KDE 4.2 requires local MySQL Server

[Aldo Foot]

On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 4:59 PM, Arthur Pemberton <pemboa@...> wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 6:22 PM, Aldo Foot <lunixer@...> wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 10:32 PM, Arthur Pemberton <pemboa@...> wrote:
>>> I have yet to see what is so special about MySQL that makes having it
>>> such a big issue.
>>
>> If anything at all: default accounts must be deleted or secured with passwords.
>
> Ok, bare with me awhile, but ... why? Or are you securing against
> users who turn off their firewall?
>
> Because with a firewall up, an attacker would need to already have
> access to the machine... in which case having passwords on MySQL is
> useless.
>
> Installing mysql-server does not open your firewall.

So you're suggesting that because you have a firewall it's ok to
have accounts without passwords? My sense of system security is
very different from your own... so maybe it's ok with you.
BTW - the accounts I was referring to are those created by mysql, which
are different from the system accounts.
And yes, I know how installs and firewall relate.

~af

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@...
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines

Aldo Foot wrote:
> If anything at all: default accounts must be deleted or secured with
> passwords.

The stuff Akonadi starts up is secured to only allow access to Akonadi
running as the current user. MySQL is set up to listen on a Unix socket
which is only accessible by the current user, not on a TCP socket.

        Kevin Kofler

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@...
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines

[Rick Stevens-3]

Aldo Foot wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 4:59 PM, Arthur Pemberton <pemboa@...> wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 6:22 PM, Aldo Foot <lunixer@...> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 10:32 PM, Arthur Pemberton <pemboa@...> wrote:
>>>> I have yet to see what is so special about MySQL that makes having it
>>>> such a big issue.
>>> If anything at all: default accounts must be deleted or secured with passwords.
>> Ok, bare with me awhile, but ... why? Or are you securing against
>> users who turn off their firewall?

I think Aldo means "bear with me".  TOTALLY different connotation,
there, Aldo!  :-)

>> Because with a firewall up, an attacker would need to already have
>> access to the machine... in which case having passwords on MySQL is
>> useless.
>>
>> Installing mysql-server does not open your firewall.
>
> So you're suggesting that because you have a firewall it's ok to
> have accounts without passwords? My sense of system security is
> very different from your own... so maybe it's ok with you.
> BTW - the accounts I was referring to are those created by mysql, which
> are different from the system accounts.
> And yes, I know how installs and firewall relate.

I think we're getting away from the point of this thread.  I believe
it started out with "Why should KDE require mysql?" and I think the OP
was sorta ticked off about dedicating N megabytes of disk space to a
package he doesn't want or need in order to have a desktop environment.

I tend to agree with that.  I don't use KDE myself and I don't know what
KDE needs a database for in the first place.  If KDE or whatever needs a
database, it should check to see if an _existing_ database is installed
and use it.  If there's none installed, the package should install the
smallest, lightest one it can OR do the storage itself (flat files,
dbm, whatever).

There's a tremendous number of these "dependency" things now.  I can't
tell you how many times I've had to remove the stupid language packs
that Firefox keeps sticking on my machine every time there's an update.
I've complained.  "If the packs aren't installed now, WHY DO YOU INSIST
ON STUFFING THEM ON?!"  The way things are going now, we're catching the
"Redmond Bloat" disease.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer                      ricks@... -
- AIM/Skype: therps2        ICQ: 22643734            Yahoo: origrps2 -
-                                                                    -
-        "And on the seventh day, He exited from append mode."       -
----------------------------------------------------------------------

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@...
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines

Aldo Foot wrote:
> So you're suggesting that because you have a firewall it's ok to
> have accounts without passwords? My sense of system security is
> very different from your own... so maybe it's ok with you.
> BTW - the accounts I was referring to are those created by mysql, which
> are different from the system accounts.
> And yes, I know how installs and firewall relate.

The "account" is only accessible for the current user, the mysqld is
configured to only listen on a local Unix socket only accessible to the
current user. So there's no security risk whatsoever at all.

        Kevin Kofler

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@...
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines

[Aldo Foot]

On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 5:56 PM, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@...> wrote:

> Aldo Foot wrote:
>> So you're suggesting that because you have a firewall it's ok to
>> have accounts without passwords? My sense of system security is
>> very different from your own... so maybe it's ok with you.
>> BTW - the accounts I was referring to are those created by mysql, which
>> are different from the system accounts.
>> And yes, I know how installs and firewall relate.
>
> The "account" is only accessible for the current user, the mysqld is
> configured to only listen on a local Unix socket only accessible to the
> current user. So there's no security risk whatsoever at all.
>
>        Kevin Kofler

Thanks for the explanation. Maybe I'm a bit paranoid about no passwords on
any account type

As Rick pointed out this idea I introduced is not inline withe the
OP's question, but
I'll just throw this in:

Remember that when one installs mysql there is a warning to give a password
to the root account --this is what I initially had in mind.

Just for reference:
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/default-privileges.html

"Accounts with the user name root are created. These are superuser
accounts that can do anything. The initial root account passwords are
empty, so anyone can connect to the MySQL server as root — without a
password — and be granted all privileges."

I believe the above refers to a local login and not coming from a TCP
connection. I should have made the distinction earlier. My bad.
Anyways... it could be problematic to have a bunch of records and have some
account with full access wipe things out.

it's been a long day.
~af

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@...
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines

[Aldo Foot]

On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 5:40 PM, Rick Stevens <ricks@...> wrote:
> Aldo Foot wrote:
>>> Ok, bare with me awhile, but ... why? Or are you securing against
>>> users who turn off their firewall?
>
> I think Aldo means "bear with me".  TOTALLY different connotation,
> there, Aldo!  :-)

LOL! that cracked me up!!! I think I'll pass!

> I tend to agree with that.  I don't use KDE myself and I don't know what
> KDE needs a database for in the first place. <snip>

I asked the same question of Firefox when I saw they resorted to mysqlite to
store bookmarks. I've seen some commercial backup product that uses
mysql as their dbase engine because of efficiency issues. So it seems to
work for some applications. I have no idea how mysql relates to KDE though.

> There's a tremendous number of these "dependency" things now.  I can't
> tell you how many times I've had to remove the stupid language packs
> that Firefox keeps sticking on my machine every time there's an update.
> I've complained.

When I do test installs I look here and there to remove things whose names
I cannot even pronounce. I cross my fingers and I have to backtrack when
I see all the stuff that will be removed. More often than not I wonder "what
this has to do with that?" It's truly a pain to put up with utilities
I never use.
But the world looks different using a programmer's pair of eyeglasses; they
think in terms of reusable code (OOP) and in the process create all those
dependencies we don't understand.

~af

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@...
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines

[Tim-163]

On Wed, 2009-02-18 at 18:59 -0600, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> Because with a firewall up, an attacker would need to already have
> access to the machine...

Configuring services properly is security.  A firewall is a last ditch
attempt to stop fire spreading throughout a system.  If you manage to
bypass it, and people do (not to mention those who turn it off while
trying to resolve some other problem, or configure one with gaping
holes), then you can get into all the unsecurely configured services.

--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.27.12-78.2.8.fc9.i686

Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.  I
read messages from the public lists.



--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@...
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines

[Rick Stevens-3]

Tim wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-02-18 at 18:59 -0600, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>> Because with a firewall up, an attacker would need to already have
>> access to the machine...
>
> Configuring services properly is security.  A firewall is a last ditch
> attempt to stop fire spreading throughout a system.  If you manage to
> bypass it, and people do (not to mention those who turn it off while
> trying to resolve some other problem, or configure one with gaping
> holes), then you can get into all the unsecurely configured services.

Hardly a "last ditch attempt", Tim.  Even in the construction trade,
a firewall is an integral part of a building's design.  In the network
world, a firewall is just as integral along with VPNs, VLANS, passwords
and other mechanisms.  It's not an add on.

There are some protocols or services that can't be secured in any other
way.  Take NFS for example.  Much of the data is flying around in
cleartext.  I don't want my NFS stuff visible on the big, bad Internet
and a firewall prevents it.  There are devices (lots of switches,
routers, network-controllable power strips, etc.) that support telnet
don't support something like ssh, and don't have "hosts.allow"-type
of access restrictions.  How do you block outside interference with
those without a firewall?

Proper service configuration is crucial to security, but items such as
firewalls, deep packet inspectors, HIDS, NIDS, log inspections, security
updates to existing services and a host of other things are equally
important.  Stating that a firewall is a last ditch attempt is, well,
rather naive to say the least.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer                      ricks@... -
- AIM/Skype: therps2        ICQ: 22643734            Yahoo: origrps2 -
-                                                                    -
- I never drink water because of the disgusting things that fish do  -
-                                  in it.                            -
-                                                      -- WC. Fields -
----------------------------------------------------------------------

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@...
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines

[David Jansen-3]

We are running into the same problem here. Why is it a problem? Not the
disk space taken up by mysqld or the little bit of cpu time it
takes. But the diskspace on the user's home directories. We have a
shared home disk here for > 200 people, each has disk quota of 0.5 - 1 GB
and akonadi's database for some users seems to be taking as much as 140 MB
And that is even without them being actively using it, it's probably
just an existing addressbook getting converted to mysql database or so.
I have no idea how big those databases will grow over time.

So a way to disable akonadi would be very much appreciated. Well, other
than removing the binary, or chmod 000 ~/local/share/akonadi which seems
to be doing the trick nicely (though with some startup errors).
At least, I haven't been able to find any settings regarding akonadi in
the KDE settings, autostart programs, etc. Any pointers would be
appreciated.

In another department, we use thin clients, getting their X services
from a central RHEL server. I'm also holding my breath for waht it will
do if 50 users all have theirr private mysqld running on that one
server. Luckily KDE 4.2 is not in Redhat Enterprise yet, but that will
just be a matter of time.

In short, ideas that may look nice for a single user on a single
computer, don't scale too well to larger environments.
It would be great if such additional features would be optional.

David Jansen

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@...
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines

[Rex Dieter]

David Jansen wrote:

> We are running into the same problem here. Why is it a problem? Not the
> disk space taken up by mysqld or the little bit of cpu time it
> takes. But the diskspace on the user's home directories. We have a
> shared home disk here for > 200 people, each has disk quota of 0.5 - 1 GB
> and akonadi's database for some users seems to be taking as much as 140 MB
> And that is even without them being actively using it, it's probably
> just an existing addressbook getting converted to mysql database or so.
> I have no idea how big those databases will grow over time.

We're currently working on splitting packaging so that akonadi gets
installed only when really used/needed.  If anyone wants to help or
participate in testing that, jump onto the fedora-kde list for news.

But, that doesn't address the size issue.  Wow, confirmed, my akonadi dir is
~163M.  ouchie.  Looks like another TODO item to look into.

-- Rex


--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@...
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines

[Craig White-6]

On Fri, 2009-02-20 at 07:51 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote:

> David Jansen wrote:
>
> > We are running into the same problem here. Why is it a problem? Not the
> > disk space taken up by mysqld or the little bit of cpu time it
> > takes. But the diskspace on the user's home directories. We have a
> > shared home disk here for > 200 people, each has disk quota of 0.5 - 1 GB
> > and akonadi's database for some users seems to be taking as much as 140 MB
> > And that is even without them being actively using it, it's probably
> > just an existing addressbook getting converted to mysql database or so.
> > I have no idea how big those databases will grow over time.
>
> We're currently working on splitting packaging so that akonadi gets
> installed only when really used/needed.  If anyone wants to help or
> participate in testing that, jump onto the fedora-kde list for news.
>
> But, that doesn't address the size issue.  Wow, confirmed, my akonadi dir is
> ~163M.  ouchie.  Looks like another TODO item to look into.

----
you're sort of tossing fuel on the fire but consider...

# du -sh /home/craig/.local/share/akonadi/
144M    /home/craig/.local/share/akonadi/

and I've never started kmail, kabc, kontact, kalarm, korganizer on this
system ever. This is a brand new installation...no data whatsoever. Viva
le mysql/innodb.

Though in the larger scheme of things, I don't mind the wasted space and
since I'm not actually using it, there aren't many wasted cycles
involved, save for the initial screen reporting something about starting
akonodai after login...it's just the perception of a heavy footprint.

Then of course, there's some obscure error that vanishes from screen
almost immediately and I cat ~/.local/akonodai/akonadiserver.error.old
Control process died, committing suicide!

It's not as if this was going to be an issue wasn't known because of all
of the griping that went on when Firefox implemented sqlite which meant
that a typical Linux system would be using embedded versions of db4,
sqlite and now mysql. One of the earliest comments in this thread
bemoaned the bloat of Linux.

Craig


--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@...
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines

[Rex Dieter]

Craig White wrote:

> On Fri, 2009-02-20 at 07:51 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote:

>> But, that doesn't address the size issue.  Wow, confirmed, my akonadi dir
>> is
>> ~163M.  ouchie.  Looks like another TODO item to look into.
> ----
> you're sort of tossing fuel on the fire but consider...
>
> # du -sh /home/craig/.local/share/akonadi/
> 144M    /home/craig/.local/share/akonadi/

OK, discussed with upstream kontact/akonadi, we've got their ok/blessing to
shrink the default value of
innodb_log_file_size=64M
in ~/.local/share/akonadi/mysql.conf
to something a little more palletable.

-- Rex

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@...
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines

[Arthur Pemberton]

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 7:41 AM, David Jansen <jansen@...> wrote:

> We are running into the same problem here. Why is it a problem? Not the
> disk space taken up by mysqld or the little bit of cpu time it
> takes. But the diskspace on the user's home directories. We have a
> shared home disk here for > 200 people, each has disk quota of 0.5 - 1 GB
> and akonadi's database for some users seems to be taking as much as 140 MB
> And that is even without them being actively using it, it's probably
> just an existing addressbook getting converted to mysql database or so.
> I have no idea how big those databases will grow over time.
>
> So a way to disable akonadi would be very much appreciated. Well, other
> than removing the binary, or chmod 000 ~/local/share/akonadi which seems
> to be doing the trick nicely (though with some startup errors).
> At least, I haven't been able to find any settings regarding akonadi in
> the KDE settings, autostart programs, etc. Any pointers would be
> appreciated.
>
> In another department, we use thin clients, getting their X services
> from a central RHEL server. I'm also holding my breath for waht it will
> do if 50 users all have theirr private mysqld running on that one
> server. Luckily KDE 4.2 is not in Redhat Enterprise yet, but that will
> just be a matter of time.
>
> In short, ideas that may look nice for a single user on a single
> computer, don't scale too well to larger environments.
> It would be great if such additional features would be optional.
>
> David Jansen

Since you already have a centralized system, is not feasible to just
have akonadi point to a central database? It seems like what it was
designed for, but I don't know, I am just asking.


--
Fedora 9 : sulphur is good for the skin
( www.pembo13.com )

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@...
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines

[Patrick O'Callaghan-2]

On Fri, 2009-02-20 at 11:09 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote:

> Craig White wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2009-02-20 at 07:51 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote:
>
> >> But, that doesn't address the size issue.  Wow, confirmed, my akonadi dir
> >> is
> >> ~163M.  ouchie.  Looks like another TODO item to look into.
> > ----
> > you're sort of tossing fuel on the fire but consider...
> >
> > # du -sh /home/craig/.local/share/akonadi/
> > 144M    /home/craig/.local/share/akonadi/
>
> OK, discussed with upstream kontact/akonadi, we've got their ok/blessing to
> shrink the default value of
> innodb_log_file_size=64M
> in ~/.local/share/akonadi/mysql.conf
> to something a little more palletable.

You mean "palatable", meaning related to good taste.

Sorry :-)

poc

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@...
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines

[Rex Dieter]

Arthur Pemberton wrote:

> Since you already have a centralized system, is not feasible to just
> have akonadi point to a central database? It seems like what it was
> designed for, but I don't know, I am just asking.

Kinda sorta, but it still needs to be a per-user thing at the moment:
http://techbase.kde.org/Projects/PIM/Akonadi#Akonadi_FAQ

-- Rex

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@...
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines

[Arthur Pemberton]

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 1:35 PM, Rex Dieter <rdieter@...> wrote:

> Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>
>> Since you already have a centralized system, is not feasible to just
>> have akonadi point to a central database? It seems like what it was
>> designed for, but I don't know, I am just asking.
>
> Kinda sorta, but it still needs to be a per-user thing at the moment:
> http://techbase.kde.org/Projects/PIM/Akonadi#Akonadi_FAQ
>
> -- Rex

Well that's unfortunate. Even liberal admins aren't going to like the
idea of creating 1 database per user. (referring to centralized use)

--
Fedora 9 : sulphur is good for the skin
( www.pembo13.com )

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@...
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines

Rex Dieter wrote:
> Kinda sorta, but it still needs to be a per-user thing at the moment:
> http://techbase.kde.org/Projects/PIM/Akonadi#Akonadi_FAQ

The Akonadi server needs to be per user, but I think the MySQL database can
be shared.

        Kevin Kofler

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@...
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines

[Arthur Pemberton]

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 3:08 PM, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@...> wrote:
> Rex Dieter wrote:
>> Kinda sorta, but it still needs to be a per-user thing at the moment:
>> http://techbase.kde.org/Projects/PIM/Akonadi#Akonadi_FAQ
>
> The Akonadi server needs to be per user, but I think the MySQL database can
> be shared.


I looked at the FAQ, and I wasn't clear.

Does it need one 'database' ? Or one 'database server' ?


--
Fedora 9 : sulphur is good for the skin
( www.pembo13.com )

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@...
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines

[Robin Laing]

Mark Haney wrote:

> Martín Marqués wrote:
>> 2009/2/16 Mark Haney <mhaney@...>:
>>> Martín Marqués wrote:
>>>> 2009/2/16 Arthur Pemberton <pemboa@...>:
>>>>> On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Martín Marqués
>>>>> <martin.marques@...> wrote:
>>>>>> IMHO, this is the beginning of the end of KDE
>>>>> Because some portions of it require a free database engine? Seriously?
>>>> Not becuase of that. Because it's starting to use resources which are
>>>> totally unnecesary. It's starting to look like the Linux Vista: Nice,
>>>> but useless.
>>>>
>>> What part of KDE requires MySQL server?  None that I am aware of. But
>>> then I build my own from source and not rely on these asinine package
>>> dependencies from binary packages.  There are NO KDE components that
>>> /require/ MySQL.  You can' specify database support, but it's not required.
>> Please, enlight me. How can akonadi work without a mysql instance?
>>
>> http://techbase.kde.org/Projects/PIM/Akonadi#Which_DBMS_does_Akonadi_use.3F
>>
>> BTW, is there a way to disable akonadi and still work with KDE destop?
>>
>
> And yes akonadi does require MySWL, but KDE 4.2 does NOT require
> akonadi.  So my point is still very valid.
>
>

I have been away for a week and during that week I upgraded my home
system to KDE 4.2 and found that it installed Akonadi and now I get
error messages every time I log in.  I have been to busy to look at this
though.

On the other hand.  KDE 4.2 does require Akonadi.  Try to remove it from
your system.  It cannot be removed without removing KDE 4.2.  I just
tried.  :(

On my work system, Akonadi has not run.  On my home system, I get error
messages flash up but they disappear before I get a chance to read them.
  Some info box with a bunch of check marks.  It needs some kind of
acknowledgement before it closes.

I removed Beagle when I tried gnome and as soon as I can, I will remove
Akonadi.

--
Robin Laing

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@...
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines

[Anoop-8]

>
> I have been away for a week and during that week I upgraded my home system
> to KDE 4.2 and found that it installed Akonadi and now I get error messages
> every time I log in.  I have been to busy to look at this though.
>
> On the other hand.  KDE 4.2 does require Akonadi.  Try to remove it from
> your system.  It cannot be removed without removing KDE 4.2.  I just tried.
>  :(
>
> On my work system, Akonadi has not run.  On my home system, I get error
> messages flash up but they disappear before I get a chance to read them.
>  Some info box with a bunch of check marks.  It needs some kind of
> acknowledgement before it closes.

May be you are running it as 'root'.

-Anoop
>
> I removed Beagle when I tried gnome and as soon as I can, I will remove
> Akonadi.
>
> --
> Robin Laing

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@...
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines