 Xen 3.0 kernels? All I see are i686 in
development. I am really looking forward to playing with Xen 3.0 on
my dual core x86_64 desktop.
Work in progress to my understanding. see fedora-xen list. It is
scheduled to be available for FC5 afaik.
That is great to hear.
4. What is up with the return of mdadm.conf? I started with a FC4
system with a /, /boot, and /home partition. I told anaconda to
format / and /boot, while ignoring /home. I told it to ignore home
because that is where I backed up all the data. I then finished
installing FC5T2. After booting for the first time I setup /home in
fstab, it is /dev/md2. I then rebooted and got an error about
/dev/md2. After digging into the problem I found udev was not
creating the file /dev/md2. I thought of mdadm.conf from the past,
and looked in it. Sure enough it existed and mentioned md0 and md1. I
added md2, and then /home would mount properly on boot. I thought we
had gotten rid of the need for mdadm.conf.
File a bug report.
Ok, I expected the a developer to come back with an excuse similar to
the one I have gotten about using partition labels to mount.
10. Anaconda's dependency code may be a little screwy. I am pretty
sure I had told it to install beagle during the package selection. I
think I deselect one of it's dependencies. Instead of installing the
dependency anyway so that it could install beagle, it seemed to not
install either. Another possibility is that the package selection
code is just buggy. I did notice that the selection display was new.
I am happy to see it's return after the lack of a decent one in FC5T1.
Can you file a bug report against anaconda with the installation logs
in /root?
Yes, I should still have those logs in /root.
--
fedora-test-list mailing list
fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list