2009/11/3 Conrad Meyer ceme...@u.washington.edu
In this case, upstream (wodim) is a fork of Joerg Schilling's project.
Wodim
was forked from cdrecord because Joerg is crazy. Joerg likes to call wodim
the broken fork and cdrecord the original software.
He visited all the booths of linux
Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com wrote:
Looks like another thread going the wrong way.
I just wanted to know if wodim is usable (i mean without wasting dvds
like its doing currently for me). From the discussion, I feel it's still
buggy and therefore I'm going to shift to another program
Bastien Nocera bnoc...@redhat.com wrote:
The person from the GNOME project just verified that he attacks people who
are
helpful. He does not seem to be important.
The person being Olav Vitters, one of the GNOME bugmasters, and that was
at my request, after you polluted the GNOME
Josephine Tannhäuser wrote:
2009/11/2 Matthias Clasen mcla...@redhat.com
We don't do jumps to the next major GNOME version within a released
Fedora, that would be incompatible with our understanding of a released
product.
I hope the KDE-sig will take up this stance on her own
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/bugs/libsndfile
What's up with libsndfile in Fedora and EPEL?
There are open tickets about CVEs filed in March.
There are additional tickets without any reply.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
King InuYasha wrote:
The only thing I can figure out from this conversation is that the CDDL is
supposed to be incompatible with the GPL. If that's the case, why not
simply ask the original creator to kindly dual license it?
We did, many times. He refuses to acknowledge there's any problem at
2009/11/3 Liang Suilong liangsuil...@gmail.com:
Some Linux distros has migrated from grub-0.97 to grub2-1.97. Grub2 provides
more useful features to users. And it is more easy to add a new file system
support. But I can not see Fedora has any plan for GRUB2. I read a feature
page on Fedora
Julian Sikorski beleg...@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/02/2009 03:47 PM, Denis Leroy wrote:
On 11/02/2009 07:18 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
That may be true, but since cdrecord is not shippable, it's a pretty
vacuous truth.
Out of curiosity, was that just because of the GPL2-CDDL mix ? Or was
Dne 3.11.2009 05:22, Ankur Sinha napsal(a):
I just wanted to know if wodim is usable (i mean without wasting dvds
like its doing currently for me). From the discussion, I feel it's still
buggy and therefore I'm going to shift to another program (maybe
growisofs).
Yes, wodim is perfect. Joerg
On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 23:08:53 -0500, Jon wrote:
* fluidsynth and PA (jds2001, 17:04:44)
* LINK: http://markmail.org/message/bovdqb7na3zor2ck - without
comment. (mjg59, 17:17:07)
* LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500087#c13
(jds2001, 17:19:22)
* AGREED: PA
W dniu 03.11.2009 11:37, Matěj Cepl pisze:
Dne 3.11.2009 05:22, Ankur Sinha napsal(a):
I just wanted to know if wodim is usable (i mean without wasting dvds
like its doing currently for me). From the discussion, I feel it's still
buggy and therefore I'm going to shift to another program (maybe
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Julian Sikorski beleg...@gmail.com wrote:
So, while waiting for libburn to improve, we could either take over
cdrkit development, or do a(nother) legal review of cdrecord. It seems
that the latter should be simpler, given that it's a one-time effort.
Already
Joerg Schilling wrote:
There are some people who claim that there is a legal problem with the
original software but none of the persons who spread this claim (including
people from redhat) did ever make a valid legal statement that could
confirm a problem. As there are no valid legal arguments
King InuYasha ngomp...@gmail.com wrote:
The only thing I can figure out from this conversation is that the CDDL is
supposed to be incompatible with the GPL. If that's the case, why not simply
ask the original creator to kindly dual license it?
First, it is definitely wrong that the CDDL was
I'm trying texlive-2009 packages for f11. I see man and info pages get
installed (not in standard system locations, but into texlive tree), but man
and info search paths don't seem to be setup to find them.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
Josephine Tannhäuser josephine.tannhau...@googlemail.com wrote:
2009/11/3 Conrad Meyer ceme...@u.washington.edu
In this case, upstream (wodim) is a fork of Joerg Schilling's project.
Wodim
was forked from cdrecord because Joerg is crazy. Joerg likes to call wodim
the broken fork and
On 11/02/2009 03:02 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Mon, 2009-11-02 at 14:23 -0500, Steve Dickson wrote:
I'm not sure about this... Actually I like the fact we can define a
pseudo root other than '/'... which means you really want a live exported
directory with the fsid=0 option... If I am
2009/11/3, Joerg Schilling joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de:
Josephine Tannhäuser josephine.tannhau...@googlemail.com wrote:
It seems that you have not been there.
I was there and I was shocked about your behavior.
--
Josephine Fine Tannhäuser
2.6.29.6-213.fc11.i586
--
Mat??j Cepl mc...@redhat.com wrote:
Dne 3.11.2009 05:22, Ankur Sinha napsal(a):
I just wanted to know if wodim is usable (i mean without wasting dvds
like its doing currently for me). From the discussion, I feel it's still
buggy and therefore I'm going to shift to another program (maybe
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 07:42:56PM +0100, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
On Mon, 2009-10-26 at 11:15 -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
If it's true cross support, then that should be a noarch package and the
file names it uses should not depend on %{_lib} that way.
Arguably it even belongs in
Julian Sikorski beleg...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok, putting the ad personam arguments aside, there are two important facts:
- cdrecord is still under active development, but there might be a
problem with distributability (Sun lawyers say there is not, but I guess
There is no problem with
Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
Joerg Schilling wrote:
There are some people who claim that there is a legal problem with the
original software but none of the persons who spread this claim (including
people from redhat) did ever make a valid legal statement that could
confirm
2009/11/3 Joerg Schilling joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de:
if there legal department was wrong. I still do not understand why Companies
like Redhat do not siply ask their lawyers for legal assistence. If they did,
they would have better advise about cdrtools.
Just a small thing that drives
Josephine Tannhäuser josephine.tannhau...@googlemail.com wrote:
2009/11/3, Joerg Schilling joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de:
Josephine Tannhäuser josephine.tannhau...@googlemail.com wrote:
It seems that you have not been there.
I was there and I was shocked about your behavior.
Compose started at Tue Nov 3 06:15:13 UTC 2009
New package calibre
E-book converter and library management
New package intrace
Traceroute-like application for network reconnaisance
New package perl-Makefile-Parser
Simple parser for Makefiles
New package
Dne 3.11.2009 02:55, King InuYasha napsal(a):
The only thing I can figure out from this conversation is that the CDDL
is supposed to be incompatible with the GPL. If that's the case, why not
simply ask the original creator to kindly dual license it?
You must be new here :)
Concerning legal
On 11/03/2009 03:08 PM, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Josephine Tannhäuserjosephine.tannhau...@googlemail.com wrote:
2009/11/3, Joerg Schillingjoerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de:
Josephine Tannhäuserjosephine.tannhau...@googlemail.com wrote:
It seems that you have not been there.
On Mon, 2009-11-02 at 23:34 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Nov 02, 2009 at 05:15:50PM -0500, Bryan Kearney wrote:
Word of warning.. I am no too familiar with C across platforms. I am
trying to package ruby-ffi (spec file is at [1]) and when I do a scratch
build in Koji [2] it runs
On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 09:28:45AM -0500, Adam Jackson wrote:
What header defines __ILP32__ or __LP64__?
Nothing defines __ILP32__, only __LP64__:
$ gcc -m64 -E -dD -xc /dev/null | grep LP64
#define _LP64 1
#define __LP64__ 1
$ gcc -m32 -E -dD -xc /dev/null | grep LP64
Jakub
--
On 11/03/2009 09:13 AM, Matěj Cepl wrote:
Dne 3.11.2009 02:55, King InuYasha napsal(a):
The only thing I can figure out from this conversation is that the CDDL
is supposed to be incompatible with the GPL. If that's the case, why not
simply ask the original creator to kindly dual license it?
2009/11/3, Joerg Schilling joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de:
Fortunately, you are of limited relevance and other people did not behave
hostile but friendly ;-)
Sorry Joerg,
but Imho it isn't friendly to come to a booth, thump the table and
say: Remove illegal software from fedora
Tom \spot\ Callaway tcall...@redhat.com wrote:
Since nothing has changed, please consider this thread closed. Continued
postings will be handled under the moderation policies.
So let us conclude:
- Redhat continues to distribute cdrkit although there are
known legal problems
Once upon a time, Joerg Schilling joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de said:
- Redhat continues to distribute cdrkit although there are
known legal problems with it and Redhat has been informed more that
once about this fact.
it is Red Hat, not Redhat (and this is Fedora).
You
On 11/03/2009 07:47 AM, Steve Dickson wrote:
On 11/02/2009 03:02 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Mon, 2009-11-02 at 14:23 -0500, Steve Dickson wrote:
I'm not sure about this... Actually I like the fact we can define a
pseudo root other than '/'... which means you really want a live exported
On 11/03/2009 09:52 AM, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Joerg Schilling joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de said:
-Redhat continues to distribute cdrkit although there are
known legal problems with it and Redhat has been informed more that
once about this fact.
it is Red
Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net wrote:
You have refused to cite specific legal problems with cdrkit, so there
are no known legal problems that anyone can see. The proper reporting
method is bugzilla.redhat.com; can you point to where you reported them?
It seems that you did never check this
On Tue, 2009-11-03 at 12:58 +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
The conclusion of all lawyers I did talk to, is that there is no legal
problem
with original source.
There is no problem with the **source**, but the binary results most
probably cannot be distributed, because they combine in a
On Tue, 2009-11-03 at 15:43 +0100, Josephine Tannhäuser wrote:
The quality of the content of your Messages sometimes extremly differs
from your behavior, your way how you tell it. Perhaps it is me (as a
woman) who is very sensitive in that case.
Josephine,
be reassured, it's definitely not
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 8:53 AM, Joerg Schilling
joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de wrote:
Chris Adams cmad...@hiwaay.net wrote:
You have refused to cite specific legal problems with cdrkit, so there
are no known legal problems that anyone can see. The proper reporting
method is
Simo Sorce sso...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, 2009-11-03 at 12:58 +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
The conclusion of all lawyers I did talk to, is that there is no legal
problem
with original source.
There is no problem with the **source**, but the binary results most
probably cannot be
King InuYasha ngomp...@gmail.com wrote:
While it is true that the GPL permits linking to CDDL libraries, that is
only in the case if the library is a system library, which is a library
that is NECESSARY for working on a particular OS. This is usually how it is
Please show me the exact place
I had texlive* installed.
After today's update, I no longer have any /usr/share/texlive directory!
I'm guessing some install script removed it??
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
This is a report of the weekly KDE-SIG-Meeting with a summary of the
topics that were discussed. If you want to add a comment please reply
to this email or add it to the related meeting page.
--
= Weekly KDE
I need to rebuild alienarena for all targets due to a security issue, so
I decided to update to 7.32, but unfortunately, the 7.32 build segfaults
immediately on Fedora 12 (x86_64), and gdb isn't much help (gdb output
is at the bottom).
Now, it is worth noting that the alienarena client does
Hi,
Is there a web-page or is it possible to have one that shows the
Fedora distro release and its stage in the release cycle?
For example, if a release such as Fedora 9, is not supported, one can
have it shown with a red circle. If a release is in freeze, it can be
in marked in an yellow
On Tue, 2009-11-03 at 11:45 -0500, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
I need to rebuild alienarena for all targets due to a security issue, so
I decided to update to 7.32, but unfortunately, the 7.32 build segfaults
immediately on Fedora 12 (x86_64), and gdb isn't much help (gdb output
is at the
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 4:48 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/bugs/libsndfile
What's up with libsndfile in Fedora and EPEL?
There are open tickets about CVEs filed in March.
There are additional tickets without any reply.
Yeah, things go a little
Kevin Kofler wrote:
Petrus de Calguarium wrote:
By the way, colours on old kde3 apps doesn't work,
either, despite enabling for non-kde4 applications in
system settings (kftpgrabber) - I can see it already:
file a bug report :-)
There's already an ages-old bug report, the upstream KDE
GPLv2: End of Section 3, middle of the paragraph right after clause 3c.
GPLv3: Explicit separate definition in Section 1.
GPLv2 Quote:
The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making
modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source code means all
the source
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Libburn is based on a wrong asumption: libburn only works partly on Linux
in non-root mode
Actually, burning as non-root works just fine on GNU/Linux.
and the vast majority of other OS needs root permissions to burn.
Those OSes are broken and need to be fixed.
On 11/03/2009 12:16 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
On Tue, 2009-11-03 at 11:45 -0500, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
I need to rebuild alienarena for all targets due to a security issue, so
I decided to update to 7.32, but unfortunately, the 7.32 build segfaults
immediately on Fedora 12 (x86_64), and gdb
On Sun, 01 Nov 2009 02:45:10 +0100
Christoph Wickert christoph.wick...@googlemail.com wrote:
This is a follow-up to my mail from October 9th [1]
As per unresponsive package maintainer policy, Claudio is now
officially considered missing in action and his packages [2] will be
orphaned.
I can
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Sun, 01 Nov 2009 02:45:10 +0100
Christoph Wickert christoph.wick...@googlemail.com wrote:
This is a follow-up to my mail from October 9th [1]
As per unresponsive package maintainer policy, Claudio is now
officially considered missing in action and his packages [2] will
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009, King InuYasha wrote:
GPLv2: End of Section 3, middle of the paragraph right after clause 3c.GPLv3:
Explicit separate definition in Section 1.
GPLv2 Quote:
The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making
modifications to it. For an executable
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Joerg Schilling wrote:
You seem to miss that the license mkisofs is using is called GPL and not
GPL FAQ, so the quoting you mention do not apply.
The FAQ is the legal interpretation of the GPL given by the FSF, who are the
folks who wrote the
2009/11/3 Ikem Krueger ikem.krue...@googlemail.com:
Web page for distro life cycle stage
If a release is in freeze, it can be in marked in an yellow circle, and when
we can push packages to a release, it can be in a green circle, similar to
traffic signal lights
I like this idea. :)
New mesa (7.6.0) is causing trouble for people using F-11/12 code (see
bugs #524338 and #509528 for instance).
Are there fixes available for these problems? Last time 7.6.0 packages
were built was Sept 21, which is a month and a half ago and it seems
that concerns from the above bugs are not
Joerg Schilling wrote:
You seem to miss that the license mkisofs is using is called GPL and not
GPL FAQ, so the quoting you mention do not apply.
The FAQ is the legal interpretation of the GPL given by the FSF, who are the
folks who wrote the license, so why would you trust them less than
On 11/03/2009 02:16 PM, Jerry James wrote:
This seems to happen only when portaudio is installed. Uninstall
portaudio and alienarena starts up. I'm not sure exactly what is
going on here, but it seems that alienarena is both trying to dlopen
libopenal, and is linked against it. Check it:
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com wrote:
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
[Switching to Thread 0x7fffea1e0710 (LWP 18791)]
pthread_cond_wait@@GLIBC_2.3.2 () at
../nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/pthread_cond_wait.S:170
170
FWIW, it looks like the backtrace is within the C++ start-up code that
runs all non-empty constructors for global C++ variables, which gets
called before main starts for a C++ program.
Does
(gdb) break call_init
before
(gdb) run
give you a working breakpoint?
It does, but it doesn't
tlmgr
Can't locate TeXLive/TLPOBJ.pm in @INC (@INC contains:
/usr/share/texlive/tlpkg /usr/local/lib64/perl5/site_perl/5.10.0/x86_64-
linux-thread-multi /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.10.0
/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10.0/x86_64-linux-thread-multi
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10.0
Web page for distro life cycle stage
If a release is in freeze, it can be in marked in an yellow circle, and when
we can push packages to a release, it can be in a green circle, similar to
traffic signal lights
I like this idea. :)
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Libburn is based on a wrong asumption: libburn only works partly on Linux
in non-root mode
Actually, burning as non-root works just fine on GNU/Linux.
and the vast majority of other OS needs root permissions to burn.
Those
For people running wine or Crossover and using MS Office 2003 and related codes
it is necessary to do:
# setsebool -P allow_unconfined_mmap_low 1
To prevent AVC denials.
However there is recent publicity at
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/03/linux_kernel_vulnerability/
which highlights that
On Tue, 2009-11-03 at 21:31 +, Mike Cloaked wrote:
For people running wine or Crossover and using MS Office 2003 and related
codes
it is necessary to do:
# setsebool -P allow_unconfined_mmap_low 1
To prevent AVC denials.
However there is recent publicity at
Hi,
--- On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 4:41 AM, Mat Booth fed...@matbooth.co.uk wrote:
| Can't this be inferred from https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates ?
\--
I was looking at something with less text, and having a pictorial
representation. Sometimes, a picture is a thousand words!
SK
--
Shakthi
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=522187
nh2 nh2-redhatbugzi...@deditus.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=522187
--- Comment #30 from nh2 nh2-redhatbugzi...@deditus.de 2009-11-03 08:05:14
EDT ---
Sorry, a typo. The URL is
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=532231
Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=532237
--- Comment #3 from Akira TAGOH ta...@redhat.com 2009-11-03 21:23:05 EDT ---
Hmm, weird. so the suggestion from nim-nim on
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530880
Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225617
Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Author: ozamosi
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/gdouros-akkadian-fonts/F-11
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv11450
Modified Files:
.cvsignore sources
Added Files:
gdouros-akkadian-fonts-fontconfig.conf
gdouros-akkadian-fonts.spec
Log Message:
Version 2.52
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=532816
Robin Sonefors ozam...@flukkost.nu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530880
Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Author: ozamosi
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/gdouros-akkadian-fonts/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv32277
Modified Files:
.cvsignore sources
Added Files:
gdouros-akkadian-fonts-fontconfig.conf
gdouros-akkadian-fonts.spec
Log Message:
Version 2.52
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225617
Pravin Satpute psatp...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=532231
Robin Sonefors ozam...@flukkost.nu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=532819
Robin Sonefors ozam...@flukkost.nu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=532817
Robin Sonefors ozam...@flukkost.nu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Author: petersen
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/cjkuni-fonts/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv4962
Modified Files:
cjkuni-fonts.spec
Log Message:
drop bitmap fontconfig .conf for now (#459680)
Index: cjkuni-fonts.spec
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459680
--- Comment #64 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com 2009-11-04 01:40:29
EDT ---
I removed the bitmap fontconfig in
Hi,
I found that if I update
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/Server/publictest16,
the welcome banner of pt16 changes too.
How is it done? Looks interesting.
Thanks.
--
Regards,
Susmit.
=
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/user:susmit
On 11/02/2009 04:53 PM, Christian Krause wrote:
Is this license acceptable for Fedora too and if yes, what should I put
in RPM's License tag?
If (and only if) clause 2.b is used instead of clause 2.a (the license
explicitly gives you a choice), then the license is Free but GPL
incompatible.
On 11/03/2009 04:25 PM, David Nalley wrote:
So I started looking at packaging Netomata (
http://www.netomata.com/products/ncg ) and came across something that
raises a flag. The author is also at a conference with me this week,
so I figured the face time would be a good time to request a
On 11/03/2009 09:38 AM, Jatin K wrote:
Dear all
I've purchased a new Dell laptop Vostro 1520, major configuration[1] ,
My question is should I go for FC 11 64bit version ? is there any
significant benefit if I use 64bit version ?
[1]
Model :- Dell Vostro 1520 P-series
Processor:-
On Tue, 2009-11-03 at 00:55 -0500, Jud Craft wrote:
At the very least, it would be lovely if Fedora user desktops could
reliably network with -themselves-.
I use NFS for that, works brilliantly. I see no point in adding the
foibles of Samba into my computer networking. Though, long ago when I
On 11/03/2009 01:34 PM, Aioanei Rares wrote:
On 11/03/2009 09:38 AM, Jatin K wrote:
Dear all
I've purchased a new Dell laptop Vostro 1520, major configuration[1]
, My question is should I go for FC 11 64bit version ? is there any
significant benefit if I use 64bit version ?
[1]
Model :-
On 11/03/2009 11:15 AM, Jatin K wrote:
On 11/03/2009 01:34 PM, Aioanei Rares wrote:
On 11/03/2009 09:38 AM, Jatin K wrote:
Dear all
I've purchased a new Dell laptop Vostro 1520, major configuration[1]
, My question is should I go for FC 11 64bit version ? is there any
significant benefit
On 11/03/2009 02:55 PM, Aioanei Rares wrote:
On 11/03/2009 11:15 AM, Jatin K wrote:
On 11/03/2009 01:34 PM, Aioanei Rares wrote:
On 11/03/2009 09:38 AM, Jatin K wrote:
Dear all
I've purchased a new Dell laptop Vostro 1520, major
configuration[1] , My question is should I go for FC 11 64bit
On 11/03/2009 12:15 PM, Jatin K wrote:
On 11/03/2009 02:55 PM, Aioanei Rares wrote:
On 11/03/2009 11:15 AM, Jatin K wrote:
On 11/03/2009 01:34 PM, Aioanei Rares wrote:
On 11/03/2009 09:38 AM, Jatin K wrote:
Dear all
I've purchased a new Dell laptop Vostro 1520, major
configuration[1] , My
On Mon, 2 Nov 2009, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Mon, 2009-11-02 at 19:42 -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2009, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Mon, 2009-11-02 at 13:49 -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
is there a package of basic .dv video file utilities,
particularly
On 11/03/2009 03:58 PM, Aioanei Rares wrote:
On 11/03/2009 12:15 PM, Jatin K wrote:
On 11/03/2009 02:55 PM, Aioanei Rares wrote:
On 11/03/2009 11:15 AM, Jatin K wrote:
On 11/03/2009 01:34 PM, Aioanei Rares wrote:
On 11/03/2009 09:38 AM, Jatin K wrote:
Dear all
I've purchased a new Dell
On 11/03/2009 03:58 PM, Aioanei Rares wrote:
On 11/03/2009 12:15 PM, Jatin K wrote:
On 11/03/2009 02:55 PM, Aioanei Rares wrote:
On 11/03/2009 11:15 AM, Jatin K wrote:
On 11/03/2009 01:34 PM, Aioanei Rares wrote:
On 11/03/2009 09:38 AM, Jatin K wrote:
Dear all
I've purchased a new Dell
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 05:51:51 -0500 (EST)
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
what i was
after was pulling together a collection of command-line utilities for
examining and converting video files of various formats, that's all.
apparently, i still have some research to do.
Don't worry, the research will
On 11/03/2009 02:16 PM, Jatin K wrote:
On 11/03/2009 03:58 PM, Aioanei Rares wrote:
On 11/03/2009 12:15 PM, Jatin K wrote:
On 11/03/2009 02:55 PM, Aioanei Rares wrote:
On 11/03/2009 11:15 AM, Jatin K wrote:
On 11/03/2009 01:34 PM, Aioanei Rares wrote:
On 11/03/2009 09:38 AM, Jatin K wrote:
On 11/03/2009 08:38 AM, Jatin K wrote:
Dear all
I've purchased a new Dell laptop Vostro 1520, major configuration[1] ,
My question is should I go for FC 11 64bit version ?
Depends on what you plan to use this notebook for.
is there any
significant benefit if I use 64bit version ?
In
On 11/03/2009 05:55 PM, Aioanei Rares wrote:
On 11/03/2009 02:16 PM, Jatin K wrote:
On 11/03/2009 03:58 PM, Aioanei Rares wrote:
On 11/03/2009 12:15 PM, Jatin K wrote:
On 11/03/2009 02:55 PM, Aioanei Rares wrote:
On 11/03/2009 11:15 AM, Jatin K wrote:
On 11/03/2009 01:34 PM, Aioanei Rares
On 11/03/2009 02:32 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 11/03/2009 08:38 AM, Jatin K wrote:
Dear all
I've purchased a new Dell laptop Vostro 1520, major configuration[1] ,
My question is should I go for FC 11 64bit version ?
Depends on what you plan to use this notebook for.
is there any
1 - 100 of 185 matches
Mail list logo
