Re: shameful censoring of mono opposition
On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 10:26 AM, Mark Finkmpf...@gmail.com wrote: you sound like a typical M$ appologist. do you sleep well at night? hope they are paying you well. Let's inject a little humour here. When making arguments, it's vitally important that your language doesn't make me think of this: http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2002/7/22/ . This message brought to you by the bad boys of punctuation. -- 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: video card (intel) problems in jaunty
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 9:28 PM, Vincenzo Ciancia cian...@di.unipi.it wrote: On 18/02/2009 Christopher Halse Rogers wrote: This is known by the X team, but I'm not sure what they're planning to do about it. Is it a problem of the drivers or of the server? It's a driver problem. What is the ubuntu policy about this? I see that there are many bugs about uxa on launchpad. Is it possible to do a forward port of the old drivers (if they are the problem?). Otherwise, as usual I would prefer a clear statement: is it just a known problem in ubuntu, and there is nobody who can do anything about that? I'm not entirely sure what you want here. Yes, it's a known problem in Ubuntu, and upstream. There are plenty of people who can do something about it, though, by working with upstream to actually resolve the problems. That is: is this a know regression which must be left in the stable release? I can't speak for the X team, but from what I've gathered the team is looking at, in roughly this order: a) Whether UXA can be enabled by default. This is where upstream is going, and doesn't suffer from the (apparently terrible) performance problems, but it's much less tested and doesn't seem to to work properly for everyone. b) Really, really hoping the upstream Intel drivers have the EXA performance regressions fixed. c) Work out whether we can ship an older driver release. I don't think it's possible to state whether or not this regression will remain in the final release at this point. There's still a fair amount of time left to fix it. -- 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: Installation fails: how to know why? + Audio and video card problems in jaunty
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 6:24 AM, Vincenzo Ciancia cian...@di.unipi.it wrote: ... An even worse problem is with the video card (i955): Xorg is *extremely* slow, with or without compiz. This appeared also in the very first alpha, but I thought it was due to some in-progress migration and forgot about it. Then I had no time to test anymore. Is this known? Are there workarounds? This is known by the X team, but I'm not sure what they're planning to do about it. Switching on UXA[1] will probably make it fast again, although it might introduce rendering glitches or just fail to bring up X at all. [1] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/X/UxaTesting -- 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: Fake login screens
This is what the kernel killswitch sysrq[1] key is for (but without the security guarantees). If you read the documentation, it's very much what you're after - killing all processes on the current VT, and without the ability for people to remap it away. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_SysRq_key -- 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: [strawman] Make Git Branches of all Ubuntu Packages Too
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 11:12 AM, Joseph Smidt josephsm...@gmail.com wrote: I will up the ante: if somebody would be willing to mentor me, I would do the work. Admittedly, I am a physics grad student, not a CS major so I am only proficient in the basic C/C++ coding that goes into numerical work. (I am learning Python) So it would need to be a good and patient mentor. But I believe enough in the idea that I am willing to learn and will do the work. And, if it worked out, you would have a lifelong maintainer in addition to whatever else such a task would lead to. You might be better served by helping John Carr with his git-serve[1] addition to bzr-git. That will basically serve bzr branches over the git protocol, so you don't have the same problems with maintaining two separate repositories. Some code is available already[2]. This seems a better option than either having parallel git/bzr trees or switching entirely to git (which seems tremendously unlikely). [1] http://blogs.gnome.org/johncarr/2008/12/11/dvcs-for-gnome/ [2] https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~johncarr/bzr-git/git-serve -- 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: [strawman] Make Git Branches of all Ubuntu Packages Too
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 12:09 PM, Joseph Smidt josephsm...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, 2009-01-13 at 11:38 +1100, Christopher Halse Rogers wrote: You might be better served by helping John Carr with his git-serve[1] addition to bzr-git. That will basically serve bzr branches over the git protocol, so you don't have the same problems with maintaining two separate repositories. Sounds interesting. Does this project have the Ubuntu's blessing? Is there any indication it will be supported in Launchpad for all Ubuntu's packages? If so, great, maybe the problem is solved. :) If not, why? You probably mean Canonical's blessing there. It has no particular Canonical involvement as far as I know, apart from being developed in a bzr plugin which is also worked on by core bzr devs. There's no indication at this stage as to whether it'll be supported in Launchpad; obviously, a decision on that would require a working plugin before it could be meaningful - you'd need to know the load-characteristics of the git server plugin, the dependencies, etc. before a commitment could be made. -- 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
Fwd: OpenAL Regressions In Intrepid
Argh. Forwarding my mis-sent message because gmail sucks. -- Forwarded message -- From: Christopher Halse Rogers [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sep 24, 2008 12:58 PM Subject: Re: OpenAL Regressions In Intrepid To: Null Ack [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 9/24/08, Null Ack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gday everyone, The Linux Standard Base is surely a good thing. I don't know if OpenAL is included in the LSB or not. What I do know is that someone decided to change naming for OpenAL in Intrepid and this is causing many regressions in other apps that now can't find OpenAL. Can I please refer people to this bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openal-soft/+bug/273558 Some questions that come to mind are: 1. Why did we change the naming? This one's easy to answer: Because the library's ABI changed. This is also why the proposed solution of creating a symlink from libopenal.so.1 to libopenal.so.0 won't work. 2. What is the best solution in the long term here for us? Exactly what's happening now. I note that libopenal0a is still installable - at least, I've got both libopenal0a and libopenal1 installed, although it seems that the libopenal0a binary package has been removed from the archives in an Not-Built-from-Source sweep. It's possible that the Replaces: field doesn't do what you think it does (all it does is allow a package to overwrite a file provided by the Replaces'd package). Unless we want to keep the old source package around, producing an old OpenAL library, like we do for libstdc++5. I think this would only be considered in exceptional circumstances, however - (almost) all the software in the repositories is now built against the newer library. Those packages still built against libopenal0a should have bugs filed against them - I'll get around to this later today if no one beats me to it. -- 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: The non-evil graphics card
On 6/25/08, Markus Hitter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello all, probably some of you already read that statement of kernel developers about the opening of graphics drivers: https:// www.linuxfoundation.org/en/Kernel_Driver_Statement Currently I'm using Intel's integrated graphics (G965, G31), but I'm about to upgrade to a real graphics card. Which vendor should I prefer (or stay with the G31) in order to support proper open source graphics drivers? Is there a contraindication if I want to use CUDA-like technologies (I'm doing FEA, CFD) ? For high-performance graphics cards you're pretty much limited to ATI or nVidia. This makes the choice nice and easy: ATI/AMD have released specs, and employ at least one Xorg developer. nVidia have done neither, and (unsurprisingly) haven't responded to nouveau's request(s) for documentation. You still won't get a performant open source 3D driver out of the box with an ATI card, at least not yet. But you'll stand a better chance of getting one with ATI. CUDA is an nVidia-specific technology IIRC, but I believe there's an ATI equivalent. -- 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: Problem with yum etc after installing Ubuntu 7.10.....
On 5/15/08, Peter Teoh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: a. install ubuntu b. apt-get install yum* c. apt-get install git This probably hasn't installed the program you thought it would. It turns out that before Linus developed the distributed VCS called 'git' there was already a project called the 'GNU interactive tools', or 'git'. This is what the 'git' package contains. You actually wanted to install the 'git-core' package, which contains the dvcs. Next I tried git, I got command not found, but reattempted to apt-get install git will give me: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/tmp# apt-get install git Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done git is already the newest version. 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 211 not upgraded. I tried to yum install some other stuff, I got the following: There was a problem importing one of the Python modules required to run yum. The error leading to this problem was: No module named cElementTree This seems like the package misses a dependency. That should be documented in a bug filed against the package on launchpad.net. On the other hand, I'm don't think that installing programs through yum is a good idea on an Ubuntu system. I may be wrong here, though. Why do we even have that package? :) -- 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: Suggestion to make remote recovery easier
On 5/7/08, Andrew Sayers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At this point, I'm trying to walk the line between unrealistic wouldn't it be great if... type ideas and overly-strict reliance on solving the specific problem I have in my head, so I'd like to go back to first principles for a moment. Please tell me if any of these are false: 1) It's common for new Linux users to have a technical friend that deals with their problems. This is a healthy relationship that we should look for ways to support 2) People generally don't formalise that sort of thing until it's too late 3) All Linux users can be behind arbitrarily complex sets of firewalls/NAT, including multiple layers of NAT or firewalls, not all of which are under either user's control 4) We can expect experts to do some considerable work (e.g. installing packages and configuring routers), but non-technical users need simple instructions from the default installation 5) There's some interest in making small changes to the default install to cater to the above issues 6) Since the people in most need of help are more likely to stick to LTS releases, we can afford to add this sort of feature gradually, and see what public reaction is like The basic solution we're looking at here is to make it possible for the technical friend to set up an SSH connection to the non-technical friend's computer, using an account that has some way to execute superuser commands (with sudo or by actually being the root user). This breaks down into three sub-problems: 1) Creating or modifying an account that has the necessary permissions 2) Creating an SSH connection 3) Destroying or reverting an account to its original state In (1) and (3), I had been concentrating on setting up a mechanism to trust someone temporarily, but I now realise that's not a particularly common use case, because if I trust you today, I will probably trust you tomorrow too. Getting people to jump through the same set of hoops every time there's a problem makes life harder than necessary for non-expert users, which I've been complaining about all thread. Reliably doing (2) is a hard problem. The solution I had come up with strikes me as a good solution for a common use case, but there's no way to deal with the general case without introducing more complexity. The other option here might be to flip the problem around: the technical user almost certainly _is_ in control of the NAT they're behind, so you could try writing up a server on the techy-friend side that a client connects to in order to get help. This would have the advantage that you probably don't need to care about what NAT/firewall the helpee is behind, and might also ease some security concerns - the helpee must explicitly start the connection, the helper can start the server only when required, and it doesn't give shell access to anyone who connects. And the obvious disadvantage that this client/server needs to be written. -- 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: Massive breakage on my system with April 1st updates
On 4/2/08, Conrad Knauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not an April Fool's joke... or if it is, I'm not laughing ;) Today I lost: - sound (due to latest kernel, linux-image-2.6.24-13-generic; selecting 2.6.24-12 in GRUB gets sound working) - most of my GNOME theme settings (because several theme-related packages upgraded?) - compiz (possibly related to one or both of the above?) It is a bit disconcerting to me that this is happening so close to release... You manually installed the 2.6.24-13 kernel, right? Browsing the linux-meta source package on Launchpad shows that it still depends on 2.6.24-12. You probably haven't installed the various other 2.6.24-13 packages (linux-ubuntu-modules - where your sound driver lives, linux-restricted-modules - where your graphics driver probably lives), or they haven't yet been built. Once they're all built, linux-meta will be updated to depend on the -13 kernel packages, and will automatically pull in the new kernel + necessary associated packages. I haven't seen any problems with GNOME theme settings. This may be related, or may be a real bug - it's difficult to tell. -- 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: Clarification over Alpha 1 and dual monitors
On 12/3/07, Onkar Shinde [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 3, 2007 3:38 AM, Sidarth Dasari [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does Alpha 1 have support for Dual monitors?
I noticed there was no xorg.conf so I was wondering how to configure it.
Isn't Xorg 7.3 supposed to support hot plugging of monitors?
Indeed it does. Running xrandr --auto would be a good start, as
long as you're using one of {ati, intel}. The nouveau driver for
nVidia cards may work, too, but you obviously aren't using that.
As for the original question: you can create an xorg.conf X will use
it. You could also try the System-Administration-Screens Graphics
program, which should set it up for you. File bugs if it doesn't work
:).
--
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: Activate Desktop-Effects: Yes/No-Button?
On 9/27/07, Dominik Wagenfuehr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Even without that question the user can still decide: Just deactivate Compiz. ;) The reason is that many people do not trust you (I know, blasphemy. ;)) that you will catch all non working cards. I think the worst marketing for Ubuntu is a shiny new Compiz-desktop - that won't even start the OS. This is not an argument for an option. If the system won't even start with compiz enabled (which is, as far as I'm aware, extremely unlikely - compiz would need to not crash, but to spin endlessly) then having an option beforehand is Russian roulette. Are you feeling lucky, punk? Contrary to what some people make us belive, many consumers don't even want to have a lot of choice in *all* situations of their life (there have been studies on the negative psychological effects of too much choice in our modern world). In the last time I often read Ubuntu reviews that say that this is some of the bad things of Ubuntu. You really have no real choice what you install in Ubuntu without much experience (and a server-install without GUI). Of course there are some distributions like Mandrake (a few years ago) where you can choose every single program. This is an overkill! As far as I'm concerned, people who really, really want to select what they install are better off with a distribution that's not Ubuntu. That's what we *do*: working out of the box, sane defaults. It is easy enough to customize Ubuntu after install (with the advantage that you get to try-as-you-go, rather than having to make blind choices) that I don't believe that having more options during install is useful. We don't have to drive all the other distributions into oblivion. There really are people with different needs, and Ubuntu can not cater well for absolutely everybody. To try tends to result in disappointing everyone. -- 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: I'd like to discuss how difficult it is to add a third party repository
On 5/28/07, Dean Sas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not in Gutsy at least, there's an authentication tab in software-properties-gtk, you can press the import key file and browse to a key file to add that. Since software-properties-gtk is already a mime handler for sources.list, could we extend s-p to be a mime-handler for a more general repository-specification file? Something with a format including such things as gpg key-id and keyserver, comment, and possibly a list of mirrors. Then a user could click on an add wine repository link, and be presented with a sane dialog verifying that they really want to add the winehq.whereever.org/apt repository, signed by foo, to their software sources. -- 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
