On 14/05/14 07:56, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
On 05/13/2014 05:47 PM, Dale Dellutri wrote:
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Robert Moskowitz
wrote:
I am displaying IEEE 802 standard pdfs. In Acrobat that I get for
Fedora
from Adobe's repo, the font used is basically unreadable,
particularly whe
On 05/13/2014 05:47 PM, Dale Dellutri wrote:
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
I am displaying IEEE 802 standard pdfs. In Acrobat that I get for Fedora
from Adobe's repo, the font used is basically unreadable, particularly when
I display it on the monitor in the meeting
On 05/13/2014 05:47 PM, Dale Dellutri wrote:
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
I am displaying IEEE 802 standard pdfs. In Acrobat that I get for Fedora
from Adobe's repo, the font used is basically unreadable, particularly when
I display it on the monitor in the meeting
On 05/13/2014 05:47 PM, Dale Dellutri wrote:
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
I am displaying IEEE 802 standard pdfs. In Acrobat that I get for Fedora
from Adobe's repo, the font used is basically unreadable, particularly when
I display it on the monitor in the meeting
On 5/13/2014 8:59 PM, CLOSE Dave wrote:
On 05/13/2014 05:39 PM, Russell Miller wrote:
I want to run the same software on all of these machines and
having inconsistent names /between/ the machines makes that next to
impossible. Using the new names means that my software has to learn
all those d
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
> I am displaying IEEE 802 standard pdfs. In Acrobat that I get for Fedora
> from Adobe's repo, the font used is basically unreadable, particularly when
> I display it on the monitor in the meeting room.
>...
I don't understand why this sh
On Tue, 2014-05-13 at 20:33 -0400, Michael H. Warfield wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-05-13 at 20:17 -0400, Michael H. Warfield wrote:
> > On Tue, 2014-05-13 at 20:04 -0400, Michael H. Warfield wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2014-05-13 at 22:56 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 13 May 2014 16:36:13 -04
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 17:59:54 -0700,
CLOSE Dave wrote:
I've done that. The problem seems to be that what I want to do is to
/exchange/ the names assigned. One of the renames works but the other
fails, claiming the new name is already in use. In other circumstances,
I'd use an intermediate n
On May 13, 2014, at 6:33 PM, Tom Horsley wrote:
>> You could learn to love the default udev nomenclature
>
> Of course the major problem with the new "consistent" names
> is they keep changing the software and making the names
> consistently different :-).
>
> The original biosdevname changed
On Tue, 13 May 2014 15:23:27 -1000
Robert Moskowitz wrote:
> Please help figure out the font selection.
I have occasionally poked around in acrobat with a
stick and never determined why wacky fonts happen.
It seems to depend on the document, and I've
sometimes suspected when the document claims
t
> You could learn to love the default udev nomenclature
Of course the major problem with the new "consistent" names
is they keep changing the software and making the names
consistently different :-).
The original biosdevname changed two or three times with
the names of the ports on my machine cha
I am displaying IEEE 802 standard pdfs. In Acrobat that I get for
Fedora from Adobe's repo, the font used is basically unreadable,
particularly when I display it on the monitor in the meeting room.
But switching to Evince document viewer, the fonts are 'normal' and
readable by myself and ever
On 05/13/2014 05:39 PM, Russell Miller wrote:
>> I want to run the same software on all of these machines and
>> having inconsistent names /between/ the machines makes that next to
>> impossible. Using the new names means that my software has to learn
>> all those different names and can't easily
On May 13, 2014, at 5:33 PM, CLOSE Dave wrote:
>
> I want to run the same software on all of these machines and having
> inconsistent names /between/ the machines makes that next to impossible.
> Using the new names means that my software has to learn all those
> different names and can't eas
On Tue, 2014-05-13 at 20:17 -0400, Michael H. Warfield wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-05-13 at 20:04 -0400, Michael H. Warfield wrote:
> > On Tue, 2014-05-13 at 22:56 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > > On Tue, 13 May 2014 16:36:13 -0400, Michael H. Warfield wrote:
> >
> > > > I'm kind of at a loss here
I manage a lab with more than a hundred machines, all doing the same
things. Presently they are running Fedora 13 and are obviously sorely
overdue for an upgrade. But doing an upgrade is likely to present
several issues, one of which I'd like to discuss today.
The machines come from several man
On Tue, 2014-05-13 at 20:04 -0400, Michael H. Warfield wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-05-13 at 22:56 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 May 2014 16:36:13 -0400, Michael H. Warfield wrote:
>
> > > I'm kind of at a loss here. I recently (yesterday, May 12) updated my
> > > Fedora 20 laptop (ori
Reposted from
http://fedoramagazine.org/five-things-in-fedora-this-week-2014-05-06/
Fedora is a big project, and it’s hard to follow it all. This series
highlights interesting happenings in five different areas every week.
It isn’t comprehensive news coverage — just quick summaries with links
to e
On Tue, 2014-05-13 at 22:56 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Tue, 13 May 2014 16:36:13 -0400, Michael H. Warfield wrote:
> > I'm kind of at a loss here. I recently (yesterday, May 12) updated my
> > Fedora 20 laptop (originally a fresh install of F20 a couple of months
> > ago, no update from
On 05/13/2014 07:30 PM, Roger wrote:
Yesterday I upgraded my Fedora 19 to Fedora 20 and find that Grub
shows Fedora 20 option, Centos 6.5 option but does not find my ubuntu
14.04LTS installation, instead showing 2 Fedora 19 options.
As far as I can tell nothing of Fedora 19 remains.
I am unfam
Yesterday I upgraded my Fedora 19 to Fedora 20 and find that Grub shows
Fedora 20 option, Centos 6.5 option but does not find my ubuntu 14.04LTS
installation, instead showing 2 Fedora 19 options.
As far as I can tell nothing of Fedora 19 remains.
I am unfamiliar with how one should get grub to
On 05/13/2014 01:58 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On May 12, 2014, at 3:05 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:
On 05/12/2014 09:36 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On May 9, 2014, at 6:05 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:
The one limitation with GPT as I understand it is that in order to use GPT you
must also have UEFI a
On Tue, 13 May 2014 16:36:13 -0400, Michael H. Warfield wrote:
> I'm kind of at a loss here. I recently (yesterday, May 12) updated my
> Fedora 20 laptop (originally a fresh install of F20 a couple of months
> ago, no update from previous rev). I had previously updated it on April
> 30, less tha
I'm kind of at a loss here. I recently (yesterday, May 12) updated my
Fedora 20 laptop (originally a fresh install of F20 a couple of months
ago, no update from previous rev). I had previously updated it on April
30, less that 2 weeks ago. Now two critical applications, liferea and
evolution, ar
I sent this one to the fedora forum; perhaps somebody here knows the
solution:
Here's a new one. Right in the middle of using fedup to upgrade F19 to
F20, an acquaintance came in, removed his notebook, and promptly dumped
his notebook case on the upgrading machine's keyboard. By the time I
lo
On 05/13/2014 02:11 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 05/12/2014 07:59 PM, Roger wrote:
Where do I go from here?
To be more accurate, you were upgrading, not updating, but that's just
a matter of terminology. Try running this as root, and see if it
reports anything:
package-cleanup --problems
Thank
On 05/13/2014 11:51 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On May 13 11:40, Joachim Backes wrote:
>> On 05/13/2014 11:21 AM, Antonio M wrote:
>>> not working here
>>
>> Seems i'm not the sole exception :-)
>>
>> Even if starting without extensions (-safe-mode) I have no favicon.
>
> https://addons.mozi
On 05/13/2014 12:41 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
> On 05/13/14 17:40, Joachim Backes wrote:
>> On 05/13/2014 11:21 AM, Antonio M wrote:
>>> not working here
>> Seems i'm not the sole exception :-)
>>
>> Even if starting without extensions (-safe-mode) I have no favicon.
>
> OK Maybe my idea of f
On 05/13/14 17:40, Joachim Backes wrote:
> On 05/13/2014 11:21 AM, Antonio M wrote:
>> not working here
> Seems i'm not the sole exception :-)
>
> Even if starting without extensions (-safe-mode) I have no favicon.
OK Maybe my idea of favicons is different that yours? I get the "icon" of
On May 13 11:40, Joachim Backes wrote:
> On 05/13/2014 11:21 AM, Antonio M wrote:
> > not working here
>
> Seems i'm not the sole exception :-)
>
> Even if starting without extensions (-safe-mode) I have no favicon.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-us/firefox/addon/classic-style-for-favicons/
On 05/13/2014 11:21 AM, Antonio M wrote:
> not working here
Seems i'm not the sole exception :-)
Even if starting without extensions (-safe-mode) I have no favicon.
Joachim Backes
>
>
> 2014-05-13 11:14 GMT+02:00 Ed Greshko :
>
>> On 05/13/14 15:46, Joachim Backes wrote:
>>> Since some (
not working here
2014-05-13 11:14 GMT+02:00 Ed Greshko :
> On 05/13/14 15:46, Joachim Backes wrote:
> > Since some (??) firefox version (my current version is
> > firefox-29.0-5.fc20.x86_64) favicons don't work. I'm sure that in some
> > earlier firefox versions they were supported. This iss
On 05/13/14 15:46, Joachim Backes wrote:
> Since some (??) firefox version (my current version is
> firefox-29.0-5.fc20.x86_64) favicons don't work. I'm sure that in some
> earlier firefox versions they were supported. This issue seems to be
> distribution independent.
>
> Anybody knows when the su
Hi all,
Since some (??) firefox version (my current version is
firefox-29.0-5.fc20.x86_64) favicons don't work. I'm sure that in some
earlier firefox versions they were supported. This issue seems to be
distribution independent.
Anybody knows when the support will resume?
Kind regards
Joachim B
34 matches
Mail list logo
