Re: shameful censoring of mono opposition
A lot of this is non-sense. We'll see if this technological contribution lasts. If it is useful, then so be it. How long it lasts, and how useful it turns out to be, in the end, depends on how many people apply that technique, that's all. On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 10:11 PM, Christopher Chanchristopher.c...@bradbury.edu.hk wrote: Tim Zakharov wrote: Mark Fink wrote: it would be better if it was removed from the repos too, but ubuntu would get back some of its respect if it at least removed MONO from the default install like Fedora is doing. I just listened to the FLOSS Weekly podcast from May where they interviewed a Fedora developer and he stated Tomboy is installed by default. He argued for the inclusion of MONO into Fedora. oooh! Where is the fedora developers list? When is the show? I'll be ordering bags of chips and bottles of soda! -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: GRUB 2 now default for new installations
On Thu, 2009-06-11 at 09:20 +0200, Markus Hitter wrote: Am 10.06.2009 um 21:44 schrieb Lars Wirzenius: ke, 2009-06-10 kello 15:21 -0400, John Moser kirjoitti: Every argument for putting Grub or the kernel on a separate partition has been based around the idea that these files are somehow more important than, say, /bin/sh Putting the kernel (i.e., /boot) on a separate partition is often mandated by the BIOS not being able to read all of a large hard disk. I have a motherboard from 2008 that has that problem, so it's not ancient history, either. Additionally, if you have more than one installation of Ubuntu on the same platter, you really want to share /boot with both installations. Not doing so means two /boot's, while you can address only one of those in the master boot record. As /boot also contains kernels, you end up booting grub from one partition and the kernel from the other partition. Kernel install scripts can't deal with such a situation, you end up sync'ing those two /boots manually after each update of one of the kernels. Kind of. I don't have separate /boot partitions for my Karmic, Jaunty, Squeeze installs - grub2 + os-prober makes this work pretty well, but it does require running update-grub2 in the Karmic install to update the master grub.cfg. It's a bit of a trade-off, really. Not sharing /boot means a manual step for non-Karmic kernel ABI updates, sharing /boot in my experience results in contention for menu.lst. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Status of OCaml packages on Ubuntu Karmic - 2009-06-10
David MENTRE a écrit : * pycaml: a new version (0.82-10) has been uploaded in Debian which should fix the issue with Python 2.6 in Karmic after automatic import. I'm waiting for the automatic import. When will it happen, by the way? According to [1]: The syncs are done automatically on daily basis until DIF date. However, pycaml has been uploaded more that 48 hours ago in sid, and it has still not been updated in karmic... or maybe automatic syncs happen only with testing...? [1] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-discuss/2009-June/008384.html Cheers, -- Stéphane -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Status of OCaml packages on Ubuntu Karmic - 2009-06-10
On 2009-06-11 01:25:58 +0200, Stéphane Glondu wrote: When will it happen, by the way? According to [1]: The syncs are done automatically on daily basis until DIF date. However, pycaml has been uploaded more that 48 hours ago in sid, and it has still not been updated in karmic... or maybe automatic syncs happen only with testing...? It's sort of automatic. The archive-admin-of-the-day has to start a script to trigger the autosync. As archive admins are also normal (core-)developers it might happen that archive work is a little bit neglected sometimes when more important work is pending (such as preparing/fixing packages for an alpha release and such). Thinking about the alpha 2 release (announced for today) it might even be that the autosync wasn't done on purpose to not break the alpha 2 release. Michael -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: GRUB 2 now default for new installations
Felipe Figueiredo wrote: John, On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 4:21 PM, John Moserjohn.r.mo...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 1:40 PM, Luke Llukehasnon...@gmail.com wrote: How many of these things are actually going to make it into Karmic? A dynamically sized swap file? GRUB 2 residing on its own partition, etc? These things sound good. GRUB2 on its own partition is silly. Like having a separate /boot. What problem are you trying to solve? To name one problem, people who use LVM can't use GRUB because it doesn't support LVM block devices. Only partly true. I've used LVM for years but kept / off the LVM. One reason for a separate boot partition was to enable the root filesystem also to be on LVM. Also, would a dedicated GRUB2 parition be able to exist on LVM/raid? Just curious. Who cares? LVM is good enough to benefit even home users. I know there's at least one spec considering LVM by default, so people must care about it. Sure people care about LVM - but whether you can put a Grub2 partition on it seems immaterial. -- derek -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Support data gathering tool
On Thursday 11 June 2009 01:19:02 (``-_-´´) -- BUGabundo wrote: Apport can be set to do a dry run, and not submit the logs to Launchpad, but stored locally. The user only needs to get them and upload them to where s/he needs them. I'm just not sure if this logs are on /tmp or /var/crash $ apport-cli -p kate -f *** Collecting problem information The collected information can be sent to the developers to improve the application. This might take a few minutes. ... *** Send problem report to the developers? After the problem report has been sent, please fill out the form in the automatically opened web browser. What would you like to do? Your options are: S: Send report (5.7 KiB) V: View report K: Keep report file for sending later or copying to somewhere else C: Cancel Please choose (S/V/K/C): k Problem report file: /tmp/apport.8iqtBI.txt -- Hi, I'm BUGabundo, and I am Ubuntu (whyubuntu.com) (``-_-´´) http://LinuxNoDEI.BUGabundo.net Linux user #443786GPG key 1024D/A1784EBB http://BUGabundo.net signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: GRUB 2 now default for new installations
Surely the BIOS doesn't actually have to be involved as long as the initial boot stage can find files anywhere on the disk. Guess what loads the inital boot stage? -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: GRUB 2 now default for new installations
On 2009/06/12 11:13 (GMT+0800) Christopher Chan composed: Well, as there is no generic MBR, what MBR do you use? The Windows' one? Mac OS X's, *BSD's? I don't know what 'generic MBR' is either. I was referring to generic MBR _code_, an optional feature of an openSUSE installation, and I'm sure other Linux installers. It refers to MBR code that works identically or similarly to the MBR code included with IBM DOS, MS DOS, OS/2 and Windows versions from two decades ago, which when installed finds an active primary partition on the first BIOS HD, if one exists, and transfers control to its PBR if it does, and prints an error message if a grand total of exactly one active primary does not exist. That so-called 'MBR code included with IBM PCDOS, MSDOS, OS/2 and Windows' is not in fact any code at all but a MBR that only holds partition data and has no code installed. The actual finding an active primary partition and then loading the boot sector of that partition is done by the BIOS. Except for a genuine IBM BIOS on an antique IBM PC, which can boot ROM BASIC, the only post-POST job of the BIOS is to find a bootable device to transfer control to. Without bootstrap code installed to a bootable device (or access to PXE), a system cannot be booted. There is no such thing as 'generic' MBR code. The MBR aka master boot record is the first sector of a disk where partition data is written. That partition data does not use up all 512 bytes and in fact you have about 440 bytes for your OWN code. Assuming a single HD system without a bootable floppy, CD, DVD or USB device or PXE available, boot is impossible if the only content in the MBR is the partition table. Generic code, which DOS (via FDISK /MBR), Windows (via its installer or FDISK /MBR) and OS/2 (via FDISK or LVM /NEWMBR, or its installer) install into that first 440 bytes, is the code that locates an active partition to transfer control to, and makes the transfer. OS boot begins when that transfer takes place, from the PBR on the selected OS's root partition. Alternative (non-generic) MBR code can be substituted for generic if that substitute code is capable of finding and loading code that can continue the process of locating a bootable partition and loading its PBR code. An example of such code is Grub 1 stage1. You can stuff grub2 into the boot sector or into the MBR. Since the BIOS With an MBR empty of code, and no alternative boot media available, no boot sector will ever get loaded, and thus no OS boot will begin. first looks at the MBR for something to load before checking the The something the BIOS looks for is a bootable device to transfer control to. The MBR code, or absence thereof, is used by the BIOS for little more than a determination of whether the BIOS should display a boot failure message (and halt the system), or making a determination of that device to be the boot device. partition table, whatever is installed in the MBR gets first priority. Just take note of that. Not that wikipedia is an authority but you can look here too: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_boot_record I suggest _you_ read it (particularly the second li in the first ul), and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_GRUB (particularly the first paragraph following the heading Boot process). -- Cast but a glance at riches, and they are gone, for they will surely sprout wings and fly off to the sky like an eagle.Proverbs 23:5 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: shameful censoring of mono opposition
Like any other descriptive characters, any name can be penned. At any rate, mono is useful, there's a few cases I've come across were mono just did the trick. Of course as a technology itself, there are pros and cons. I can advocate for and against mono. About the opportunities that it brings as much as other thing that might be hindered. Like any thing else. Just needed to be clear, since 'omg' posted right after my last post. I'm not on either end of this debate. Recommending, this list to an arbitration is probably uncalled for. You need to know how to put out a fire. Don't go call a fire man after pitching gasoline on the thing! Now, if you really want to bash things, try to discredit opponents with facts, or find out the facts yourselves. Suffice it to say, there are always sociological relapses when something new comes about. Of course people will express their feelings, even if they are offensive. In the end try not to play with fire. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
