I got the feeling from looking aroung the mailing lists that fedora is in need of testers. I am willing to use my FC4 on my Compaq Preasio 2210US to do some testing. I have a desktop with FC4 installed but it is my primary OS/machine, so I rather not play around on it.
What would be required of a potential tester?
-- As a boy I jumped through Windows, as a man I play with Penguins.
On Fri, Dec 23, 2005 at 01:19:59AM -0600, Arthur Pemberton wrote: | I got the feeling from looking aroung the mailing lists that fedora is in | need of testers. I am willing to use my FC4 on my Compaq Preasio 2210US to | do some testing. I have a desktop with FC4 installed but it is my primary | OS/machine, so I rather not play around on it. | | What would be required of a potential tester?
Your help would be much appreciated. Every little bit counts.
You can start by checking out our Testing Guide: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/Drafts/TestingGuide
luke
On 12/23/05, Luke Macken lmacken@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 23, 2005 at 01:19:59AM -0600, Arthur Pemberton wrote: | I got the feeling from looking aroung the mailing lists that fedora is in | need of testers. I am willing to use my FC4 on my Compaq Preasio 2210US to | do some testing. I have a desktop with FC4 installed but it is my primary | OS/machine, so I rather not play around on it. | | What would be required of a potential tester?
Your help would be much appreciated. Every little bit counts.
You can start by checking out our Testing Guide: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/Drafts/TestingGuide
luke
Thanks for the link, I am on my way there now . Totally of topic, but why are good Fedora tutorials/howtos often in */draft/* ?
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
-- As a boy I jumped through Windows, as a man I play with Penguins.
Hi
I got the feeling from looking aroung the mailing lists that fedora is in need of testers
Yes. Very much so.
You can start by checking out our Testing Guide: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/Drafts/TestingGuide lukeThanks for the link, I am on my way there now . Totally of topic, but why are good Fedora tutorials/howtos often in */draft/* ?
It is in the draft section because it is work in progress. I have been adding content whenever I can but its nowhere near complete yet.
Testing seems as simple as enabling the updates-testing repo. But I have one queston: i need the livna repos for my ndiswrapper, is it better to stick with the regular livna repo, or use livna-testing?
Thank you.
-- As a boy I jumped through Windows, as a man I play with Penguins.
On Fri, 2005-12-23 at 02:41 -0600, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
Testing seems as simple as enabling the updates-testing repo. But I have one queston: i need the livna repos for my ndiswrapper, is it better to stick with the regular livna repo, or use livna-testing?
That would be a question for the livna mailing list.
On 12/23/05, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams ivazquez@ivazquez.net wrote:
On Fri, 2005-12-23 at 02:41 -0600, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
Testing seems as simple as enabling the updates-testing repo. But I have one queston: i need the livna repos for my ndiswrapper, is it better to stick with the regular livna repo, or use livna-testing?
That would be a question for the livna mailing list.
Fair enough. -- As a boy I jumped through Windows, as a man I play with Penguins.
On 12/23/05, Luke Macken lmacken@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 23, 2005 at 01:19:59AM -0600, Arthur Pemberton wrote: | I got the feeling from looking aroung the mailing lists that fedora is in | need of testers. I am willing to use my FC4 on my Compaq Preasio 2210US to | do some testing. I have a desktop with FC4 installed but it is my primary | OS/machine, so I rather not play around on it. | | What would be required of a potential tester?
Your help would be much appreciated. Every little bit counts.
You can start by checking out our Testing Guide: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/Drafts/TestingGuide
luke
How can I help with a lowly 500 MHz machine I have acquired? It wasn't what I was expecting originally, but that's because my original plans fell through.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
-- As a boy I jumped through Windows, as a man I play with Penguins.
On 2/8/06, Arthur Pemberton pemboa@gmail.com wrote:
How can I help with a lowly 500 MHz machine I have acquired? It wasn't what I was expecting originally, but that's because my original plans fell through.
As long as it has enough RAM (check the release notes) and some free disk space, and as long as you have a little patience, it should be fine for testing.
I'm coming back to Fedora Core testing after a long break (for various reasons)... with a 350MHz machine. ^_^ -- -Barry K. Nathan barryn@pobox.com
On Wednesday 08 February 2006 12:56pm, Barry K. Nathan wrote:
On 2/8/06, Arthur Pemberton pemboa@gmail.com wrote:
How can I help with a lowly 500 MHz machine I have acquired? It wasn't what I was expecting originally, but that's because my original plans fell through.
As long as it has enough RAM (check the release notes) and some free disk space, and as long as you have a little patience, it should be fine for testing.
I'm coming back to Fedora Core testing after a long break (for various reasons)... with a 350MHz machine. ^_^
I think having some slow machines in the mix is good. We don't want to be building a distribution that suddenly only runs "tolerably" on "the last 20% of the speed curve" hardware.
Then again, those with "only" slow machines need to be cautious of becoming "numb" about performance. After a while, you get used to the speed of your machine (screaming fast, painfully slow or anywhere in between) and it can become very easy to overlook the changes in performance. I think the best defense against that is awareness + hard numbers (benchmark).
"time" is your friend :) . It turns fuzzy time into something that we can all talk about.
So, to those with "slow" boxes; happy testing.
P.S. I don't speak for the Fedora Project :) .
On 2/8/06, Lamont R. Peterson lamont@gurulabs.com wrote:
On Wednesday 08 February 2006 12:56pm, Barry K. Nathan wrote:
On 2/8/06, Arthur Pemberton pemboa@gmail.com wrote:
How can I help with a lowly 500 MHz machine I have acquired? It wasn't what I was expecting originally, but that's because my original plans fell through.
As long as it has enough RAM (check the release notes) and some free disk space, and as long as you have a little patience, it should be fine for testing.
I'm coming back to Fedora Core testing after a long break (for various reasons)... with a 350MHz machine. ^_^
I think having some slow machines in the mix is good. We don't want to be building a distribution that suddenly only runs "tolerably" on "the last 20% of the speed curve" hardware.
Then again, those with "only" slow machines need to be cautious of becoming "numb" about performance. After a while, you get used to the speed of your machine (screaming fast, painfully slow or anywhere in between) and it can become very easy to overlook the changes in performance. I think the best defense against that is awareness + hard numbers (benchmark).
"time" is your friend :) . It turns fuzzy time into something that we can all talk about.
So, to those with "slow" boxes; happy testing.
Ok cool. I'll install FC4 on it this weekend. Any recommendations for DE, esp. as XFCE is no longer on the install media. My regular DE is KDE.
P.S. I don't speak for the Fedora Project :) .
-- Lamont R. Peterson lamont@gurulabs.com Senior Instructor Guru Labs, L.C. [ http://www.GuruLabs.com/ ] GPG Key fingerprint: F98C E31A 5C4C 834A BCAB 8CB3 F980 6C97 DC0D D409
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
-- As a boy I jumped through Windows, as a man I play with Penguins.
On Wednesday 08 February 2006 02:59pm, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On 2/8/06, Lamont R. Peterson lamont@gurulabs.com wrote:
[snip]
I think having some slow machines in the mix is good. We don't want to be building a distribution that suddenly only runs "tolerably" on "the last 20% of the speed curve" hardware.
Then again, those with "only" slow machines need to be cautious of becoming "numb" about performance. After a while, you get used to the speed of your machine (screaming fast, painfully slow or anywhere in between) and it can become very easy to overlook the changes in performance. I think the best defense against that is awareness + hard numbers (benchmark).
"time" is your friend :) . It turns fuzzy time into something that we can all talk about.
So, to those with "slow" boxes; happy testing.
Ok cool. I'll install FC4 on it this weekend. Any recommendations for DE, esp. as XFCE is no longer on the install media. My regular DE is KDE.
I would either grab fluxbox (or friend of your choice) from extras or just go with KDE. It's not that heavy and testing to make sure it doesn't get "that" heavy (if you want to) can also be quite helpful.
Either way, I would start with a minimal install and build up from there, testing those things you want to test. "yum install" is your friend.
Finally have the test machine ready. However, already having problems, the display doesn't consume the entire screen here are the specs on the system:
Dell - OptiPlex GX110 Intel Pentium III Processor: 733 MHz (133MHz Bus Speed) BIOS Version: A09 Harddrive: WDC WD200BB-75AUA1 (20 GB) CD-ROW: Samsung CD-ROM SC-148F (48x) Soundcard: Intel ICH82801AA VGA: Intel 82810E DC-133 CGC Ethernet: 3Com 3c905C-TX/TX-M [Tornado] Monitor: Dell UltraScan P780
On my way to read the testers guude, have only gotten up to updating the entire system to updates-release.
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
Finally have the test machine ready. However, already having problems, the display doesn't consume the entire screen here are the specs on the system:
Dell - OptiPlex GX110 Intel Pentium III Processor: 733 MHz (133MHz Bus Speed) BIOS Version: A09
Latest version that I saw for the model on a search.
Harddrive: WDC WD200BB-75AUA1 (20 GB) CD-ROW: Samsung CD-ROM SC-148F (48x) Soundcard: Intel ICH82801AA VGA: Intel 82810E DC-133 CGC Ethernet: 3Com 3c905C-TX/TX-M [Tornado] Monitor: Dell UltraScan P780
On my way to read the testers guude, have only gotten up to updating the entire system to updates-release.
I have a computer with an Intel 815 which took the FC5T3 installation alright. There were no 640x480 or 800x600 problems that it seems you are having. Did you check the legacy video settings in BIOS? Are you trying to install the test version or FC4? My computer is a PowerSpec, but has Intel video. similar soundcard and similar Ethernet card.
Jim
On 2/26/06, Jim Cornette fcd-cornette@insight.rr.com wrote:
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
Finally have the test machine ready. However, already having problems, the display doesn't consume the entire screen here are the specs on the system:
Dell - OptiPlex GX110 Intel Pentium III Processor: 733 MHz (133MHz Bus Speed) BIOS Version: A09
Latest version that I saw for the model on a search.
Harddrive: WDC WD200BB-75AUA1 (20 GB) CD-ROW: Samsung CD-ROM SC-148F (48x) Soundcard: Intel ICH82801AA VGA: Intel 82810E DC-133 CGC Ethernet: 3Com 3c905C-TX/TX-M [Tornado] Monitor: Dell UltraScan P780
On my way to read the testers guude, have only gotten up to updating the entire system to updates-release.
I have a computer with an Intel 815 which took the FC5T3 installation alright. There were no 640x480 or 800x600 problems that it seems you are having. Did you check the legacy video settings in BIOS?
I didn't specifically check for that, however, I went throught he BIOS thoroughly since I wasn't familiar with that brand of BIOS. I could have missed such a thing however.
Are you trying to
install the test version or FC4?
I started by install FC4 release, then yum`ed my way to updates-released, rebooted (problem remained), then yumed my way to updates-testing.
My computer is a PowerSpec, but has Intel video. similar soundcard and
similar Ethernet card.
I am considering a few options: 1) this is as a result of me installing FC4 over a KVM. This has causes slight monitor configuration problems before, but I was then able to fix it.
2) The drivers for this particular card are buggy. I popped in a Knoppix disk before installtion, and it too complained about the video card (somethign about incorret mode sent) and it only went up to 800x600.
Just to clarfiy, I have tried various settings at and above 1024x768 they are all either badly scaled, or do not consume the screen (leaving approx. an inch top and bottom on my 19inch screen).
I ensured that the montitor section in xorg.conf was as my main machine (as they share the same monitor).
Should I bring this thread over to fedora-testing-list? I have since registered there.
Jim
-- As a boy I jumped through Windows, as a man I play with Penguins.
You probably wanted development, not updates-testing.
Unless you wanted to test an update to Fedora core 4, in which case you went the right way.
I would advise you to try to upgrade onto rahwide for testing the next release. There may be issues upgrading since you have gone into updates-testing.
First upgrade the kernel I think. Then reboot, and do a full update...
On 2/26/06, Arthur Pemberton pemboa@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/26/06, Jim Cornette fcd-cornette@insight.rr.com wrote:
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
Finally have the test machine ready. However, already having problems, the display doesn't consume the entire screen here are the specs on
the
system:
Dell - OptiPlex GX110 Intel Pentium III Processor: 733 MHz (133MHz Bus Speed) BIOS Version: A09
Latest version that I saw for the model on a search.
Harddrive: WDC WD200BB-75AUA1 (20 GB) CD-ROW: Samsung CD-ROM SC-148F (48x) Soundcard: Intel ICH82801AA VGA: Intel 82810E DC-133 CGC Ethernet: 3Com 3c905C-TX/TX-M [Tornado] Monitor: Dell UltraScan P780
On my way to read the testers guude, have only gotten up to updating
the
entire system to updates-release.
I have a computer with an Intel 815 which took the FC5T3 installation alright. There were no 640x480 or 800x600 problems that it seems you are having. Did you check the legacy video settings in BIOS?
I didn't specifically check for that, however, I went throught he BIOS thoroughly since I wasn't familiar with that brand of BIOS. I could have missed such a thing however.
Are you trying to
install the test version or FC4?
I started by install FC4 release, then yum`ed my way to updates-released, rebooted (problem remained), then yumed my way to updates-testing.
My computer is a PowerSpec, but has Intel video. similar soundcard and
similar Ethernet card.
I am considering a few options:
- this is as a result of me installing FC4 over a KVM. This has causes
slight monitor configuration problems before, but I was then able to fix it.
- The drivers for this particular card are buggy. I popped in a Knoppix
disk before installtion, and it too complained about the video card (somethign about incorret mode sent) and it only went up to 800x600.
Just to clarfiy, I have tried various settings at and above 1024x768 they are all either badly scaled, or do not consume the screen (leaving approx. an inch top and bottom on my 19inch screen).
I ensured that the montitor section in xorg.conf was as my main machine (as they share the same monitor).
Should I bring this thread over to fedora-testing-list? I have since registered there.
Jim
-- As a boy I jumped through Windows, as a man I play with Penguins.
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On 2/26/06, *Jim Cornette* <fcd-cornette@insight.rr.com mailto:fcd-cornette@insight.rr.com> wrote:
Arthur Pemberton wrote: > Finally have the test machine ready. However, already having problems, > the display doesn't consume the entire screen here are the specs on the > system: > > Dell - OptiPlex GX110 > Intel Pentium III Processor: 733 MHz (133MHz Bus Speed) > BIOS Version: A09 Latest version that I saw for the model on a search. > Harddrive: WDC WD200BB-75AUA1 (20 GB) > CD-ROW: Samsung CD-ROM SC-148F (48x) > Soundcard: Intel ICH82801AA > VGA: Intel 82810E DC-133 CGC > Ethernet: 3Com 3c905C-TX/TX-M [Tornado] > Monitor: Dell UltraScan P780 > > On my way to read the testers guude, have only gotten up to updating the > entire system to updates-release. > I have a computer with an Intel 815 which took the FC5T3 installation alright. There were no 640x480 or 800x600 problems that it seems you are having. Did you check the legacy video settings in BIOS?I didn't specifically check for that, however, I went throught he BIOS thoroughly since I wasn't familiar with that brand of BIOS. I could have missed such a thing however.
Are you trying to install the test version or FC4?I started by install FC4 release, then yum`ed my way to updates-released, rebooted (problem remained), then yumed my way to updates-testing.
My computer is a PowerSpec, but has Intel video. similar soundcard and similar Ethernet card.I am considering a few options:
- this is as a result of me installing FC4 over a KVM. This has causes
slight monitor configuration problems before, but I was then able to fix it.
- The drivers for this particular card are buggy. I popped in a Knoppix
disk before installtion, and it too complained about the video card (somethign about incorret mode sent) and it only went up to 800x600.
Just to clarfiy, I have tried various settings at and above 1024x768 they are all either badly scaled, or do not consume the screen (leaving approx. an inch top and bottom on my 19inch screen).
I ensured that the montitor section in xorg.conf was as my main machine (as they share the same monitor).
Should I bring this thread over to fedora-testing-list? I have since registered there.
An updated FC4 without updates-testing would qualify for resolution on fedora-list. I checked updates-testing and no xorg updates were in the repo. There are a lot of discussions in the list archives. Adding "noaccel" as an option was one listed.
Personally, I found 24 for depth and 1280x1024 worked best for my purposes. I believe I adjust my monitor for vertical and horizontal sweeps not filling up the entire screen. You can adjust these settings with the menu button on most monitors.
Jim
On 2/8/06, Barry K. Nathan barryn@pobox.com wrote:
On 2/8/06, Arthur Pemberton pemboa@gmail.com wrote:
How can I help with a lowly 500 MHz machine I have acquired? It wasn't
what
I was expecting originally, but that's because my original plans fell through.
As long as it has enough RAM (check the release notes) and some free disk space, and as long as you have a little patience, it should be fine for testing.
I'm coming back to Fedora Core testing after a long break (for various reasons)... with a 350MHz machine. ^_^ -- -Barry K. Nathan barryn@pobox.com
Inspiring, cool
-- As a boy I jumped through Windows, as a man I play with Penguins.
devel@lists.stg.fedoraproject.org
-
Arthur Pemberton -
Barry K. Nathan -
Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams -
Jim Cornette -
Lamont R. Peterson -
Luke Macken -
Naheem Zaffar -
Rahul Sundaram