Re: F12-Beta-i686-Live-Edu.iso has selinux problem with sugar browse

[Thomas C Gilliard <satellit bendbroadband com>]

F12-Beta-i686-Live-Edu.iso has 2 problems:

1.) selinux policy has to be set to selenix=0 for sugar browse to work using these methods
    a.) <esc> <tab> selinux=0 at boot screen
    b.) changing selinux policy in gnome first then logging into sugar
2.) logging out of sugar and back into gnome. Sugar mouse cursor is retained in gnome desktop.

selinux policy should be changed to allow sugar activities to work.

fedora-test-list-request redhat com wrote:

Send fedora-test-list mailing list submissions to
	fedora-test-list redhat com

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	fedora-test-list-request redhat com

You can reach the person managing the list at
	fedora-test-list-owner redhat com

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of fedora-test-list digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: f12, alpha versus beta? (Jesse Keating)
   2. Re: f12, alpha versus beta - how to tell ? (Jesse Keating)
   3. Re: f12, alpha versus beta - how to tell ? (Robert P. J. Day)
   4. Re: f12, alpha versus beta? (Robert P. J. Day)
   5. rawhide report: 20091017 changes (Rawhide Report)
   6. Re: f12, alpha versus beta? (Patrick O'Callaghan)
   7. Re: f12, alpha versus beta? (Clyde E. Kunkel)
   8. Re: f12, alpha versus beta - how to tell ? (Bruno Wolff III)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 00:55:38 -0700
From: Jesse Keating <jkeating redhat com>
Subject: Re: f12, alpha versus beta?
To: fedora-test-list redhat com
Message-ID: <1255766138 25237 1 camel localhost localdomain>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

On Sat, 2009-10-17 at 01:00 -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
  

  a valid philosophy but the linux kernel sees it differently, so it's
not like there's just one true way, but how fedora chooses to do this
is perfectly valid, thanks. 
    

If we were dealing with just a distribution of source, it could be
different.  But since we have to compile that source, and then compile
those compiles into a binary install tree, there are lots of chances for
things to go wrong, and so we test what will go out the door, rather
than what we hope will be the same in the future if we do another
compose.

I've always taken offense to the term "release candidate" when there is
no possible way the candidate could ever be released as is.