LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   Fedora (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/fedora-35/)
-   -   Not clear what Fedora supports re photos (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/fedora-35/not-clear-what-fedora-supports-re-photos-4175445542/)

rmknox 01-14-2013 09:46 AM

Not clear what Fedora supports re photos
 
In December I filed a bugzilla on f-spot. Starting with fedora 17 32 bit it files photos in 1969 dec 31. F-spot has not changed for some time thus the problem apparently is in its interaction with a system routine that has changed. I documented it in some detail - but there have been no other postings to the bug report (890716).

My prior experience is that when I file a bug report it triggers a discussion between members of the support community and this discussion shows up on the bug report.

I find that gThumb files photos properly, and thus have switched to using it to upload my photos from my camera.

Loaded plugins: auto-update-debuginfo, presto, refresh-packagekit
Installed Packages
f-spot.i686 0.8.2-6.fc17 @anaconda-0
gthumb.i686 3.0.2-1.fc17 @anaconda-0

All of this suggests to me that the support/development team concentrates more on some features than on others. Is there a way one can tell what their priorities are?

I notice that the material on my system is from a number of repositories.
@anaconda-0
@updates
@fedora
@fedora/14
@fedora-debug
@rawhide
@updates-debuginfo
plus others

Is there someplace that explains the role of these different repositories? How one is different from another? Do they give some clue as to priorities?

unSpawn 01-14-2013 10:44 AM

F-spot lives at http://f-spot.org/ and http://git.gnome.org/browse/f-spot/ shows it's maintained (last commit date Dec 2012). The mailing list (http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/f-spot-list) shows problems with time stamps (http://www.google.com/custom?domains...&q=f-spot+EXIF) as does its bug tracker (https://bugzilla.gnome.org/buglist.c...-spot%22++EXIF) though this shouldn't imply I know it's EXIF-related or not (try your own search terms). BTW they also have an IRC channel if you fancy short lines.

As for your repo's you if you run stable F17 then I wonder why you should have "@fedora/14"? You would use "@fedora-debug" and "@updates-debuginfo" if you help troubleshooting problems (thanks!) but why "@rawhide"? Sure, if you follow development or help troubleshooting problems that's a choice you make but otherwise Rawhide represents the actual bleeding edge, with all the b0rkage that may (or may not be) associated with it...

rmknox 01-14-2013 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by unSpawn (Post 4869761)
F-spot lives at http://f-spot.org/ and http://git.gnome.org/browse/f-spot/ shows it's maintained (last commit date Dec 2012). The mailing list (http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/f-spot-list) shows problems with time stamps (http://www.google.com/custom?domains...&q=f-spot+EXIF) as does its bug tracker (https://bugzilla.gnome.org/buglist.c...-spot%22++EXIF) though this shouldn't imply I know it's EXIF-related or not (try your own search terms). BTW they also have an IRC channel if you fancy short lines.

As for your repo's you if you run stable F17 then I wonder why you should have "@fedora/14"? You would use "@fedora-debug" and "@updates-debuginfo" if you help troubleshooting problems (thanks!) but why "@rawhide"? Sure, if you follow development or help troubleshooting problems that's a choice you make but otherwise Rawhide represents the actual bleeding edge, with all the b0rkage that may (or may not be) associated with it...

unSpawn - thanks
I must confess I don't know why any of those are there. I got into Fedora at f12 and have done preupgrades ever since. I don't recall ever having added any of the Fedora related repositories. The only ones I recall adding are from outside the system for Google related etc.
I'll start by looking to see what I have from rawhide - for example.

[knox@knox ~]$ sort -k 3 yum_list_installed_jan2013.txt | grep -i rawhide
vbetool.i686 1.2.2-1.fc12 @rawhide/$releasever
pam_smb.i686 1.1.7-11.fc12 @rawhide/$releasever
hal-info.noarch 20090716-3.fc12 @rawhide/$releasever
[knox@knox ~]$

[knox@knox ~]$ sort -k 3 yum_list_installed_jan2013.txt | grep -i fedora/14
ndesk-dbus.i686 0.6.1b-1.fc13 @fedora/14
hal-storage-addon.i686 0.5.14-5.fc14.1 @fedora/14
[knox@knox ~]$

when i compare the above 2 lists from similar info 2 months ago, I see that some of the rawhide and fedora/14 stuff disappeared when f17 was installed.

eg
[knox@knox ~]$ sort -k 3 yum_installed_nov_2012.txt | grep -i rawhide | more
ustr.i686 1.0.4-9.fc12 @rawhide/$releasever
vbetool.i686 1.2.2-1.fc12 @rawhide/$releasever
pam_smb.i686 1.1.7-11.fc12 @rawhide/$releasever
hal-info.noarch 20090716-3.fc12 @rawhide/$releasever
[knox@knox ~]$

[knox@knox ~]$ sort -k 3 yum_installed_nov_2012.txt | grep -i fedora/14 | more
crystalhd-firmware.noarch 3.5.1-1.fc14 @fedora/14
gstreamer-plugin-crystalhd.i686 3.5.1-1.fc14 @fedora/14
libcrystalhd.i686 3.5.1-1.fc14 @fedora/14
pdfedit.i686 0.4.5-1.fc14 @fedora/14
ndesk-dbus.i686 0.6.1b-1.fc13 @fedora/14
hal-storage-addon.i686 0.5.14-5.fc14.1 @fedora/14
[knox@knox ~]$

heres wht i currently have in etc/yum.repos.d
[knox@knox yum.repos.d]$ cd /etc/yum.repos.d
[knox@knox yum.repos.d]$ ls -l
total 68
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 179 Jul 25 2007 adobe-linux-i386.repo
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 1144 May 4 2012 fedora.repo
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 1105 May 4 2012 fedora-updates.repo
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 1163 May 4 2012 fedora-updates-testing.repo
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 114 Aug 27 08:21 google-chrome.repo
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 111 May 20 2011 google-earth.repo
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 217 Jan 5 2011 google.repox
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 1325 Feb 27 2012 rpmfusion-free-rawhide.repo
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 1202 May 27 2012 rpmfusion-free.repo
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 1200 Feb 27 2012 rpmfusion-free-updates.repo
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 1260 May 18 2012 rpmfusion-free-updates-testing.repo
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 1393 Feb 27 2012 rpmfusion-nonfree-rawhide.repo
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 1247 May 27 2012 rpmfusion-nonfree.repo
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 1245 Feb 27 2012 rpmfusion-nonfree-updates.repo
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 1305 May 18 2012 rpmfusion-nonfree-updates-testing.repo
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 176 Sep 17 2010 skype.repo
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 165 Sep 16 2010 skype.repo~
[knox@knox yum.repos.d]$

are there any here that you would delete if you wanted a smooth non bleeding edge system (with Nvidia graphics)?

John VV 01-14-2013 02:28 PM

Quote:

I got into Fedora at f12 and have done preupgrades ever since.
it has been some time since i used fedora and preupgrad has improved

but

it will still leave some of the old version still installed if fedora starts using a different program

say the move to gnome 2 to 3

I am betting that parts of gnome 2 ARE still installed


now ( personal exp.) i never had good results with preupgrade
EVERYTIME i ended up doing a new clean install

that said

Others have not had many issues ( minor ones like still using OLD conf files )
and leftover rpms form the last version that need to be manually cleaned up


some like it , some do not -- this is up to you


as to the repos

that fedora 14 repo IS one of those leftovers from "preupgrade"
remove it

rawhide
Warning:

DO NOT , i repeat DO NOT !!!!!!
use this unless you know EXACTLY what you are doing


it is the NEXT version of fedora ( do to delays it is fedora 18 )
very soon it will be the ALPHA pre- early TESTING of fedora 19

and will very likely destroy your fedora 17 install



Now not all of these are likely turned on

@anaconda-0
@updates
@fedora
@fedora/14
@fedora-debug
@rawhide
@updates-debuginfo
plus others

run this to see
Code:

su -
yum repolist all

that will inform you at to what IS installed and it's state
on/off

also you might want to run this to check just how many "leftover" rpms are still installed
fedora WILL normally have just a few old rpms used in a new version
the program did NOT have to be hacked to be used in the new version , then why repackage it
-- a guess only --
a good bet that on fedora 17 there will be a dozen or so 16 a few 15 and if a font maybe even a few 14 or 13

so use with caution
-- the first one is to check if some fedora 18 rpms got installed on 17
Code:

su -
rpm -qa | fc18
------
rpm -qa | fc16
------
rpm -qa | fc15
------
rpm -qa | fc14
------
rpm -qa | fc13

then replace the OLD OS rpm's with the current fedora 17 version

syg00 01-14-2013 03:03 PM

Having just yesterday preupgraded an initial clean install F16 to F17, here are some comparative data for you:
Code:

[root@xps ~]# rpm -qa | grep -i fc16 | wc -l
20
[root@xps ~]# rpm -qa | grep -i fc15 | wc -l
2
[root@xps ~]# yum repolist all | grep enabled:
adobe-linux-x86_64                                    Adobe Syst enabled:      2
fedora/17/x86_64                                      Fedora 17  enabled: 27,033
mondorescue                                          fedora 16  enabled:    34
rpmfusion-free/17/x86_64                              RPM Fusion enabled:    449
rpmfusion-free-updates/17/x86_64                      RPM Fusion enabled:    557
rpmfusion-nonfree/17/x86_64                          RPM Fusion enabled:    193
rpmfusion-nonfree-updates/17/x86_64                  RPM Fusion enabled:    420
updates/17/x86_64                                    Fedora 17  enabled: 11,116

As you can see this is a pretty basic system - I added mondo and rpmfusion, don't know about adobe .... :shrug:

Meant to add: shotwell has been favoured over f-spot (by me at least) for some time, and is the current tool of choice on Fedora.
Yeah, I know it's a PITA changing over.

syg00 01-14-2013 03:58 PM

Just noticed this interesting page. Go down to point 6 and try the package-cleanup commands - also note the recommendations under "More Information" at the bottom.

unSpawn 01-14-2013 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rmknox (Post 4869905)
I'll start by looking to see what I have from rawhide - for example.

This may be easier:
Code:

# Fedora packages:
rpm -qa --qf="%{vendor}\n"|grep -i fedora|sort|uniq -c|sort -nrk1
# Non-Fedora packages:
rpm -qa --qf="%{vendor}\n"|grep -vi fedora|sort|uniq -c|sort -nrk1


Quote:

Originally Posted by rmknox (Post 4869905)
heres wht i currently have in etc/yum.repos.d

Having repo files doesn't necessarily mean they're enabled. Here's the current view of those:
Code:

sudo yum -d0 -C repolist enabled

rmknox 01-15-2013 12:40 AM

Than ks guys - super amount of stuff to digest

it will be a few days before i respond since i'm in the process of a major plumbing overhaul at my sons house
old galvanized line from sink to sewer - rusted thru - water ran out on floor
tore out 10 feet of cabinet - ripped out drywall - cut old pipe and put in abs with no-hub connectors - in process of rebulding
in the mean time he has no kitchen - so it takes priority over my fun stuff like fedora
Dick


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:49 AM.