Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
Am 21.04.02 um 16:08:17 schrieb Emanuele Aina: Someone (I don't remember who) said that odd numbers are better than even numbers, because summing or multipling even numbers you can only get even numbers... Multiplying odd number always gives odd numbers. Not much gain. Bye, Mike -- |=| Michael Piefel |=| Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin |=| Tel. (+49 30) 2093 3831 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
Patrick Ouellette [EMAIL PROTECTED] esultò: And the SUM of the numbers in the version number is also an even number!!! Sorry, but you are able to get a *odd* number summing only *even* numbers? :-) Someone (I don't remember who) said that odd numbers are better than even numbers, because summing or multipling even numbers you can only get even numbers... -- Au revoir. Lele... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
And the SUM of the numbers in the version number is also an even number!!! On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 07:52:57PM +1000, Brian May wrote: Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 19:52:57 +1000 From: Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again Mail-Followup-To: Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED], debian-devel@lists.debian.org On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 10:56:33AM +1000, Roger So wrote: Why do people like you insists on having the latest version of everything without making sure that it's actually _better_ than what we have? Are you implying that the latest version isn't always the best version? Yeah right! ;-) Rather than repeating what most others have said, I'll give you one more reason why not rushing 4.2.0 into woody is a good thing: the whole i18n architecture changed from 4.1 to 4.2, and many bugs _were_ introduced in the transition -- like X clients segfault on startup if Xlib can't find the input method specified in the environment, and so on. I for one am glad that Branden is not rushing things through. I need X 4.2 because it... errr... umph. hang on a moment ...because its version number is made entirely of even numbers. ;-) (knew there had to be a good reason). -- Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Patrick Ouellette [EMAIL PROTECTED] Amateur Radio: KB8PYM 50.200, 144.200 EN81fp ICBM: 41:38:25.476N 83:31:43.417W -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 09:16:49PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: Overfiend this is the New Overfiend, preacher of Love and Tolerance I see your irony detector is as non-functional as ever... :) Oh it works just fine. It just _had_ to be said, sooner or later -- Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] This end upside-down Deek If the user points the gun at his foot and pulls the trigger, it is our job to ensure the bullet gets where it's supposed to. pgpydmmtbP9n3.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 06:28:50AM +0300, Lasse Karkkainen wrote: Other platforms aren't nearly as significant as i386 (not many users, no much new hardware). You're arrogance makes me wonder if George W. Bush is related to you. Hehehehee... Lasse, I guess if the other platforms aren't nearly as significant as i386, then I might as well reinstall Solaris, IRIX, HP-UX, Tru64, and OS X on my machines since it would be obvious that they aren't good enough to run linux. Also, I might as well call a few of my former employers and tell them that the work that they put into making linux better on their platforms doesn't matter. Your comments are both rude, biased, and insulting...I guess my 5+ years of contributions and working on Alpha and other ports doesn't equate to even minimal efforts by an i386-only developer. Check my package list and see if you can live without my packages, then write back with your answer as to whether my efforts make any difference or not. If you think other ports don't matter as much as i386, then feel free to purge any of my packages from your system since not one of them is compiled initially on i386. I'll give you a hint: we are volunteers, and we do this because it's fun. Messages like yours, that demand service for free just disgust. I guess after seeing your messages Branden goes out for a beer rather an opens a editor to serve ungrateful kids. Well said, Riku... C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 01:14:15AM +0200, Russell Coker wrote: What do you contribute to open source in general? A search of sourceforge and google reveals nothing. Google finds nothing because he's a Finn whose names often have Scandinavian characters. Too many things still break if they are used. Lasse's real surname is Kärkkäinen. I have the exact same problem: I do s/ä/a/g when I use may name in URL's and emails. Lasse seems to be a member of a remarkably productive sourceforge project called Multimedia Container Format URL: http://sourceforge.net/projects/mcf/ . Google search: URL: http://www.google.com/search?as_q=Lasse+Tronicnum=10hl=enbtnG=Google+ Searchas_epq=as_oq=Karkkainen+K%E4rkk%E4inenas_eq=lr=as_ft=ias_filetype =as_qdr=allas_occt=anyas_dt=ias_sitesearch=safe=images -- Ari Makela [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://arska.org/hauva/ Sailing is, after all, a kind of grace, a kind of magic. - Phil Berman -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 07:25:31PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: I didn't go anywhere. Nowhere in my platform did I claim I wasn't evil. ;-) Damm! Too late to vote for you now... -- Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 10:56:33AM +1000, Roger So wrote: Why do people like you insists on having the latest version of everything without making sure that it's actually _better_ than what we have? Are you implying that the latest version isn't always the best version? Yeah right! ;-) Rather than repeating what most others have said, I'll give you one more reason why not rushing 4.2.0 into woody is a good thing: the whole i18n architecture changed from 4.1 to 4.2, and many bugs _were_ introduced in the transition -- like X clients segfault on startup if Xlib can't find the input method specified in the environment, and so on. I for one am glad that Branden is not rushing things through. I need X 4.2 because it... errr... umph. hang on a moment ...because its version number is made entirely of even numbers. ;-) (knew there had to be a good reason). -- Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Thu, 18 Apr 2002 08:01, Ari Makela wrote: On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 01:14:15AM +0200, Russell Coker wrote: What do you contribute to open source in general? A search of sourceforge and google reveals nothing. Google finds nothing because he's a Finn whose names often have Scandinavian characters. Too many things still break if they are used. Lasse's real surname is Kärkkäinen. I have the exact same problem: I do s/ä/a/g when I use may name in URL's and emails. Lasse seems to be a member of a remarkably productive sourceforge project called Multimedia Container Format URL: http://sourceforge.net/projects/mcf/ . They appear to have never released anything. Also there are 18 people in that project, I wonder whether Lasse does 1/18th of the work (I expect not). -- If you send email to me or to a mailing list that I use which has 4 lines of legalistic junk at the end then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I wish with the message and all other messages from your domain, by posting the message you agree that your long legalistic sig is void. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
I agree with Chris it that is insulting for folks to be degrading the other arch's supported by Debian. What is strange is that someone would feel strongly enough about having a choice in operating systems to run Debian Linux yet think that a i386-only world is just fine. The two monopolies go hand in hand (Intel and Microsoft). Lastly the presence of non-i386 architectures has helped even the i386 folks by forcing Linux and gnu to be more rigorous in programming. The just because it runs on i386 won't cut it with multiple arches and enforces the requirement of clean coding that is processor independent. Jack -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 07:52:57PM +1000, Brian May wrote: I need X 4.2 because it... errr... umph. hang on a moment ...because its version number is made entirely of even numbers. ;-) (knew there had to be a good reason). Of course! That's it! The clear truth is revealed! This is not XFree 4.2.0 this _really_ is XFree 42 ! SCNR Regards, David -- Signaturen sind wie Frauen. Man findet selten eine Vernuenftige -- gesehen in at.linux Signaturen sind wie Frauen. Hat man einmal eine Vernuenftige gefunden gibt man sie nicht wieder her. -- Hubert Partl pgpHuleDIoGkS.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Thu, 18 Apr 2002 15:13, Jack Howarth wrote: by forcing Linux and gnu to be more rigorous in programming. The just because it runs on i386 won't cut it with multiple arches and enforces the requirement of clean coding that is processor independent. I've fixed over a dozen bugs in my programs that never showed any symptoms on i386. All of them were bugs that could potentially cause data loss on i386, but I could only track them down on other architectures. -- If you send email to me or to a mailing list that I use which has 4 lines of legalistic junk at the end then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I wish with the message and all other messages from your domain, by posting the message you agree that your long legalistic sig is void. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Thu, 2002-04-18 at 09:13, Jack Howarth wrote: I agree with Chris it that is insulting for folks to be degrading the other arch's supported by Debian. What is strange is that someone would feel strongly enough about having a choice in operating systems to run Debian Linux yet think that a i386-only world is just fine. The two monopolies go hand in hand (Intel and Microsoft). Lastly the presence of non-i386 architectures has helped even the i386 folks by forcing Linux and gnu to be more rigorous in programming. The just because it runs on i386 won't cut it with multiple arches and enforces the requirement of clean coding that is processor independent. I agree. I mean, I put effort into my code to as portable as possible, and love hearing from people, wow, your code compiled on OS Foo on architecture Bar, and that almost never happens with downloaded source!, especially when I've never even been near aforementioned Foo and Bar. By writing cross platform code, it even compiles cleaner and easier within the x86 environment as well. Jack -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, 16 Apr 2002, Lasse Karkkainen wrote: Someone said that X is a difficult package to maintain and that there is nothing wrong if PACKAGING it takes 3+ months. People have managed to install it from sources in matter of HOURS (well, that didn't work for me, dunno why). Based on that packaging it during a single weekend should be possible. You've admitted you have no clue about Debian internals, and yet you are willing to espouse what should be possible, without any actual knowledge of what needs to be done. Does that strike you as a little naive? As we are talking about UNSTABLE here, no real testing needs to be done before releasing - that's what the Debian Unstable is for, right? No. Although unstable is the first stop for packages, that doesn't mean that maintainers should dump whatever cruft they feel like in there - and ESPECIALLY when it's something as big and complex as XFree. That's just not something you want to think about doing, unless you have a desire to piss off an extraordinary number of people. while. I have too much stuff to do to actually help Debian, but I'm willing to order around volunteers. Part of the reason Branden is the X maintainer, is because X is possibly the hardest package in Debian to maintain, and Branden is willing and able to do a job most of the rest of us couldn't or wouldn't. I have seen that same model happening in many places (trustees of associations, software developers, ..). Everybody thinks that someone is vital for what he is doing and no-one is willing to replace him... Well, then someone else comes and questions that - and gets lots of flame. Often that still, finally, leads to replacing that person with a new, fresh one. Usually the change is for the good, after all. People who have done something for ages just don't care about it anymore, but new people are willing to devote all their time for it.. Unless, of course, their name is tronic. In which case they just feel that they should spout off at those who are doing the real work, without any intention of doing any themselves. A few sayings come to mind: Before criticising someone, walk a mile in their shoes. Those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. I debated putting this one in, but it seems to sum it up rather nicely: FOAD. -- --- #include disclaimer.h Matthew Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
Tue, 2002-04-16 12:14, Lasse Karkkainen Hi! (it's my first post here) You are probably sick and tired of this topic, but ... IT'S A QUARTER YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF 4.2.0 RELEASE! Yes, it really has been three (3) months (!) since it was released. Why do people like you insists on having the latest version of everything without making sure that it's actually _better_ than what we have? Rather than repeating what most others have said, I'll give you one more reason why not rushing 4.2.0 into woody is a good thing: the whole i18n architecture changed from 4.1 to 4.2, and many bugs _were_ introduced in the transition -- like X clients segfault on startup if Xlib can't find the input method specified in the environment, and so on. I for one am glad that Branden is not rushing things through. Just because upstream calls something a .0 or stable release, doesn't automatically mean that it meets our (and our users') quality expectations. As you said yourself, XF is way too essential component to be ignored like this. Regards Roger -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 09:43:51AM -0400, Ashton Trey Belew wrote: Just thought I would pipe in that I am supremely happy with the X 4.1 package. I can only add to the discussion that XFree 4.1 also runs fine with the XFree 4.2.0 server. The server is much simpler to compile (or even NOT compile for that matter if you'd prefer not to do so) than the whole of XFree86, and is all that is required to add support for the latest hardware. I recall seeing someplace a document which describes how to add XFree86 4.1's server to Debian's older 4.0.x X packages. A quick google doesn't turn it up, but perhaps if someone has a link to the document it could be generalized and included someplace that users can find it? It covered installing the XFree server from source or binary and procedure to remove it when Branden finished XFree 4.1 packages. (I hope the document was not taken down when 4.1 packages were ready, everything in it still applies today to 4.2..) -- Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Here we go again FrikaC I should probably reboot... FrikaC ok brb FrikaC So, what apart form avoiding virii, memory leaks, and rampant crashing does Linux reallhy offer :) LordHavoc reliable multitasking? pgpaeRqdQqmhZ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tuesday 16 April 2002 00:29, Andreas Metzler wrote: Marc Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Probably Geforce4 (usable with the nonfree Nvidia-driver on 4.1.*) or some Laptop-Chipset (Savage-something?) Well, so much for me going after 4.2 on my own then. I've got an nVidia GX200 4X AGP, basicly the same family. Then again, while I do bust Branden's nuts on the debian-devel channel about wanting 4.2, he knows I'm joking. Perfectly content with 4.1.x. Branden, rockin job bro, fuck what anyone else says. - -- David D.W. Downey [EMAIL PROTECTED] libpam-pgsql Debian Maintainer Upstream Source http://libpam-pgsql.codecastle.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE8vN/cJRhrFsWna/YRAko0AJ4gzMrw63eiZEGba9kT/f5HJMJ1OACfUNKw bzj+VL1/ltAeInv0s7/aUH4= =2YaA -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 07:37:11PM -0700, David D.W. Downey wrote: On Tuesday 16 April 2002 00:29, Andreas Metzler wrote: Marc Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Probably Geforce4 (usable with the nonfree Nvidia-driver on 4.1.*) or some Laptop-Chipset (Savage-something?) Well, so much for me going after 4.2 on my own then. I've got an nVidia GX200 4X AGP, basicly the same family. Then again, while I do bust Branden's nuts on the debian-devel channel about wanting 4.2, he knows I'm joking. Perfectly content with 4.1.x. I didn't say this. I have no idea what might or might not be supported regarding GeForce cards. Don't own one, don't plan on owning one. -- Marc Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.cox.net/msw pgpJTmz6srF8t.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 05:14:51AM +0300, Lasse Karkkainen wrote: You are probably sick and tired of this topic, but ... IT'S A QUARTER YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF 4.2.0 RELEASE! Yes, it really has been three (3) months (!) since it was released. [...] In that case I suggest hiring a paid programmer for the job (if that should happen, I am willing to donate). Mh, donate to Branden enough to give up job, then he has more time for building packages. Bye Jonas -- Black holes were created when God divided by 0. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 08:41:41AM +1200, Corrin Lakeland wrote: Incidentially, Lasse's email did convince me that Branden's job isn't just hard, it is _really_ hard. The idea of having to deal with daily emails like this horrifies me. I can see where his abrasive style comes from ;-) No... he had his style long before he became X maintainer :) The bitterness, on the other hand... But X will do that to a man. Imagine what it's like, not being able to browse XXX sites without being reminded of the latest chipset driver bugs. Richard Braakman -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Wed, 17 Apr 2002 10:30, Marc Wilson wrote: On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 07:37:11PM -0700, David D.W. Downey wrote: On Tuesday 16 April 2002 00:29, Andreas Metzler wrote: Marc Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Probably Geforce4 (usable with the nonfree Nvidia-driver on 4.1.*) or some Laptop-Chipset (Savage-something?) Well, so much for me going after 4.2 on my own then. I've got an nVidia GX200 4X AGP, basicly the same family. Then again, while I do bust Branden's nuts on the debian-devel channel about wanting 4.2, he knows I'm joking. Perfectly content with 4.1.x. I didn't say this. I have no idea what might or might not be supported regarding GeForce cards. Don't own one, don't plan on owning one. I own two GeForce cards. One of them is running on the binary-only driver from NVidia, and the other is using the frame-buffer driver (and the NVidia frame buffer). Both work fine in 4.1.x. I don't know which sub-version of the GeForce cards I'm using, I just got whatever was cheapest at the time (you'd have to be crazy to buy a high-end NVidia card - they release new models every 6 months and the old models then sell for less than half price). -- If you send email to me or to a mailing list that I use which has 4 lines of legalistic junk at the end then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I wish with the message and all other messages from your domain, by posting the message you agree that your long legalistic sig is void. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Wed, 17 Apr 2002 04:46, David D.W. Downey wrote: On Monday 15 April 2002 19:14, Lasse Karkkainen wrote: SNIP stupid shit here /snip Dude, kiss our collective arses. Do yourself a favor. hit http://linuxnewbie.codecastle.com and read every fiucking thing on that site, then hit http://linuxdoc.org and read everything on THAT fucking site, then hit http://www.debian.org and read everything on THAT fucking site. David, if you're going to use obscene language when emailing someone then you should use the level of language that's appropriate to their behaviour. You didn't use nearly enough obscenity to describe Lasse's behaviour! Also the structure of your message was lacking, you used two swear-words and two offensive terms, of which only one swear word was used more than once. This leads a casual observer to the conclusion that your vocabulary is lacking. I recommend not using a particular swear word or offensive term more than once per paragraph, and for variety I suggest introducing a new term of offense in every paragraph. Finally abuse without using offensive terms is good (eg reference to the glue Lasse sniffed before posting to Debian-devel). Please make amends for your error by flaming Lasse again and doing it properly. ;) -- If you send email to me or to a mailing list that I use which has 4 lines of legalistic junk at the end then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I wish with the message and all other messages from your domain, by posting the message you agree that your long legalistic sig is void. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday 17 April 2002 03:59, Russell Coker wrote: You didn't use nearly enough obscenity to describe Lasse's behaviour! I didn't want to hurt his little head with all the big words. Also the structure of your message was lacking, you used two swear-words and two offensive terms, of which only one swear word was used more than once. This leads a casual observer to the conclusion that your vocabulary is lacking. I recommend not using a particular swear word or offensive term more than once per paragraph, and for variety I suggest introducing a new term of offense in every paragraph. Dronal tonage seemed to be something I thought he might understand. I'd hate to use something like Anal Retentive Slut-puppy only to get an email back like Umm what does Anal mean? Finally abuse without using offensive terms is good (eg reference to the glue Lasse sniffed before posting to Debian-devel). Ok, got me cold on that one. Hmm. so is it considered good taste to use terms like buttmunching 5 cent excretement of a 10 cent gutter whore? Please make amends for your error by flaming Lasse again and doing it properly. ;) Ok, I'll try, not sure if his vocabulary is of sufficient quality to get the gist of it, but I'll give it a go. - -- David D.W. Downey [EMAIL PROTECTED] libpam-pgsql Debian Maintainer Upstream Source http://libpam-pgsql.codecastle.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE8vVqaJRhrFsWna/YRAmdyAJwOFhSBFV4LzVpkq2YG0JiMP0Ls+wCcCj/m 1hxVWv0M3+XnaLYw3wryaaw= =JYiI -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Wed, 2002-04-17 at 06:47, Russell Coker wrote: I don't know which sub-version of the GeForce cards I'm using, I just got whatever was cheapest at the time (you'd have to be crazy to buy a high-end NVidia card - they release new models every 6 months and the old models then sell for less than half price). Wow. Good point. I feel retarded now. (Sean's wallet is hurting after he replaced one of his old video cards which melted with a Geforce3 Ti 500 at x-mas.) When I plopped in the nVidia binary drivers, tho, I sure know it looked great. ^,^ Zangband has never looked so crisp... -- If you send email to me or to a mailing list that I use which has 4 lines of legalistic junk at the end then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I wish with the message and all other messages from your domain, by posting the message you agree that your long legalistic sig is void. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
End This Thread Please [Was: Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again]
Might I point out that Lasse has not replied to any emails since yesterday? I think maybe he's gotten the point, you can stop beating on him now ;-) *crossing my fingers and hoping this thread dies*, Daniel -- / Daniel Burrows [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---\ | Gil-Galad was an Elven king; | | of him the harpers sadly sing.| \-Evil Overlord, Inc: planning your future today. http://www.eviloverlord.com-/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: End This Thread Please [Was: Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again]
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 08:42:05AM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote: Might I point out that Lasse has not replied to any emails since yesterday? I think maybe he's gotten the point, you can stop beating on him now ;-) Or he was trolling and he's laughing too hard to type. Feeding the trolls only encourages more. -- Mike Stone -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
* Lasse Karkkainen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [020415 22:04]: Someone said that X is a difficult package to maintain and that there is nothing wrong if PACKAGING it takes 3+ months. People have managed to install it from sources in matter of HOURS (well, that didn't work for me, dunno why). Based on that packaging it during a single weekend should be possible. As we are talking about UNSTABLE here, no real testing needs to be done before releasing - that's what the Debian Unstable is for, right? I'm going to try to explain why this isn't the case. Just so you know, I was, for the most part, the only developer for TurboLinux version 6.0 through 6.0.4 (give or take). I took over for someone else who did the beginning part of migrating to the new libc. I had someone help by doing the X packages, but I always had to fix inter-packages issues. TurboLinux *never* had a package as good as Debian had at the time. To package something for debian, it must not just *compile* for the developer (which is all we really cared about at the time at TurboLinux), but it must compile on the rebuild server. It also must compile on multiple platforms. That isn't usually a trival task (we only cared about x86 at TL). Dependencies between packages is hard. Since xfree includes the x libs, a *lot* of packages depend on it. No one would be happy if installing X4.2.0 removed all their x applications. In addition, imaging that Brandon created a crappy, done on a weekend, package for x. Can you imagine the number of bugs? And Brandon would have to reply to them all. Under the way bugs are managed in Debian (even under unstable) this would be hell for him. Now, maybe you have some point. Perhaps some packages should be flagged as very alpha (ie, pre-beta). In that case, bugs *wouldn't* be allowed to be posted against it, and maybe the user would have to manually say I understand this package could destroy everything for each alpha package. That might be a nice feature. But then again. When Brandon gets packages that are that quality, he usually makes them available seperately, which has a similar effect. Finally, you mentioned that you thought that maybe someone else should do the new packages since Brandon is busy finishing up X4.1 for woody/testing. On the surface, it seems like a good idea. But in practise, it requires the new developer to be in tight coordination with the goals of the new developer. In practise, it would be better if this (currently fictional) developer finished up 4.1 for Brandon, while Brandon does the starts on the new one. Allowing packages as complex as the X packages to upgrade smoothly is very hard work and Brandon does a very good job. I hope that I have explained why Brandon is doing a very good job and that it *is* very hard, despite the fact that it seems like it should be fairly easy. I understand your fustration, since this is something that impacts whether you can use Debian on your new hardware. But its something that should be done right. I don't know how you'll take this email, or how badly you feel after the responses on the mailing list. It might be worth knowing that every so often (about every few months) a flame-Brandon-fest starts. I don't particularly like this because Brandon does do a good job. I would like to ask you to offer an apology to Brandon, saying that you didn't know that it was a difficult task and maybe say thank you for the work he has done already. But that's your choice. Ciao! -- Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur. (Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound. The Doctor What: fill in the blank http://docwhat.gerf.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] KF6VNC pgpt13gb9iLM8.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
Joseph Carter wrote: I recall seeing someplace a document which describes how to add XFree86 4.1's server to Debian's older 4.0.x X packages. A quick google doesn't turn it up, but perhaps if someone has a link to the document it could be generalized and included someplace that users can find it? It covered installing the XFree server from source or binary and procedure to remove it when Branden finished XFree 4.1 packages. (I hope the document was not taken down when 4.1 packages were ready, everything in it still applies today to 4.2..) Dunno, but I only had to do: 1. Download Xxserv.tgz and Xmod.tgz from ftp://ftp.xfree86.org/pub/XFree86/4.2.0/binaries 2. Untar over top of xserver-xfree86's files and fix X symlink. 3. Put xserver-xfree86 on hold. It took all of 10 minutes from a standing start, less time than many winers seem to spend on their flames. Xdm doesn't work, but that's the only breakage I've run into. -- see shy jo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
Quoting Joey Hess ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): Xdm doesn't work, but that's the only breakage I've run into. I'm taking a pretty wild guess that you need X because of a bright shiny new card that's only supported by 4.2 ? I ran into the same problem with a new radeon card, and solved it the same, with one exception: I used the X server included in the gatos [1] ati.2 driver package. This seems not to be a radeon-specific server, but it _is_ 4.2, and works fine with the xfree86.org binaries; furthermore it does support the authentication mechanism that's missing from the xfree86.org binaries (which breaks xdm and others). I'm currently running a rockstable X with xv and DRI support, on a xinerama dualhead 19 (3200x1200) desktop, and haven't experienced any X-related crashes yet (knocks wood). Greets, Robert -- ( o Linux Generation o ) ///\finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for my GnuPG/PGP key./\\\ \V_/ There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: \_V/ LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence. --Jeremy Anderson -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 11:26:30AM -0500, The Doctor What wrote: I would like to ask you to offer an apology to Brandon, saying that you didn't know that it was a difficult task and maybe say thank you for the work he has done already. But that's your choice. Well, as long as we're in the apology business, you could tell me who this Brandon person is that you're talking about, and what the heck he's doing with my X packages. I think he owes me an explanation. ;-) -- G. Branden Robinson| When dogma enters the brain, all Debian GNU/Linux | intellectual activity ceases. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Robert Anton Wilson http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | pgp79mxk0fMHb.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
* Branden Robinson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [020417 14:28]: On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 11:26:30AM -0500, The Doctor What wrote: I would like to ask you to offer an apology to Brandon, saying that you didn't know that it was a difficult task and maybe say thank you for the work he has done already. But that's your choice. Well, as long as we're in the apology business, you could tell me who this Brandon person is that you're talking about, and what the heck he's doing with my X packages. I think he owes me an explanation. ;-) No...uher. It's the fonts! It looked like an 'o', I swear! See, we need anti-aliased fonts! *grin* Sorry, that's my bad. Ciao! -- During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. -- Al Gore If Al Gore invented the internet, I invented spell check. -- Dan Quayle The Doctor What: What, Doctor What http://docwhat.gerf.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] KF6VNC pgpKtpYDwgLME.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
That's the result of reading your (=Debian developers') rude replies to very polite questions asked by other people. If you claim that your first post was polite I am truly amazed. It was a very rude and very clueless attack against Branden. You owe him an apology. My message was not meant to be polite. Instead its purpose was to shake people a bit (and it succeeded). Those polite questions with rude answers I was referring to can be easily found with a quick search on Google, if anyone cares. After silently reading those for several months, I just wouldn't want to go there and post another polite question. What I didn't know when posting that was that you are trying to release Woody very soon. It is acceptable that, at such phase, all time is temporarily (for couple of weeks) devoted for it. The message I manually forwarded to the list.. while Mozilla was sending it, I noticed that the CC to list was missing and thought that the reason was me accidentally hitting Reply (instead of Reply All). I apologize. Some people said that I'm not contributing. I don't know if they meant Debian or open-source in general. In case of the former, they are right. I'm a human with limited resources. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.8) Why doesn't that surprise me? Because you know that my hardware doesn't work in Debian and I have to use W98? I realized too late that it was a mistake to get rid of that Matrox G400. Do you know how to operate CVS and get your OWN copy of 4.2? LOL. As if I didn't use CVS daily for developement and as if I hadn't co'ed CVS-versions of XF few weeks before 4.2.0 was released (and several times after that too), to get the hardware support. Every version refused to compile here though. I am not going to apologize anything from Branden - I said that he doesn't have enough time that doesn't seem like an insult to me. I also understand why 4.2.0 won't go in Woody (and I don't care: I can always use those unstable (or experimental) versions). Anyway, no need to add my address to your mail filters - this will be my last post about this topic, on this list. Now that I have surely awaken you, it's better not waste time flaming here, while you could be fine-tuning Woody. Thanks for the greatest distro (if it wasn't the greatest, I wouldn't even write to this list: a little dilemma for you;). - Tronic - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
* Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [020417 14:29]: this Brandon person is that you're talking about, and what the heck Don't worry, I also had a lapse of judgement eariler in the thread. -- Scott Dier [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ringworld.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 01:46:54PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: Dunno, but I only had to do: 1. Download Xxserv.tgz and Xmod.tgz from ftp://ftp.xfree86.org/pub/XFree86/4.2.0/binaries 2. Untar over top of xserver-xfree86's files and fix X symlink. 3. Put xserver-xfree86 on hold. It took all of 10 minutes from a standing start, less time than many winers seem to spend on their flames. I believe the documented process was a little more involved than that, but not much really. No need to put Branden's package on hold. Even Lasse should be able to do it if he really tries to think about it first. Xdm doesn't work, but that's the only breakage I've run into. ... and this comes as a surprise? Xdm is evil. -- Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] I swallowed your goldfish netgod heh thats a lost cause, like the correct pronounciation of jewelry netgod give it up :-) sage and the correct spelling of colour :) BenC heh sage and aluminium BenC or nuclear weapons sage are you threating me yankee ? sage just cause we don't have the bomb... BenC back off ya yellow belly pgpvwZsauxp1b.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 04:20:00PM -0500, Scott Dier wrote: * Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [020417 14:29]: this Brandon person is that you're talking about, and what the heck Don't worry, I also had a lapse of judgement eariler in the thread. -- Scott Dier [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ringworld.org/ No apologies needed, we all know it's his evil twin. -- David D.W. Downey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Upstream - libpam-pgsql.codecastle.com Debian - Woody: 0.5.2-2 Sid: 0.5.2-3 State - bugs.debian.org/libpam-pgsql pgpyJjpSfbTEe.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 03:16:52PM -0700, David D. W. Downey wrote: On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 04:20:00PM -0500, Scott Dier wrote: * Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [020417 14:29]: this Brandon person is that you're talking about, and what the heck Don't worry, I also had a lapse of judgement eariler in the thread. No apologies needed, we all know it's his evil twin. *Evil* twin? You mean one of us isn't? -- G. Branden Robinson| Measure with micrometer, Debian GNU/Linux | mark with chalk, [EMAIL PROTECTED] | cut with axe, http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | hope like hell. pgpaZzmL4GYas.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Wed, 17 Apr 2002 22:58, Lasse Karkkainen wrote: That's the result of reading your (=Debian developers') rude replies to very polite questions asked by other people. If you claim that your first post was polite I am truly amazed. It was a very rude and very clueless attack against Branden. You owe him an apology. My message was not meant to be polite. You achieved your aim in that regard, if nothing else. After silently reading those for several months, I just wouldn't want to go there and post another polite question. Fuck you too. What I didn't know when posting that was that you are trying to release Woody very soon. It is acceptable that, at such phase, all time is temporarily (for couple of weeks) devoted for it. It takes more than a couple of weeks to test any large piece of software for release. If you were a programmer you would know this. Some people said that I'm not contributing. I don't know if they meant Debian or open-source in general. In case of the former, they are right. I'm a human with limited resources. What do you contribute to open source in general? A search of sourceforge and google reveals nothing. Do you know how to operate CVS and get your OWN copy of 4.2? LOL. As if I didn't use CVS daily for developement and as if I hadn't co'ed CVS-versions of XF few weeks before 4.2.0 was released (and several times after that too), to get the hardware support. Every version refused to compile here though. You previously said that it's not difficult to compile it. Should we conclude that you are saying you are not intelligent enough to complete simple tasks? Anyway, no need to add my address to your mail filters - this will be my Actually I was thinking of adding your address to a cron job... -- If you send email to me or to a mailing list that I use which has 4 lines of legalistic junk at the end then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I wish with the message and all other messages from your domain, by posting the message you agree that your long legalistic sig is void. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: *Evil* twin? You mean one of us isn't? He's bck. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
* Russell Coker | Please make amends for your error by flaming Lasse again and doing it | properly. ;) Please excuse David -- he's still in the NM queue and haven't learnt all the flame-throwing tipstricks yet. :) -- Tollef Fog Heen Unix _IS_ user friendly... It's just selective about who its friends are. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 04:27:17PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: *Evil* twin? You mean one of us isn't? He's bck. I didn't go anywhere. Nowhere in my platform did I claim I wasn't evil. ;-) -- G. Branden Robinson|You should try building some of the Debian GNU/Linux |stuff in main that is [EMAIL PROTECTED] |modern...turning on -Wall is like http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |turning on the pain. -- James Troup pgpi7JR1hEuPW.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
This one time, at band camp, David D. W. Downey wrote: No apologies needed, we all know it's his evil twin. *evil* twin? Now I'm scared. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://spacepants.org/jaq.gpg Marge, this ticket doesn't just give me a seat. It also gives me the right -- no, the duty -- to make a complete ass of myself. -- Homer Simpson, Dancin' Homer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 07:25:31PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: *Evil* twin? You mean one of us isn't? He's bck. I didn't go anywhere. Nowhere in my platform did I claim I wasn't evil. ;-) Overfiend this is the New Overfiend, preacher of Love and Tolerance -- Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] glDisable (DX8_CRAP); toor netgod: what do you have in your kernel??? The compiled source for driving a space shuttle??? Spoo time to make a zip drive your floppy drive then. if the kernel doesn fit on that, the kernel is an AI pgpGHPuGasEVL.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 06:20:24PM -0700, Joseph Carter wrote: On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 07:25:31PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: *Evil* twin? You mean one of us isn't? He's bck. I didn't go anywhere. Nowhere in my platform did I claim I wasn't evil. ;-) Overfiend this is the New Overfiend, preacher of Love and Tolerance Are you suggesting that everyone who preaches Love and Tolerance is non-evil? Steve Langasek postmodern programmer pgpO1TJbOZqbT.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 06:20:24PM -0700, Joseph Carter wrote: Overfiend this is the New Overfiend, preacher of Love and Tolerance I see your irony detector is as non-functional as ever... :) -- G. Branden Robinson| Debian GNU/Linux | Please do not look directly into [EMAIL PROTECTED] | laser with remaining eye. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | pgpPTZOvqBlln.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
This one time, at band camp, Joseph Carter wrote: On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 07:25:31PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: I didn't go anywhere. Nowhere in my platform did I claim I wasn't evil. ;-) Overfiend this is the New Overfiend, preacher of Love and Tolerance Orwellian Love and Tolerance, that is. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://spacepants.org/jaq.gpg Remember: every member of your 'target audience' also owns a broadcasting station. These 'targets' can shoot back. -- Michael Rathbun to advertisers, in nanae -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 06:30:20AM +0300, Lasse Karkkainen [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say: I guess you didn't read my original message: the problem is that I know next to nothing about Debian. Yes, that sums it up pretty well. I'm feeling a bit generous, so I'll hand you a piece of advice, gratis. If I had to say what the fastest way is to get yourself flamed or ignored, it would probably be this: Barge into a technical discussion group focussed on a topic you clearly and admittedly haven't a clue on. Attack one of the most prominent and technically respected members of the group. Suggest that he is incompetent to perform a particular task, one in which his past and present performance is widely acknowledged to be superb. Suggest that this task, known to be complex and difficult, is easy because you did something passingly similar once. Finish with vague and unsubstantiated predictions of catastrophic results if your outrageous recommendations are not followed. In fact, I'm having a lot of difficulty imagining anything that could make your credibility on this list drop faster and harder than you're managing right now. I suggest that you do a small amount of research before posting again; maybe even try to learn from the other replies you've gotten. If you stubbornly persist in your current path, I predict that you will land in the killfiles of a large proportion of the list readers within 24-48 hours. Speaking for myself, I have wasted far too much of my own time on this email already. Daniel -- / Daniel Burrows [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ | The spork is strong with him... -- Fluble | \ Be like the kid in the movie! Play chess! -- http://www.uschess.org ---/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
Ack, I don't like doing this, but I'm provoked now... massive uncharacteristic flamage Fucking idiot!!! On Mon, 2002-04-15 at 23:30, Lasse Karkkainen wrote: Forgot to cc this to the list.. The message is attached. From: Lasse Karkkainen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Martin Pool [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again Date: 16 Apr 2002 06:28:50 +0300 I think your case would be more convincing if you mentioned some particular reason why Debian ought to upgrade. Presumably it supports more cards or something. Having the current version is not super important in and of itself. It's the hardware support. People are getting sick of VGA/VESA. I thought that it would be obvious. I own some of the most recent/exotic video hardware out there, and it works fine on Debian. I'd say there are less video cards that fail to run on X 4.1 than there are video hardware Windows never has a chance of supporting (read: big SGI coolness) Hey, guest what, most of the odd drivers that *don't* work at 100% don't work in 4.2 either, because the hardware companies didn't release specs. If you have one of the 3 chipsets only supported in 4.2, there is nothing stopping you from installing that. Except that you are instead mucking around spouting ideas straight from your ass on a mailing list, instead of learning how to do what you need to (i.e., build X). I think Debian should put all its resources right at the moment into a freeze first of all. So, Debian has a fixed number of developers, all working at 100%? I thought that it was fuzzy number of developers working when they feel like they are able and want to code (which is what free software is all about, IMO). Yes, you are right. And Free Software should also have the advantage of not having assholes shove their values down the developers' throats with absolutely no contributions of their own. Give me, and everyone else, one good reason why we should listen to your ideas? Why we should get rid of a developer that made better X packages than any other distro? Why Debian can't want a moment longer for X 4.2, instead of letting the dumbasses flood the low-quality distros? Nobody is stopping you building your own version of XF86 4.2 debs and putting them up on a web page, or encouraging/paying other people to I guess you didn't read my original message: the problem is that I know next to nothing about Debian. That's obvious. If you don't know anything about Debian, how in all the fucking hells do you expect to be able to encourage developers to make better packages? You do *NOT* understand a single goddamn thing you are talking about. You know this. We know this. Why the hell can't you accept that? You might as well try to tell a nuclear physicist how to do *his* job. do so. Mere assertion that other people could do a better job than Branden is not very persuasive. Maybe not *better* job, but they could do it *now* .. Also, if Branden is working on 4.1.0, why doesn't someone else do 4.2.0? Sounds like two separate projects to me. Why the hell would we want a sub-par package in Debian? You said you are willing to pay a developer to package X4.2... go ahead and do so. That shitty package won't be in Debian, but you can use it. Now isn't important. Stability is. I've used now based distros, and guess what? They crash and lockup a *lot*. (that being once a week or so, which is a lot for me.) You are fully free to use one of them instead of Debian. What comes to encouraging other people - guess what I'm doing right now. Encouraging them to what? Again, you have no idea what the hell you are talking about, as you stated yourself. Learn what the hell you're talking about *first*, then try to help the project. Trust me, it doesn't work well doing those in reverse. At reasonable rates, I would expect it to cost at least USD1, possibly a lot more, to build and test a reasonable combination of platforms and systems. I believe Unstable (or even Testing) is for testing and there surely are people willing to test it. Putting it together so that it runs on i386 really shouldn't be a big problem for any Debian developer. Well, hey, guess what? You're wrong! Again, you don't know what you're talking about. What you believe testing or unstable for is irrelevant. If you want to know what they *are* for, it's clearly documented on the Debian website, which it seems you have read much on. Remove your head from your ass, go to the website, and try this thing called learning for a bit. Other platforms aren't nearly as significant as i386 (not many users, no much new hardware). I don't recall this being named Debian GNU/Linux x86. Debian is multi-platform by nature. That's how it works. If you don't like it, there are plenty of x86 only distros out there for you to annoy the hell out of. So what if he names you? Then I'll be spending lot of time
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 06:28:50AM +0300, Lasse Karkkainen wrote: What comes to encouraging other people - guess what I'm doing right now. No you are definetly not. You are pissing people off. Other platforms aren't nearly as significant as i386 (not many users, no much new hardware). You're arrogance makes me wonder if George W. Bush is related to you. I'll give you a hint: we are volunteers, and we do this because it's fun. Messages like yours, that demand service for free just disgust. I guess after seeing your messages Branden goes out for a beer rather an opens a editor to serve ungrateful kids. -- Riku Voipio|[EMAIL PROTECTED] | kirkkonummentie 33 |+358 40 8476974 --+-- 02140 Espoo| | Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 12:23:27AM -0400, Sean Middleditch wrote: If you have one of the 3 chipsets only supported in 4.2, there is nothing stopping you from installing that. Except that you are instead mucking around spouting ideas straight from your ass on a mailing list, instead of learning how to do what you need to (i.e., build X). One of them is Matrox's G550, one of them is one or another of the Radeon's, but what's the third? And actually, the G550 is a no-brainer to add support for and re-do the package. ^_^ /me wuvs his G550... -- Marc Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.cox.net/msw -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Mon, 2002-04-15 at 21:49, Riku Voipio wrote: On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 06:28:50AM +0300, Lasse Karkkainen wrote: What comes to encouraging other people - guess what I'm doing right now. No you are definetly not. You are pissing people off. Other platforms aren't nearly as significant as i386 (not many users, no much new hardware). You're arrogance makes me wonder if George W. Bush is related to you. I'll give you a hint: we are volunteers, and we do this because it's fun. Messages like yours, that demand service for free just disgust. I guess after seeing your messages Branden goes out for a beer rather an opens a editor to serve ungrateful kids. I'll chip in to pay for the beer, as long as he comes back. (I'm just a user, and buying beer for developers could be my best contribution :) -- first impressions are bunk (unknown) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
Hi Lasse! You wrote: You are probably sick and tired of this topic, but ... IT'S A QUARTER YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF 4.2.0 RELEASE! Congratulations. Now please return to your Redhat box. -- Kind regards, +---+ | Bas Zoetekouw | Si l'on sait exactement ce | || que l'on va faire, a quoi| | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | bon le faire?| |[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Pablo Picasso | +---+ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 12:01:10AM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote: On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 06:30:20AM +0300, Lasse Karkkainen [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say: I guess you didn't read my original message: the problem is that I know next to nothing about Debian. Yes, that sums it up pretty well. I'm feeling a bit generous, so I'll hand you a piece of advice, gratis. If I had to say what the fastest way is to get yourself flamed or ignored, it would probably be this: Aw Daniel - Don't go giving him a clue, I was really enjoying read his drivel - haven't read anything quite like it for ages! (At first I really thought he was joking...) -- Paul -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On 16 Apr 2002, Lasse Karkkainen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Forgot to cc this to the list.. The message is attached. Here's another clue, for free: when somebody specifically replies to you rather to the list, and points that out in the message body, they probably had a reason. Going back on to the list is not perfect etiquette. It's the hardware support. People are getting sick of VGA/VESA. I thought that it would be obvious. Hyperbole is not making you any more credible. For example, I'm using a 64MB FireGL2 (which does not even support VESA) on Brendan's xf86 4.1. the problem is that I know next to nothing about Debian. So I see. :-) Please do some reading first. You might, for example, start here: http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/writings/homesteading/homesteading/ (I know not everybody loves esr, but I think most would agree he's more informed here than Lasse.) Assuming you actually want to get better software and not just start flamewars those documents should help. Also, if Branden is working on 4.1.0, why doesn't someone else do 4.2.0? Sounds like two separate projects to me. The thing about most free software lists is that people are basically not interested in your opinion about this until you can demonstrate that it is an *informed* opinion. Since you've admitted and demonstrated you don't actually know anything much about XFree86 or Debian (socially or politically) you're not doing well so far. Offering money comes second to having a clue, but it ought to be something reasonably related to the effort involved, like say USD10k. I have a feeling you had about $10 in mind. Then I'll be spending lot of time in the local library, trying to learn how *nix/Debian work, That would be good. Keep away from the email terminals :-) Lasse, if you need more help understanding why your bozo bit just got set, then please reply to me, not to the list. -- Martin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 06:04:09AM +0300, Lasse Karkkainen wrote: That's the result of reading your (=Debian developers') rude replies to very polite questions asked by other people. If you claim that your first post was polite I am truly amazed. It was a very rude and very clueless attack against Branden. You owe him an apology. If someone was rude to you you got what you asked for. -- Ari Makela [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://arska.org/hauva/ Sailing is, after all, a kind of grace, a kind of magic. - Phil Berman -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
Lasse, please read the following SlashDot comment written by Branden. It explains why Woody will not come with 4.2.0: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=30663cid=3297389 And now feel impressed by his work. ;-) -- *=-+-__ |[EMAIL PROTECTED]: _ Ugh! Nio2f says something: __ : http://www.lintux.cx/ |/ i and be the withat to is as it h \ ~~-+-=-+~+-=* -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
Marc Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 12:23:27AM -0400, Sean Middleditch wrote: If you have one of the 3 chipsets only supported in 4.2, there is nothing stopping you from installing that. [...] One of them is Matrox's G550, one of them is one or another of the Radeon's, but what's the third? Probably Geforce4 (usable with the nonfree Nvidia-driver on 4.1.*) or some Laptop-Chipset (Savage-something?) And actually, the G550 is a no-brainer to add support for and re-do the package. ^_^ And until then, there is www.matrox.com, featuring precompiled drivers for 4.[01].*. cu andreas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, 16 Apr 2002 04:57, Jeff Licquia wrote: On Mon, 2002-04-15 at 21:14, Lasse Karkkainen wrote: Hi! (it's my first post here) You are probably sick and tired of this topic, but ... IT'S A QUARTER YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF 4.2.0 RELEASE! Yes, it really has been three (3) months (!) since it was released. No, I am NOT willing to prepare and release that package. Wow. What an idiot. Here's an idea: the next time we have someone complain about potato being so old and woody taking so long, let's say, Hey, you know, this 'tronic2' guy flamed us real bad for not including XFree86 4.2, so we're postponing woody for six more months to get it in. Feel free to talk to him if this bothers you. The only problem is that we'd likely be named accessories to the inevitable murder this would trigger. Someone as stupid as Lasse is unlikely to live very long anyway. Maybe we need a new sub-distribution, Debian for glue-sniffers? -- If you send email to me or to a mailing list that I use which has 4 lines of legalistic junk at the end then you are specifically authorizing me to do whatever I wish with the message and all other messages from your domain, by posting the message you agree that your long legalistic sig is void. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 10:20:16AM +0200, Russell Coker wrote: On Tue, 16 Apr 2002 04:57, Jeff Licquia wrote: On Mon, 2002-04-15 at 21:14, Lasse Karkkainen wrote: Hi! (it's my first post here) You are probably sick and tired of this topic, but ... IT'S A QUARTER YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF 4.2.0 RELEASE! Yes, it really has been three (3) months (!) since it was released. No, I am NOT willing to prepare and release that package. Wow. What an idiot. Here's an idea: the next time we have someone complain about potato being so old and woody taking so long, let's say, Hey, you know, this 'tronic2' guy flamed us real bad for not including XFree86 4.2, so we're postponing woody for six more months to get it in. Feel free to talk to him if this bothers you. The only problem is that we'd likely be named accessories to the inevitable murder this would trigger. Someone as stupid as Lasse is unlikely to live very long anyway. Maybe we need a new sub-distribution, Debian for glue-sniffers? I personaly had a very good laugh reading his first message and I did not take it seriously because such a rant cannot be really serious. This is a kind of counterpart of Debian's popularity. -- Jérôme Marant -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 09:58:49PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: You are, of course, free to package your own private X system. After all, you seem to think you have a clue about the amount of work that entails. People have managed to install it from sources in matter of HOURS (well, that didn't work for me, dunno why). -- Peter Mathiasson, peter at mathiasson dot nu, http://www.mathiasson.nu GPG Fingerprint: A9A7 F8F6 9821 F415 B066 77F1 7FF5 C2E6 7BF2 F228 pgp3nT5ZfeSil.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
** On Apr 16, Manoj Srivastava scribbled: Lasse == Lasse Karkkainen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Lasse Time to throw some gasoline on the flames ... Branden apparently is Lasse incapable of releasing it. So, I suggest that anyone, with enough Lasse knowledge and TIME, reading this, would volunteer as XFree package Lasse maintainer. Branden's comments suggest that he just doesn't have Lasse enough time for that. This demonstrates you have no clue what it takes to package and test something the size and complexity of X. It also shows you do not have the commitment to quality that characterizes debian. To give the guy a clue, Red Hat (please, don't start another flamewar anyone :)) hires a full-time employee to _mostly_ work on the XFree packages. That should even convice Lasse The Troll that there must be something hard in packaging such a beast (I hope it will make it into his nut sized brain... :) marek p.s. and I found the poster on Branden's XFree page very amusing :P pgpNtzaMvpZtt.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 05:14:51AM +0300, Lasse Karkkainen wrote: You are probably sick and tired of this topic, but ... IT'S A QUARTER YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF 4.2.0 RELEASE! Yes, it really has been three (3) months (!) since it was released. so? 4.1 works just fine. Time to throw some gasoline on the flames ... Branden apparently is incapable of releasing it. So, I suggest that anyone, with enough knowledge and TIME, reading this, would volunteer as XFree package maintainer. Branden's comments suggest that he just doesn't have enough time for that. this may shock the hell out of Branden but i think he does an *excellent* job with the XFree packages. i may have some disagreements with him on various issues, but i have no problem at all with the quality or frequency of his work. debian needs more developers of his caliber. he took on X (an incredibly difficult set of packages) when everybody else had too much sense to even think about doing it and has done a fantastic job with it. there's a lot more to packaging a program than just compiling it and hoping that it mostly works on your own system. if you want that kind of quality-control then try redhat's contrib packages. craig -- craig sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fabricati Diem, PVNC. -- motto of the Ankh-Morpork City Watch -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 07:30:47PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote: On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 05:14:51AM +0300, Lasse Karkkainen wrote: You are probably sick and tired of this topic, but ... IT'S A QUARTER YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF 4.2.0 RELEASE! Yes, it really has been three (3) months (!) since it was released. so? 4.1 works just fine. Not on newport (MIPS). There is only 8bit color (4.2 - 24bit). But I'm happy with patches from Guido. eloy -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Taaa. Taaa. W tak piknych okolicznociach przyrody... i niepowtarzalnej. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
** On Apr 16, Andreas Metzler scribbled: Marc Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 12:23:27AM -0400, Sean Middleditch wrote: If you have one of the 3 chipsets only supported in 4.2, there is nothing stopping you from installing that. [...] One of them is Matrox's G550, one of them is one or another of the Radeon's, but what's the third? Probably Geforce4 (usable with the nonfree Nvidia-driver on 4.1.*) or some Laptop-Chipset (Savage-something?) Trident-something (CyberBlade, I think) as used in Toshiba Satellite PRO 5600 (IIRC) - works well with the VESA on 4.1, though :) marek pgpCxRRWNzCIs.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, 2002-04-16 at 10:20, Russell Coker wrote: Someone as stupid as Lasse is unlikely to live very long anyway. Maybe we need a new sub-distribution, Debian for glue-sniffers? maybe we need to ignore morons like him. I think him getting tens and tens of answers to his stupid mail means playing the same game as he does. Best thing is to completely ignore him, for instance, adding it to your spammers mail filter, which is what I'm doing right now. As an example, some weeks ago, when Miguel de Icaza said he would like GNOME 4.0 to use Mono (which is just his personal opinion, not an actual plan), we (like 100~ GNOME developers) got a mail from a moron who asked us to kick Miguel off the GNOME project. AFAIK, nobody answered him, and, so far, I haven't got another mail from him. So, please ignore trolls, they don't deserve your time. And, THANKS to all Debian developers, keep up the good work, my life is easier thanks to all of you :-) cheers -- Rodrigo Moya [EMAIL PROTECTED] - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gnome-db.org/ - http://www.ximian.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tuesday 16 Apr 2002 4:04 am, Lasse Karkkainen wrote: Well, it seems that you almost need 4.2.0 for Woody anyway, if it is going to work with any recent hardware (unless you are aiming for servers only). Or are you going to hack 4.2.0 display drivers into 4.1.0? As it happens 4.2.0 seems to have a lot of bugs of it's own. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 06:03:47AM +0300, Lasse Karkkainen wrote: Someone said that X is a difficult package to maintain and that there is nothing wrong if PACKAGING it takes 3+ months. People have managed to install it from sources in matter of HOURS (well, that didn't work for me, dunno why). Man, I am seriously thinking about putting this quote to my archive of best laughs ever :) -- Dmitry Borodaenko -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
Hello, Just thought I would pipe in that I am supremely happy with the X 4.1 package. Have a nice day, -Trey pgpT14C75sPP3.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 10:09:55PM -0500, Scott Dier wrote: bleeding software. Brandon has added functionality to our X packages Run, Scott :) -- Jordi Mallach Pérez || [EMAIL PROTECTED] || Rediscovering Freedom, aka Oskuro in|| [EMAIL PROTECTED] || Using Debian GNU/Linux Reinos de Leyenda || [EMAIL PROTECTED] || http://debian.org http://sindominio.net GnuPG public information: pub 1024D/917A225E telnet pusa.uv.es 23 73ED 4244 FD43 5886 20AC 2644 2584 94BA 917A 225E pgp6CBlfM31HT.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 07:14:39PM -0700, Adam McKenna wrote: ObPleaseDon'tFeedTheTroll http://www.bofhlet.net/trolls.txt :) -- 2. That which causes joy or happiness. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 05:14:51AM +0300, Lasse Karkkainen wrote: So, I suggest that anyone, with enough knowledge and TIME, reading this, would volunteer as XFree package maintainer. Doesn't the fact that nobody has openly volunteered to do so indicate to you that there just aren't many (any?) such people? I am just saying what other developers don't dare to say, as it might damage and rip apart their magic castle. This risk must be taken, or Debian may die anyhow. Debian developers are generally all _but_ quiet little sheep. Were there cause for major disgruntlement, there would be major disgruntlement. I submit the mailing list and bug tracking system archives as proof. Let me put it this way: in the eyes of every clueful bystander, Branden's reputation sinks from the starting value of, say, 100, by 0.1 with every day the new version release is delayed. (At the same time there can be other fluctuations in the imaginary reputation value, of course. :) Your reputation sinks from the starting value of 0, by 10.0 with every clueless sentence. Anyway, no-one will volunteer as long as Branden is officially working on it, Hundreds of packages have been hijacked in the past. so I suggest that the first thing to do is getting rid of him. I can only laugh at this part :)) -- 2. That which causes joy or happiness. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 04:32:44PM +0200, Jordi Mallach wrote: bleeding software. Brandon has added functionality to our X packages Run, Scott :) He also misspelled yet emphasized definitely, so I think the fiend will be able to let it slip ;) -- 2. That which causes joy or happiness. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 02:57:52PM +0300, Dmitry Borodaenko wrote: On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 06:03:47AM +0300, Lasse Karkkainen wrote: Someone said that X is a difficult package to maintain and that there is nothing wrong if PACKAGING it takes 3+ months. People have managed to install it from sources in matter of HOURS (well, that didn't work for me, dunno why). Man, I am seriously thinking about putting this quote to my archive of best laughs ever :) *save* into my collection of fortunes :) -- One time, you all will be emulated by linux! Jan- Hendrik Palic Url:http://www.billgotchy.de; E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- Version: 3.12 GCS d- s: a-- C++ UL++ P+++ L+++ E W++ N+ o+ K- w--- O- M- V- PS++ PE Y+ PGP++ t--- 5- X+++ R-- tv- b++ DI-- D+++ G+++ e+++ h+ r++ z+ --END GEEK CODE BLOCK-- pgpBKLfLpLCEC.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, 16 Apr 2002 16:49, Riku Voipio wrote: I guess after seeing your messages Branden goes out for a beer rather an opens a editor to serve ungrateful kids. Incidentially, Lasse's email did convince me that Branden's job isn't just hard, it is _really_ hard. The idea of having to deal with daily emails like this horrifies me. I can see where his abrasive style comes from ;-) Corrin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
XFree 4.2.0 - again
Hi! (it's my first post here) You are probably sick and tired of this topic, but ... IT'S A QUARTER YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF 4.2.0 RELEASE! Yes, it really has been three (3) months (!) since it was released. Time to throw some gasoline on the flames ... Branden apparently is incapable of releasing it. So, I suggest that anyone, with enough knowledge and TIME, reading this, would volunteer as XFree package maintainer. Branden's comments suggest that he just doesn't have enough time for that. Before you all start flaming and bashing me.. No, I am NOT willing to prepare and release that package. I know next to nothing about Debian internals, and I don't have enough time either (with my other projects and a dayjob). Anyway THIS IS NO REASON for me to shut the fuck up (to quote Branden's welcome-pic, which I have been weekly refreshing for couple of months now). I am just saying what other developers don't dare to say, as it might damage and rip apart their magic castle. This risk must be taken, or Debian may die anyhow. Of course, if no-one else is capable of maintaining that package, Debian is in trouble. In that case I suggest hiring a paid programmer for the job (if that should happen, I am willing to donate). XF is way too essential component to be ignored like this. Anyway, no-one will volunteer as long as Branden is officially working on it, so I suggest that the first thing to do is getting rid of him. He can freely continue working with smaller projects, but XF is way too big for him, with his limited resources (time). Another solution *I* (yes, my opinion only) could accept would be Branden re-evaluating his values, devoting more time for Debian. As a proof of that he should release 4.2.0 in one week (the deadline would be 2002-04-23) and make sure that new releases also get deb'ed in time. Yet another option, of course, would be Branden directly naming his successor. Now you can start bashing me. - Tronic - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
ObPleaseDon'tFeedTheTroll --Adam -- Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
Now you can start bashing me. Since your remarks seem to be deliberately provocative, let me just point out that X is a large package to take care of yet there is reason to think that B.R. will have 4.2 ready before very long, as he has said he will. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 05:14:51AM +0300, Lasse Karkkainen wrote: Now you can start bashing me. - Tronic - 4.2.0 doesn't matter, as it's not going into Woody; what needs to be done on the X packages is getting the highest quality packages X packages for Woody, which he is doing just fine. This is about the rudest message I've seen on this mailing list in a while. I have too much stuff to do to actually help Debian, but I'm willing to order around volunteers. Part of the reason Branden is the X maintainer, is because X is possibly the hardest package in Debian to maintain, and Branden is willing and able to do a job most of the rest of us couldn't or wouldn't. -- David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED] It's not a habit; it's cool; I feel alive. If you don't have it you're on the other side. - K's Choice (probably referring to the Internet) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 05:14:51AM +0300, Lasse Karkkainen wrote: Hi! (it's my first post here) Fucking idiot. Yes, I can say that now. I'll only be DPL for another ~20 hours. Here, let me say it again. Fucking idiot. Man that felt good. Ben (not the DPL for much longer) Collins -- Debian - http://www.debian.org/ Linux 1394 - http://linux1394.sourceforge.net/ Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/ Deqo - http://www.deqo.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
better be careful, talk like that will get you re-elected. :-) by me anyway! On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 10:29:06PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote: On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 05:14:51AM +0300, Lasse Karkkainen wrote: Hi! (it's my first post here) Fucking idiot. Yes, I can say that now. I'll only be DPL for another ~20 hours. Here, let me say it again. Fucking idiot. Man that felt good. Ben (not the DPL for much longer) Collins -- Jason I hope you learn speaking English proper I hope speak I me you. -- Branden Robinson, 2001 pgpiWC2Mgb7gd.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Mon, 2002-04-15 at 21:14, Lasse Karkkainen wrote: Hi! (it's my first post here) You are probably sick and tired of this topic, but ... IT'S A QUARTER YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF 4.2.0 RELEASE! Yes, it really has been three (3) months (!) since it was released. Time to throw some gasoline on the flames ... [...] No, I am NOT willing to prepare and release that package. Wow. What an idiot. Here's an idea: the next time we have someone complain about potato being so old and woody taking so long, let's say, Hey, you know, this 'tronic2' guy flamed us real bad for not including XFree86 4.2, so we're postponing woody for six more months to get it in. Feel free to talk to him if this bothers you. The only problem is that we'd likely be named accessories to the inevitable murder this would trigger. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
Someone said that X is a difficult package to maintain and that there is nothing wrong if PACKAGING it takes 3+ months. People have managed to install it from sources in matter of HOURS (well, that didn't work for me, dunno why). Based on that packaging it during a single weekend should be possible. As we are talking about UNSTABLE here, no real testing needs to be done before releasing - that's what the Debian Unstable is for, right? 4.2.0 doesn't matter, as it's not going into Woody; what needs to be done on the X packages is getting the highest quality packages X packages for Woody, which he is doing just fine. Well, it seems that you almost need 4.2.0 for Woody anyway, if it is going to work with any recent hardware (unless you are aiming for servers only). Or are you going to hack 4.2.0 display drivers into 4.1.0? This is about the rudest message I've seen on this mailing list in a That's the result of reading your (=Debian developers') rude replies to very polite questions asked by other people. while. I have too much stuff to do to actually help Debian, but I'm willing to order around volunteers. Part of the reason Branden is the X maintainer, is because X is possibly the hardest package in Debian to maintain, and Branden is willing and able to do a job most of the rest of us couldn't or wouldn't. I have seen that same model happening in many places (trustees of associations, software developers, ..). Everybody thinks that someone is vital for what he is doing and no-one is willing to replace him... Well, then someone else comes and questions that - and gets lots of flame. Often that still, finally, leads to replacing that person with a new, fresh one. Usually the change is for the good, after all. People who have done something for ages just don't care about it anymore, but new people are willing to devote all their time for it.. - Tronic - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
Lasse == Lasse Karkkainen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Lasse Hi! (it's my first post here) We can tell. Lasse You are probably sick and tired of this topic, but ... Lasse IT'S A QUARTER YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF 4.2.0 RELEASE! Lasse Yes, it really has been three (3) months (!) since it was released. Lasse Time to throw some gasoline on the flames ... Branden apparently is Lasse incapable of releasing it. So, I suggest that anyone, with enough Lasse knowledge and TIME, reading this, would volunteer as XFree package Lasse maintainer. Branden's comments suggest that he just doesn't have Lasse enough time for that. This demonstrates you have no clue what it takes to package and test something the size and complexity of X. It also shows you do not have the commitment to quality that characterizes debian. You are, of course, free to package your own private X system. After all, you seem to think you have a clue about the amount of work that entails. manoj -- Have you ever noticed that the people who are always trying to tell you `there's a time for work and a time for play' never find the time for play? Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/ 1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
* Lasse Karkkainen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [020415 21:16]: incapable of releasing it. So, I suggest that anyone, with enough knowledge and TIME, reading this, would volunteer as XFree package Go to hell. Find a bug that is impacting a viable woody release for may1st and *fix* it, or patch it, or at least put in a constructive comment. If you dont see anything a month after woody release, then you might have some credibility. But please, go away until then. We want to provide a stable release, not a still bleeding release. -- Scott Dier [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ringworld.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
* Lasse Karkkainen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [020415 22:04]: should be possible. As we are talking about UNSTABLE here, no real testing needs to be done before releasing - that's what the Debian Unstable is for, right? You need to do some serious thinking about time constraints of developers and what matters more, a stable woody release or still bleeding software. Brandon has added functionality to our X packages that outpaces other distributions, and is *definately* not trivial to implement. -- Scott Dier [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ringworld.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
Forgot to cc this to the list.. The message is attached. ---BeginMessage--- I think your case would be more convincing if you mentioned some particular reason why Debian ought to upgrade. Presumably it supports more cards or something. Having the current version is not super important in and of itself. It's the hardware support. People are getting sick of VGA/VESA. I thought that it would be obvious. I think Debian should put all its resources right at the moment into a freeze first of all. So, Debian has a fixed number of developers, all working at 100%? I thought that it was fuzzy number of developers working when they feel like they are able and want to code (which is what free software is all about, IMO). Nobody is stopping you building your own version of XF86 4.2 debs and putting them up on a web page, or encouraging/paying other people to I guess you didn't read my original message: the problem is that I know next to nothing about Debian. do so. Mere assertion that other people could do a better job than Branden is not very persuasive. Maybe not *better* job, but they could do it *now* .. Also, if Branden is working on 4.1.0, why doesn't someone else do 4.2.0? Sounds like two separate projects to me. What comes to encouraging other people - guess what I'm doing right now. At reasonable rates, I would expect it to cost at least USD1, possibly a lot more, to build and test a reasonable combination of platforms and systems. I believe Unstable (or even Testing) is for testing and there surely are people willing to test it. Putting it together so that it runs on i386 really shouldn't be a big problem for any Debian developer. Other platforms aren't nearly as significant as i386 (not many users, no much new hardware). So what if he names you? Then I'll be spending lot of time in the local library, trying to learn how *nix/Debian work, and the release will take forever. Bad choice, really. Surely this is a troll? Nope, I'm for real. Maybe a bit provocative, but for real. - Tronic - ---End Message---
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
Lasse == Lasse Karkkainen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Surely this is a troll? Lasse Nope, I'm for real. Maybe a bit provocative, but for real. No way! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
This one time, at band camp, Lasse Karkkainen wrote: Time to throw some gasoline on the flames ... Branden apparently is incapable of releasing it. So, I suggest that anyone, with enough knowledge and TIME, reading this, would volunteer as XFree package maintainer. Branden's comments suggest that he just doesn't have enough time for that. You're 15 days late. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://spacepants.org/jaq.gpg The email of the species is more deadly than the mail. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, 16 Apr 2002, Lasse Karkkainen wrote: nothing wrong if PACKAGING it takes 3+ months. People have managed to install it from sources in matter of HOURS (well, that didn't work for me, dunno why). Based on that packaging it during a single weekend Installing anything from source is usually very very easy, if the source is not actual Pure Crap(TM). And it often is. Packaging it is not. It takes about 200 times more effort than getting it to compile exactly right (and I should add, something that seems to work may not be compiled exactly right). You have no clue about what you are talking about. testing needs to be done before releasing - that's what the Debian Unstable is for, right? No way. That is what Debian *experimental* is for. Uploading *known* broken trash to unstable is not acceptable. Well, it seems that you almost need 4.2.0 for Woody anyway, if it is going to work with any recent hardware (unless you are aiming for servers only). Or are you going to hack 4.2.0 display drivers into 4.1.0? Anyone that needs bleeding edge can survive with unstable. Anyone else will have to simply either backport 4.2.0 to stable (which should be damn easy, since stable will be almost identical to sid when the 4.2.0 packages come out), or wait/pay for someone else to do that. This is about the rudest message I've seen on this mailing list in a That's the result of reading your (=Debian developers') rude replies to very polite questions asked by other people. Please name the faulty parties, with message-ids. I am not doubting you, but I happen to have read very very few messages where *real* registered developers flamed users in the last 3 or 4 years. I can come up with a lot of developers that will flame the living shit out of other developers (or anyone clearly acting as if he were one, or being downright insulting [and expecting a flame as a reply] like you were), but most users are pretty safe from flames. And most developers will get the crap flamed out of their behinds from flaming users. vital for what he is doing and no-one is willing to replace him... Well, Why should we? He is doing just fine, and he even manages to tolerate the abuse from lots of dead-weight, often poorly-manered and sometimes downright insulting people far better than most of us ever will (or will want to). -- One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie. -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 06:30:20AM +0300, Lasse Karkkainen wrote: It's the hardware support. People are getting sick of VGA/VESA. I thought that it would be obvious. Translation: I own one of the umpteen iterations of the Radeon that 4.1.0 doesn't support in a way I think it should, so I'm gonna whine until I get support for what *I* own, since I'm incapable of doing it for myself. Am I close? -- Marc Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.cox.net/msw -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
