subject:"\[Mageia\-dev\] Teamviewer and X86

On 29 November 2011 15:44, Olav Vitters  wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 02:49:07PM +, Donald Stewart wrote:
>> That way if a requires from the Fedora package changes, it is easier
>> to chase the changes needed for Mageia's packages, nice idea, however,
>> this would need to be documented so people know what it is and why its
>> getting pulled in. However, it would be a simpler thing to keep
>> updated and maintained that how-to's for each proprietary blob.
>
> I prefer having browser->urpmi->"click yes" work over a wiki page. So
> I'd make it work for skype as long as nobody finds this idea too ugly.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Olav

Yes of course, it should be done so that there is as little, if not no
trace that it is being installed - I was more meaning for somebody who
is wondering why proprietary-compat-whatever.rpm needs updated.

And as it seems like it would be a Mageia only feature, have some docs
about it can't hurt.

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-29 Thread Olav Vitters

On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 02:49:07PM +, Donald Stewart wrote:
> That way if a requires from the Fedora package changes, it is easier
> to chase the changes needed for Mageia's packages, nice idea, however,
> this would need to be documented so people know what it is and why its
> getting pulled in. However, it would be a simpler thing to keep
> updated and maintained that how-to's for each proprietary blob.

I prefer having browser->urpmi->"click yes" work over a wiki page. So
I'd make it work for skype as long as nobody finds this idea too ugly.

-- 
Regards,
Olav

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-29 Thread Thomas Backlund


Thorsten van Lil skrev 29.11.2011 15:44:

Am 29.11.2011 14:17, schrieb Thomas Backlund:

Robert Fox skrev 29.11.2011 13:24:

On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 12:20 +0100, nicolas vigier wrote:

You are free to try to help teamviewer fix their package to make it work
on Mageia, you can already do it now, there's no need to have a voting
system to consider it.



Sorry Nicolas - I would if I knew how, but unfortunately I am not a
packager nor am I a developer with intimate knowledge of Mageia - I am
simply a power user who enjoys testing the latest (cauldron) and giving
feedback.



Ah... and there it is...

This is how most threads like this ends up...

Many users seems to forget this is a community driven distribution,
so if you want something no-one of the current maintainers care
about, you need to do the work, and stop expecting others to do
it for you (unless you pay them)...


I don't think that he is "expecting others to do it" for him.


Well, it wasn't directed only to Robert, hence the "Many users..."


As Robert Fox said:
"All I am asking is that Mageia recognise the need for the end
users to co-exist with their Mac / Winblows counterparts, and that
certain software is unavoidable.  Any efforts made to help get such
software to work properly with our distribution would be considered
positive."



We already do, as pointed out by Romain earlier in this thread.
But it does not mean we have to bend over backvards to do it since
we are first and foremost promoting open source.


So, if I understood him right, a how-to would be enough for him.
Three possible solutions came to my mind, to solve this issue:
1. We write a documentation for, which has to be translated in each
language.
2. We provide a get-teamviewer package (as for skype). I guess there
would be a script in it, that does the needed steps? However, a packager
would be needed for it, who build and maintain it.
3. We take care, that the provided Mandriva package on the Teamviewer
website works properly in Mageia. Due to my limited knowledge I can't
estimate the effort for that possible solution.



Well... "We" is still the above mentioned community, so someone still 
has to do the work...


And in Roberts case he also stated he knows how to look things up on the 
net and figure things out.. so the next logical step then would

be to document the findings, stick it on wiki, and voila...

a member of the community ("We") did the work, and the whole community
can benefit from it. and "We" didn't even need to be a packager.

and maintaining pages on the wiki is also valuable work for the 
community. so... many ways to help...


--
Thomas

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

On 29 November 2011 14:23, Olav Vitters  wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 11:43:30AM +, Donald Stewart wrote:
>> But, as said earlier, this isn't really something that we can do
>> sustainable so..
>
> Could do it on a best effort basis in a special meta package. I'd be
> annoyed to complicate existing spec files with compatibility cruft, but
> task-proprietary-compat-* subpackages seems fine to me.
>
> Might not work in all cases, in which case: too bad!
>
> Thinking of e.g.:
> Provides: $FEDORA_THING
> Requires: $OUR_THING
>
> --
> Regards,
> Olav

That way if a requires from the Fedora package changes, it is easier
to chase the changes needed for Mageia's packages, nice idea, however,
this would need to be documented so people know what it is and why its
getting pulled in. However, it would be a simpler thing to keep
updated and maintained that how-to's for each proprietary blob.

Schultz

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-29 Thread Olav Vitters

On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 11:43:30AM +, Donald Stewart wrote:
> But, as said earlier, this isn't really something that we can do
> sustainable so..

Could do it on a best effort basis in a special meta package. I'd be
annoyed to complicate existing spec files with compatibility cruft, but
task-proprietary-compat-* subpackages seems fine to me.

Might not work in all cases, in which case: too bad!

Thinking of e.g.:
Provides: $FEDORA_THING
Requires: $OUR_THING

-- 
Regards,
Olav

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-29 Thread Pierre-Malo Denielou

On 29/11/11 13:31, Robert Fox wrote:
>> Ah... and there it is...
>>
>> This is how most threads like this ends up...
>>
>> Many users seems to forget this is a community driven distribution,
>> so if you want something no-one of the current maintainers care
>> about, you need to do the work, and stop expecting others to do
>> it for you (unless you pay them)...
>>
>>
>> So here is a few general points for all users to think about:
>>
>> * "I am not a packager"
>>- so what stops you from becoming one?
>>- everyone have had to start somewhere.
>>- we have packagers that takes on apprentices,
>>  and you can always ask questions on mageia-dev@ ml
>>  and #mageia-dev on irc if you get stuck.
>>
> 
> How does one get a mentor?  I'd like to learn how to package.

That's a great idea!

https://wiki.mageia.org/en/Becoming_a_Mageia_Packager

Welcome!
-- 
Malo
http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~malo/

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

On Tue, 29 Nov 2011, Robert Fox wrote:

> 
> How does one get a mentor?  I'd like to learn how to package.

First you should start reading rpm documentation, tutorials, mageia
policies, etc ... Then try making a few packages, asking questions on
IRC or mailing lists if needed. And when you are ready to maintain 
packages for Mageia, ask to get a mentor to review your packages and
submit them for you until you have a full packager account.

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

On 29 November 2011 13:44, Thorsten van Lil  wrote:
> Am 29.11.2011 14:17, schrieb Thomas Backlund:
>
>> Robert Fox skrev 29.11.2011 13:24:
>>>
>>> On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 12:20 +0100, nicolas vigier wrote:

 You are free to try to help teamviewer fix their package to make it work
 on Mageia, you can already do it now, there's no need to have a voting
 system to consider it.

>>>
>>> Sorry Nicolas - I would if I knew how, but unfortunately I am not a
>>> packager nor am I a developer with intimate knowledge of Mageia - I am
>>> simply a power user who enjoys testing the latest (cauldron) and giving
>>> feedback.
>>>
>>
>> Ah... and there it is...
>>
>> This is how most threads like this ends up...
>>
>> Many users seems to forget this is a community driven distribution,
>> so if you want something no-one of the current maintainers care
>> about, you need to do the work, and stop expecting others to do
>> it for you (unless you pay them)...
>

This is a very good point, however, i feel that it should be said,
that while we, as in Mageia are very welcome to new packagers and make
the process as easy as possible, there still seems to be a large
number of posts asking about how to become one, rather than, "i want
to become one, can I have a mentor please"
>
> I don't think that he is "expecting others to do it" for him.
>
> As Robert Fox said:
> "All I am asking is that Mageia recognise the need for the end
> users to co-exist with their Mac / Winblows counterparts, and that
> certain software is unavoidable.  Any efforts made to help get such
> software to work properly with our distribution would be considered
> positive."
>
> So, if I understood him right, a how-to would be enough for him.
> Three possible solutions came to my mind, to solve this issue:
> 1. We write a documentation for, which has to be translated in each
> language.
> 2. We provide a get-teamviewer package (as for skype). I guess there would
> be a script in it, that does the needed steps? However, a packager would be
> needed for it, who build and maintain it.
> 3. We take care, that the provided Mandriva package on the Teamviewer
> website works properly in Mageia. Due to my limited knowledge I can't
> estimate the effort for that possible solution.
>
> Regards,
> Thorsten
>

I would say that number 1 here makes the most sense, provided that
there aren't changes every 3 months in the teamviewer dependencies,
which seems unlikely.

For number 3, I would say using the Fedora rpm would be better
practice, as more software like Teamviewer will have rpms for Fedora
than Mandriva.

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-29 Thread Thorsten van Lil


Am 29.11.2011 14:17, schrieb Thomas Backlund:

Robert Fox skrev 29.11.2011 13:24:

On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 12:20 +0100, nicolas vigier wrote:

You are free to try to help teamviewer fix their package to make it work
on Mageia, you can already do it now, there's no need to have a voting
system to consider it.



Sorry Nicolas - I would if I knew how, but unfortunately I am not a
packager nor am I a developer with intimate knowledge of Mageia - I am
simply a power user who enjoys testing the latest (cauldron) and giving
feedback.



Ah... and there it is...

This is how most threads like this ends up...

Many users seems to forget this is a community driven distribution,
so if you want something no-one of the current maintainers care
about, you need to do the work, and stop expecting others to do
it for you (unless you pay them)...


I don't think that he is "expecting others to do it" for him.
As Robert Fox said:
"All I am asking is that Mageia recognise the need for the end
users to co-exist with their Mac / Winblows counterparts, and that
certain software is unavoidable.  Any efforts made to help get such
software to work properly with our distribution would be considered
positive."

So, if I understood him right, a how-to would be enough for him.
Three possible solutions came to my mind, to solve this issue:
1. We write a documentation for, which has to be translated in each 
language.
2. We provide a get-teamviewer package (as for skype). I guess there 
would be a script in it, that does the needed steps? However, a packager 
would be needed for it, who build and maintain it.
3. We take care, that the provided Mandriva package on the Teamviewer 
website works properly in Mageia. Due to my limited knowledge I can't 
estimate the effort for that possible solution.


Regards,
Thorsten

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

> Ah... and there it is...
> 
> This is how most threads like this ends up...
> 
> Many users seems to forget this is a community driven distribution,
> so if you want something no-one of the current maintainers care
> about, you need to do the work, and stop expecting others to do
> it for you (unless you pay them)...
> 
> 
> So here is a few general points for all users to think about:
> 
> * "I am not a packager"
>- so what stops you from becoming one?
>- everyone have had to start somewhere.
>- we have packagers that takes on apprentices,
>  and you can always ask questions on mageia-dev@ ml
>  and #mageia-dev on irc if you get stuck.
> 

How does one get a mentor?  I'd like to learn how to package.

Thanks for your response.

R.Fox

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-29 Thread Thomas Backlund


Robert Fox skrev 29.11.2011 13:24:

On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 12:20 +0100, nicolas vigier wrote:

You are free to try to help teamviewer fix their package to make it work
on Mageia, you can already do it now, there's no need to have a voting
system to consider it.



Sorry Nicolas - I would if I knew how, but unfortunately I am not a
packager nor am I a developer with intimate knowledge of Mageia - I am
simply a power user who enjoys testing the latest (cauldron) and giving
feedback.



Ah... and there it is...

This is how most threads like this ends up...

Many users seems to forget this is a community driven distribution,
so if you want something no-one of the current maintainers care
about, you need to do the work, and stop expecting others to do
it for you (unless you pay them)...


So here is a few general points for all users to think about:

* "I am not a packager"
  - so what stops you from becoming one?
  - everyone have had to start somewhere.
  - we have packagers that takes on apprentices,
and you can always ask questions on mageia-dev@ ml
and #mageia-dev on irc if you get stuck.

* "I am not a developer"
  - for many packages you dont need to be a "developer" as
upstream is doing the development, so you only need to
be a packager and check if things are fixed upstream
and so on.

* "I dont have time..."
  - then how can you expect others to use their own time
to do it for you if they dont care about the thing you
want...


Point is... our "nobody" maintainer is already overworked
with over 2000 packages to take care of. So he/she does not
want more work.


And thinking about skype/teamviewer/...
If we want to help...

They dont need to be packaged. Just start a page on the
wiki listing apps, where to get them, how to install them,
and so on...
Note! This page needs to be _maintained_ then too :)
Otherwise people can just google it.

--
Thomas

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-29 Thread Michel Catudal


Le 29/11/2011 06:43, Donald Stewart a écrit :

An immidiate solution, albeit not really a sustainable one, is to add
the missing provides to our libxdamage package; however, doing this
opens the door to have package x providing n different version of libx
or binaryx so it could only really be used if we knew that there was a
chance that upstream, in this case teamviewer, are likely to fix there
requires to suit that Mageia ones so that we don't end up with package
x having hundreds of provides to support different requires from
closed source stuff

On a slightly off topic note: have the extra provides could help to
improve interoperability with say Fedora - ergo Red Hat, and seeing as
most commercial closed source binaries for GNU/Linux will be built
with Red Hat in mind, having provides that match Fedora's is probably
a good way to eliminate this problem.

But, as said earlier, this isn't really something that we can do
sustainable so..


There is really no easy solution. This kind of make us slaves of RedHat and 
some of the bullshit they push at times.
There is little choice in many cases. What could be done is some wrappers for some sort of Fedora compatibility if there is enough demand for a package that needs that. When there is a good alternative that does the same thing then I would be opposed to 
suking up too much to those folks. The goal here is to make our users happy without compromising our principles too much.


Here is an example I had to deal with to get an Atmel program that was designed 
for Fedora to install on Mandriva 2010.0

elfutil split in different packages. I created one file that satisfied the 
Atmel installer. The package actually only had one text file  telling you that 
it was a bogus package to satisty the Atmel program.
At one time a package had an X instead of an x in the name, aside from that it 
was the same thing (same version and all)

I had the whole Atmel code working nicely on Mandriva 2010.0. When my hard disk crashed I didn't bother reinstalling because of the sound issues I had with Mandriva. I switched to Scientific Linux, I recently installed Mageia and found that I like it 
better, French support is better for one thing.
The only problem I see is my Atmel debugger no longer works, I am working on that. I allready have created the binutils and compiler with the latest Atmel patches. Perhaps running Fedora 12 in VirtualBox might be a good intermediate solution for debugging. 
I could use windows XP I guess but I have enough of this at work. When I get home windows would be the last thing I would want to see.


Michel

--
For OS/2 and Linux Software visit
http://home.comcast.net/~mcatudal

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

An immidiate solution, albeit not really a sustainable one, is to add
the missing provides to our libxdamage package; however, doing this
opens the door to have package x providing n different version of libx
or binaryx so it could only really be used if we knew that there was a
chance that upstream, in this case teamviewer, are likely to fix there
requires to suit that Mageia ones so that we don't end up with package
x having hundreds of provides to support different requires from
closed source stuff

On a slightly off topic note: have the extra provides could help to
improve interoperability with say Fedora - ergo Red Hat, and seeing as
most commercial closed source binaries for GNU/Linux will be built
with Red Hat in mind, having provides that match Fedora's is probably
a good way to eliminate this problem.

But, as said earlier, this isn't really something that we can do
sustainable so..

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 12:20 +0100, nicolas vigier wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Nov 2011, Robert Fox wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 11:05 +0100, nicolas vigier wrote:
> > > On Tue, 29 Nov 2011, Robert Fox wrote:
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > If you watch what the "other" major distros are doing related to this
> > > > topic - it may give a hint.  I am NOT advocating that we have to be like
> > > > them, I believe we need to offer the ability and the choice.
> > > 
> > > Yes, it can give a hint :
> > > - fedora does not provide any teamviewer package
> > > - opensuse does not provide any teamviewer package
> > > - debian does not provide any teamviewer package
> > > - ubuntu does not provide any teamviewer package
> > > 
> > 
> > Agreed.
> > 
> > I just meant, if the package provided by the proprietary supplier does
> > not work - then we should help ensure it does or make our own that works
> > for those of us that needs such programs.  
> > 
> > Maybe we should have a voting system for our user base - like a wish
> > list, and if enough people ask for it - we could consider it?
> 
> You are free to try to help teamviewer fix their package to make it work
> on Mageia, you can already do it now, there's no need to have a voting
> system to consider it.
> 

Sorry Nicolas - I would if I knew how, but unfortunately I am not a
packager nor am I a developer with intimate knowledge of Mageia - I am
simply a power user who enjoys testing the latest (cauldron) and giving
feedback.

Thanks anyway.

R.Fox

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

On Tue, 29 Nov 2011, Robert Fox wrote:

> On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 11:05 +0100, nicolas vigier wrote:
> > On Tue, 29 Nov 2011, Robert Fox wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > If you watch what the "other" major distros are doing related to this
> > > topic - it may give a hint.  I am NOT advocating that we have to be like
> > > them, I believe we need to offer the ability and the choice.
> > 
> > Yes, it can give a hint :
> > - fedora does not provide any teamviewer package
> > - opensuse does not provide any teamviewer package
> > - debian does not provide any teamviewer package
> > - ubuntu does not provide any teamviewer package
> > 
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> I just meant, if the package provided by the proprietary supplier does
> not work - then we should help ensure it does or make our own that works
> for those of us that needs such programs.  
> 
> Maybe we should have a voting system for our user base - like a wish
> list, and if enough people ask for it - we could consider it?

You are free to try to help teamviewer fix their package to make it work
on Mageia, you can already do it now, there's no need to have a voting
system to consider it.

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-29 Thread Pascal Terjan

On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 11:08, Robert Fox  wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 11:05 +0100, nicolas vigier wrote:
>> On Tue, 29 Nov 2011, Robert Fox wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > If you watch what the "other" major distros are doing related to this
>> > topic - it may give a hint.  I am NOT advocating that we have to be like
>> > them, I believe we need to offer the ability and the choice.
>>
>> Yes, it can give a hint :
>> - fedora does not provide any teamviewer package
>> - opensuse does not provide any teamviewer package
>> - debian does not provide any teamviewer package
>> - ubuntu does not provide any teamviewer package
>>
>
> Agreed.
>
> I just meant, if the package provided by the proprietary supplier does
> not work - then we should help ensure it does or make our own that works
> for those of us that needs such programs.
>
> Maybe we should have a voting system for our user base - like a wish
> list, and if enough people ask for it - we could consider it?

I don't like such system.
If many people want something, it does not mean that this is a good
idea and that there is not a better way to do it.
People just vote for an idea that someone else wrote that would
workaround their current problem instead of reporting what is really
their problem so that we can fix it.
A place to discuss request is IMHO more useful than a place to vote for them.

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 11:05 +0100, nicolas vigier wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Nov 2011, Robert Fox wrote:
> 
> > 
> > If you watch what the "other" major distros are doing related to this
> > topic - it may give a hint.  I am NOT advocating that we have to be like
> > them, I believe we need to offer the ability and the choice.
> 
> Yes, it can give a hint :
> - fedora does not provide any teamviewer package
> - opensuse does not provide any teamviewer package
> - debian does not provide any teamviewer package
> - ubuntu does not provide any teamviewer package
> 

Agreed.

I just meant, if the package provided by the proprietary supplier does
not work - then we should help ensure it does or make our own that works
for those of us that needs such programs.  

Maybe we should have a voting system for our user base - like a wish
list, and if enough people ask for it - we could consider it?

Just a thought.

Cheers,
R.Fox

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

On Tue, 29 Nov 2011, Robert Fox wrote:

> 
> If you watch what the "other" major distros are doing related to this
> topic - it may give a hint.  I am NOT advocating that we have to be like
> them, I believe we need to offer the ability and the choice.

Yes, it can give a hint :
- fedora does not provide any teamviewer package
- opensuse does not provide any teamviewer package
- debian does not provide any teamviewer package
- ubuntu does not provide any teamviewer package

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 10:14 +0100, Oliver Burger wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 29. November 2011, 10:07:16 schrieb Robert Fox:
> > We are not proposing that such packages be included in the ISOs - just
> > available in a repository which we can trust and know that it works . .
> And that's the problem. As misc pointed out, we can't really trust 
> proprietary 
> stuff. No one has any control on the contents of those programms.
> And thus we cannot guarantee, that it works. If we add such a package now, it 
> might work now, but what happens, if we change any library or whatever?
> And since it's not OpenSource, we can't fix it, if it's broken.
> 
> And to be honest: What is so complicated about installing skype, teamviewer 
> or 
> whatever proprietary crap from the vendor's homepage?
> Oh sure, it might force you to read a bit about what you are doing :/
> 
> Oliver

I agree with you that Mageia can't guarantee that such proprietary
software will function - or that it may break with future library
changes.  I am also not asking Mageia to trust third party, proprietary
software.  All I am asking is that Mageia recognise the need for the end
users to co-exist with their Mac / Winblows counterparts, and that
certain software is unavoidable.  Any efforts made to help get such
software to work properly with our distribution would be considered
positive.  We shouldn't have to guarantee ANYTHING, just make a
concerted effort to get such software to play nice with our distro!

If you watch what the "other" major distros are doing related to this
topic - it may give a hint.  I am NOT advocating that we have to be like
them, I believe we need to offer the ability and the choice.

As far as forcing someone to "read a bit" - some apps are more difficult
than others to install - and the install methods are sometimes
dramatically different (from tarball or from RPM or SRPM, etc).  This is
not always for the faint at heart.  I personally have no problem in
trying to install it myself, and research over the internet whether
someone else has figured it out already - but one of the main reasons I
stuck with Mandriva (and now Mageia) is that I always had a high chance
of finding a working RPM or instructions how to get it to work under the
distro.

enough said . . . I will crawl back into my cave.

Thx,
R.Fox

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

On Mon, 28 Nov 2011, Michel Catudal wrote:

> Le 28/11/2011 08:40, Michael Scherer a écrit :
>> Le lundi 28 novembre 2011 à 12:09 +0100, Kamil Rytarowski a écrit :
>>> I wouldn't like to follow the OpenBSD way...
>> Why ?
>>
>> They managed to be a highly recognized system, seen as one of the best
>> in his category, and was able to be developed since 1994.
>>
>
> They also have a very small user base.
>
>>>   There is software like
>>> TrueCrypt, Skype, TeamViewer that many users need. And there is no harm
>>> to add it to repositories.
>> I would like to remind that our focus is doing free software. And it is
>> not "becoming a dumping ground for proprietary software".
>>
> It shouldn't be but making it impossible to install those would also be a 
> mistake.
> Skype for instance is often a requirement for many of us, not just  a wish.

We're not making it impossible to install proprietary software, and
nobody suggested doing that.

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-29 Thread Oliver Burger

Am Dienstag, 29. November 2011, 10:07:16 schrieb Robert Fox:
> We are not proposing that such packages be included in the ISOs - just
> available in a repository which we can trust and know that it works . .
And that's the problem. As misc pointed out, we can't really trust proprietary 
stuff. No one has any control on the contents of those programms.
And thus we cannot guarantee, that it works. If we add such a package now, it 
might work now, but what happens, if we change any library or whatever?
And since it's not OpenSource, we can't fix it, if it's broken.

And to be honest: What is so complicated about installing skype, teamviewer or 
whatever proprietary crap from the vendor's homepage?
Oh sure, it might force you to read a bit about what you are doing :/

Oliver

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

On Mon, 2011-11-28 at 21:10 +0100, Maarten Vanraes wrote:
> Op maandag 28 november 2011 14:40:34 schreef Michael Scherer:
> [...]
> > There is several pragmatic reasons for that and, there is also some long
> > term harm by shipping more and more proprietary software like :
> [...]
> > Personally, I aim for better stuff than fragile unsustainable hacks like
> > this. And we should not start to settle on lower standards, especially
> > if forced to us by non cooperative company or group. One could be
> > tolerable. Two, likely. More, that's starting to generalize, and that's
> > just sending the wrong signal to the whole community, and saying to
> > company "it is ok to treat us like parias". It is hard to be credible
> > when saying "we want to provides a solid system" and in the same time,
> > do the contrary.
> > 
> > I doubt we will be able to bring real long term credibility and a
> > reputation for quality if we go this way. People can just compare Ubuntu
> > reputation to Debian one, and see which one was able to survive without
> > spending million of dollars each year. And also which one serve as a
> > base for the other.
> 
> You touch some interesting points here, and I appreciate you here explaining 
> your personal opinion, I'm beginning to see more clearly your reasoning in 
> the 
> past, and my own reasoning. I believe i may have to review my own pov here...
> 
> +1

I also see some of the valid points, but bottom line - is that Mageia
should help create working packages for the bigger ticket items (like
Skype) - in a cooperative spirit.  

We are not proposing that such packages be included in the ISOs - just
available in a repository which we can trust and know that it works . . 

That's all we ask for . . 

Cheers,
R.Fox

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-28 Thread Balcaen John

Le lundi 28 novembre 2011 20:55:10 Michel Catudal a écrit :
[...]
> 
> This shows a flaw in urpmi though, why doesn't it do like yum and and ask
> you if you want to install the required packages?
How can urpmi install a package which simply does not exist in mageia or where 
the requires does not exist ?

Urpmi is working as expected here, since this package was probably build on a 
fedora/suse/whatelse which a specific build environnement which is != of what 
provides mageia.


-- 
Balcaen John
Jabber-id: mik...@jabber.littleboboy.net

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-28 Thread Michel Catudal

Le 28/11/2011 08:40, Michael Scherer a écrit :

Le lundi 28 novembre 2011 à 12:09 +0100, Kamil Rytarowski a écrit :

I wouldn't like to follow the OpenBSD way...

Why ?

They managed to be a highly recognized system, seen as one of the best
in his category, and was able to be developed since 1994.

They also have a very small user base.

There is software like
TrueCrypt, Skype, TeamViewer that many users need. And there is no harm
to add it to repositories.

I would like to remind that our focus is doing free software. And it is
not "becoming a dumping ground for proprietary software".

It shouldn't be but making it impossible to install those would also be a
mistake.
Skype for instance is often a requirement for many of us, not just a wish.

I can understand the frustration at proprietary vendors but sometimes you have
no choice.
For example for Nvidia the standard Linux driver sucks big time and the only
good driver at this time is the one from Nvidia.

Atmel uses to be very nice to Linux users until they realized that they no
longer needed Linux for the AVR32 since they moved to non OS AVR32.
I think that the biggest thing that prompted Atmel to stop supporting Linux was the constant changes in boost and glibc (to name two culprits). It seems that at each new release their avr32gdbproxy stopped working. That reminded many of the Microsoft war
against Lotus and Borland. (A good dos is one where Lotus doesn't work). Some people's goal is to keep all proprietary software from working.

After many attempts to get their software to work again Atmel seem to have
decided to abandon.
For some free software fanatics, they must do all they can to free Linux from any proprietary software. Atmel has no interest in helping Microchip or Freescale to beat them on the market place so they cannot release certain information. This in turn
forces us to go to windows if no Linux stuff is available.

Not to worry on the AVR32 front as I am working on an alternative for Linux. So
far I got all the binaries, next step is to handle hardware debugging.
At this time I have to run Scientific Linux to get their avr32gdbproxy to work.
It core dumps on Mageia. It also does on most new distribution as well.
Scientific Linux being a mix of Fedora 12 and 13 makes it possible for their
fedora 12 release to work.

Following their decision to only support windows most Linux users got the
shaft. It is one thing to hold some principles and an other one to have to
face reality.
We need to be reasonable and not fanatic.

Having said that I don't think that it is a good idea to have a "tainted" section, A
"non free" section is good enough.

There is several pragmatic reasons for that and, there is also some long
term harm by shipping more and more proprietary software like :
- we cannot support them ( no source code, most of the time, no proper
bug report tools, anything ), with the implied consequence of "we cannot
trust them".

- it also make the distinction between application we trust and buggy
stuff that we don't ( skype, flash ) harder to see. We can no longer say
to people "you can trust us, everything in our repository is checked and
supported", since this is not the case. So I personally no longer say to
people to trust us because of that.

- Most if not all proprietary softwares do not permit proper
cooperation, which mean that we cannot plan much around it. So we cannot
place them as proeminent features, unless we want to later risk not
fullfilling our promises ( and I will not talk about how it goes against
cooperation values ). This also place in a uncomfortable position since
we are just treated as 2nd class citizen.

Pissing people off is not necessarily a better alternative.
Flash, nvidia and skype are a must. Making impossible to use it would result in
people leaving Mageia.
It would be very stupid idea to for exemple no longer provide easy installation
of the nvidia driver.
Yes I tried the free Nvidia driver, it is a piece of crap so I am stuck with
the proprietary driver even though I would prefer not to.
Reality is often painfull but we have to live with it.

The proper course is to provide some proprietary driver when it is impossible
to have a good free alternative.

--
For OS/2 and Linux Software visit
http://home.comcast.net/~mcatudal

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-28 Thread Michel Catudal


Le 28/11/2011 05:39, Robert Fox a écrit :

I just wanted to understand why the package from the website states
32/64 bit but so much 32 bit stuff needs to be installed.  I am also not
cure that the 32 bit versions of the needed requires will conflict with
their 64 bit counterparts.  I prefer not to mix and match when possible.

They likely mean that it will work on either 32 or 64 bits systems. This in no way means that they have both 32 bits and 64 bits even though it is phrase in such a way that you might think that is the case. Some people would call this good marketing while 
other would qualify this as bullshit.


This shows a flaw in urpmi though, why doesn't it do like yum and and ask you 
if you want to install the required packages?

Michel Catudal

--
For OS/2 and Linux Software visit
http://home.comcast.net/~mcatudal

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-28 Thread Maarten Vanraes

Op maandag 28 november 2011 14:40:34 schreef Michael Scherer:
[...]
> There is several pragmatic reasons for that and, there is also some long
> term harm by shipping more and more proprietary software like :
[...]
> Personally, I aim for better stuff than fragile unsustainable hacks like
> this. And we should not start to settle on lower standards, especially
> if forced to us by non cooperative company or group. One could be
> tolerable. Two, likely. More, that's starting to generalize, and that's
> just sending the wrong signal to the whole community, and saying to
> company "it is ok to treat us like parias". It is hard to be credible
> when saying "we want to provides a solid system" and in the same time,
> do the contrary.
> 
> I doubt we will be able to bring real long term credibility and a
> reputation for quality if we go this way. People can just compare Ubuntu
> reputation to Debian one, and see which one was able to survive without
> spending million of dollars each year. And also which one serve as a
> base for the other.

You touch some interesting points here, and I appreciate you here explaining 
your personal opinion, I'm beginning to see more clearly your reasoning in the 
past, and my own reasoning. I believe i may have to review my own pov here...

+1

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-28 Thread Pierre Jarillon

Le lundi 28 novembre 2011 14:40:34, Michael Scherer a écrit :
> Personally, I aim for better stuff than fragile unsustainable hacks like
> this. And we should not start to settle on lower standards, especially
> if forced to us by non cooperative company or group. One could be
> tolerable. Two, likely. More, that's starting to generalize, and that's
> just sending the wrong signal to the whole community, and saying to
> company "it is ok to treat us like parias". It is hard to be credible
> when saying "we want to provides a solid system" and in the same time,
> do the contrary.

Teamviewer is allowed to offer a rpm  for Mageia on its own website.
If it does not work it is a problem for them, not for us.

-- 
Pierre Jarillon - http://pjarillon.free.fr/
Vice-président de l'ABUL : http://abul.org/
Microsoft est à l'informatique ce que McDonald est à la gastronomie.

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-28 Thread Romain d'Alverny

Bringing a small bit of controversy, not on the very topic, sorry, but
on a few remarks.

On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 15:25, Oliver Burger  wrote:
> Am Montag, 28. November 2011, 15:10:01 schrieb Florian Hubold:
> I don't agree. I do think our main goal should be to provide a good linux
> distro with as few proprietary packages as possible.

Guys, please reread our announcement
(http://mageia.org/en/about/2010-sept-announcement.html ); quoting a
small part of it: "keep a high-level of integration between the base
system, the desktop (KDE/GNOME) and applications; especially improve
third-parties (be it free or proprietary software) integration;".

That was a plan, and plans are made to change and adapt, but still.

> But I don't like us providing more and more nonfree applications.

If we are not to provide (that is package, host and distribute - and
that is perfectly fair) these, couldn't we at least ease that for
others (that would like to package their own apps, or host a specific,
separate repository of nonfree apps that would still appeal to a
significant fraction of users)? That would mean some more doc and
tools for 3rd party packagers. And would solve in the same time one of
the question that was opened on Council and not yet ported to -dev
(aka, very large nonfree packages, such as games -data).

Or do we let them in the cold?

> It really is not that difficult to install things like flash, skype, 
> teamviewer
> and so on.
> In my eyes it would be the far better solution to provide documentation on how
> to install them then provide a lot of those "get-foo" packages.

Right.

> Although "easy usability" is a good thing, people should remember they are
> working on the most complex machine they do have in their homes.

They wouldn't use it if they had this in mind. No one would. :-)

> While nobody expects to be able to use a modern video recorder without reading
> the manual first, everybody expects to be able to use a far more complex
> machine like a computer without reading anyting?

That's a fallacy. There's no excuse for making things more complicated
that they need to be.

It's not absurd that most people _expect_ that installing an
application on their system is as simple (and as safe) as a drag'n
drop or as typing an URL in their browser. Their focus is beyond that.

Romain

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-28 Thread Florian Hubold

Am 28.11.2011 15:44, schrieb Robert Fox:
> On Mon, 2011-11-28 at 15:25 +0100, Oliver Burger wrote:
>> Am Montag, 28. November 2011, 15:10:01 schrieb Florian Hubold:
>>> Am 28.11.2011 14:55, schrieb Guillaume Rousse:
 I'm more and more concerned about this whole attitude: "you guys should
 make my own life easier, because other already do it". That's just
 plain consumerism.
>>> Uhmm, converse argument would that you want to make your life
>>> (and also that of other distribution users) harder because you don't
>>> want to be that consumer-like? Doesn't sound that reasonable to me,
>>> and please remember, it's not always plain black vs. white decisions.
>>>
>>> I can live without a get-teamviewer package, but just because of the facts
>>> that i'm able to install/troubleshoot it without help, because i know
>>> the tools to do this (rpm/urpmi) and doing that for a long time.
>>>
>>> In the end the question should be: Do we want to make the distribution
>>> just for ourselves, just for the sake of having "our own" linux distro,
>>> or do we want also some other people to use it, who aren't IT
>>> specialists, programmers or rocket scientists?
>> I don't agree. I do think our main goal should be to provide a good linux 
>> distro with as few proprietary packages as possible.
>>
>> Ok, if it is about drivers, there's not a real choice, so I do advocate 
>> providing the nvidia/amd drivers for the graphics cards, the partly 
>> proprietary drivers for some network cards (especially wlan).
>> This is a question of usability of the distro.
>>
>> But I don't like us providing more and more nonfree applications.
>> It really is not that difficult to install things like flash, skype, 
>> teamviewer 
>> and so on.
>> In my eyes it would be the far better solution to provide documentation on 
>> how 
>> to install them then provide a lot of those "get-foo" packages.
>>
>> Although "easy usability" is a good thing, people should remember they are 
>> working on the most complex machine they do have in their homes.
>> While nobody expects to be able to use a modern video recorder without 
>> reading 
>> the manual first, everybody expects to be able to use a far more complex 
>> machine like a computer without reading anyting?
>>
>> I don't like to support that view, so why not tell people:
>> "We are an OpenSource project and our goal is to support OpenSource 
>> software. 
>> Now it is possible to install your precious applications, just look at this 
>> wiki page and you will be able to do it without a problem, but be aware, 
>> that 
>> is proprietary software and it would be better to find OpenSource 
>> alternatives."
>>
>> Oliver
> ++1
>
>
>
Oliver summarized it pretty good there, that's also my general opinion.
But on the other hand, i see all the support issues relating to these
programs, even when we have MAQeia in the forums (most asked questions)
for that there are still a ton of forum request about these, so
obviously we still have to improve on that.

Either by making it easier to install/use things, or by writing better
documentation which is also better and easier visible to the average user.

Sorry for my last post, which was not worded well enough to adress
the issue(s) we're discussing here.

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-28 Thread Michael Scherer

Le lundi 28 novembre 2011 à 15:10 +0100, Florian Hubold a écrit :
> Am 28.11.2011 14:55, schrieb Guillaume Rousse:
> > Le 28/11/2011 11:45, Robert Fox a écrit :
> >> There a few "key" proprietary softwares which make the Linux work a bit
> >> easier to integrate and play nice with the others . . . Like Skype,
> >> Picasa&  Teamviewer (to name a few).  Other distros get this (like Linux
> >> Mint!):
> >>
> >> http://www.liberiangeek.net/2010/04/how-to-install-teamviewer-on-linux-mint-and-connect-to-windows/
> >>
> > Why not switch to linux mint then, if you feel it better suited for your 
> > need ?
> >
> > I'm more and more concerned about this whole attitude: "you guys should make
> > my own life easier, because other already do it". That's just plain 
> > consumerism.
> >
> Uhmm, converse argument would that you want to make your life
> (and also that of other distribution users) harder because you don't
> want to be that consumer-like? Doesn't sound that reasonable to me,
> and please remember, it's not always plain black vs. white decisions.
> 
> I can live without a get-teamviewer package, but just because of the facts
> that i'm able to install/troubleshoot it without help, because i know
> the tools to do this (rpm/urpmi) and doing that for a long time.
> 
> In the end the question should be: Do we want to make the distribution
> just for ourselves, just for the sake of having "our own" linux distro,
> or do we want also some other people to use it, who aren't IT
> specialists, programmers or rocket scientists?

That's a false dichotomy. 
Have you seen the price of teamviewer ? 
If you didn't, just check :

http://www.teamviewer.com/en/licensing/index.aspx 

So if a company can give this amount of money to use teamviewer, I think
they can also spend a little to have a sysadmin able to install it.

For the others people ( ie those covered by "private use" ), that's a
tool for advanced users. Since teamviewer is likely used for remote
assistance, at least one of the participant is knowledgeable in IT.

And so the so-called "advanced users" should surely be able to download
a tarball and run the only executable in the tarball to start it.

That's not harder than doing the same on windows, and people are
perfectly able to do it.

-- 
Michael Scherer

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

On Mon, 2011-11-28 at 15:25 +0100, Oliver Burger wrote:
> Am Montag, 28. November 2011, 15:10:01 schrieb Florian Hubold:
> > Am 28.11.2011 14:55, schrieb Guillaume Rousse:
> > > I'm more and more concerned about this whole attitude: "you guys should
> > > make my own life easier, because other already do it". That's just
> > > plain consumerism.
> > Uhmm, converse argument would that you want to make your life
> > (and also that of other distribution users) harder because you don't
> > want to be that consumer-like? Doesn't sound that reasonable to me,
> > and please remember, it's not always plain black vs. white decisions.
> > 
> > I can live without a get-teamviewer package, but just because of the facts
> > that i'm able to install/troubleshoot it without help, because i know
> > the tools to do this (rpm/urpmi) and doing that for a long time.
> > 
> > In the end the question should be: Do we want to make the distribution
> > just for ourselves, just for the sake of having "our own" linux distro,
> > or do we want also some other people to use it, who aren't IT
> > specialists, programmers or rocket scientists?
> 
> I don't agree. I do think our main goal should be to provide a good linux 
> distro with as few proprietary packages as possible.
> 
> Ok, if it is about drivers, there's not a real choice, so I do advocate 
> providing the nvidia/amd drivers for the graphics cards, the partly 
> proprietary drivers for some network cards (especially wlan).
> This is a question of usability of the distro.
> 
> But I don't like us providing more and more nonfree applications.
> It really is not that difficult to install things like flash, skype, 
> teamviewer 
> and so on.
> In my eyes it would be the far better solution to provide documentation on 
> how 
> to install them then provide a lot of those "get-foo" packages.
> 
> Although "easy usability" is a good thing, people should remember they are 
> working on the most complex machine they do have in their homes.
> While nobody expects to be able to use a modern video recorder without 
> reading 
> the manual first, everybody expects to be able to use a far more complex 
> machine like a computer without reading anyting?
> 
> I don't like to support that view, so why not tell people:
> "We are an OpenSource project and our goal is to support OpenSource software. 
> Now it is possible to install your precious applications, just look at this 
> wiki page and you will be able to do it without a problem, but be aware, that 
> is proprietary software and it would be better to find OpenSource 
> alternatives."
> 
> Oliver

++1

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

On Mon, 2011-11-28 at 14:55 +0100, Guillaume Rousse wrote:
> Le 28/11/2011 11:45, Robert Fox a écrit :
> > There a few "key" proprietary softwares which make the Linux work a bit
> > easier to integrate and play nice with the others . . . Like Skype,
> > Picasa&  Teamviewer (to name a few).  Other distros get this (like Linux
> > Mint!):
> >
> > http://www.liberiangeek.net/2010/04/how-to-install-teamviewer-on-linux-mint-and-connect-to-windows/
> Why not switch to linux mint then, if you feel it better suited for your 
> need ?
> 
> I'm more and more concerned about this whole attitude: "you guys should 
> make my own life easier, because other already do it". That's just plain 
> consumerism.
> 

I have switched to Linux Mint already - testing it and all.  Yet my main
distro is Mageia/Cauldron (coming from Mandriva/Cooker since 1999)
You may have missed my point that some of us are required to play nicely
with the other OSs and support & communicate with others.  That's why
selected commercial softwares like Skype and Teamviewer are unavoidable.

I apologize if I offended your sensibilities and will continue to
support Mageia with upcoming releases.

Cheers,
R.Fox

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

Am Montag, 28. November 2011, 15:10:01 schrieb Florian Hubold:
> Am 28.11.2011 14:55, schrieb Guillaume Rousse:
> > I'm more and more concerned about this whole attitude: "you guys should
> > make my own life easier, because other already do it". That's just
> > plain consumerism.
> Uhmm, converse argument would that you want to make your life
> (and also that of other distribution users) harder because you don't
> want to be that consumer-like? Doesn't sound that reasonable to me,
> and please remember, it's not always plain black vs. white decisions.
> 
> I can live without a get-teamviewer package, but just because of the facts
> that i'm able to install/troubleshoot it without help, because i know
> the tools to do this (rpm/urpmi) and doing that for a long time.
> 
> In the end the question should be: Do we want to make the distribution
> just for ourselves, just for the sake of having "our own" linux distro,
> or do we want also some other people to use it, who aren't IT
> specialists, programmers or rocket scientists?

I don't agree. I do think our main goal should be to provide a good linux 
distro with as few proprietary packages as possible.

Ok, if it is about drivers, there's not a real choice, so I do advocate 
providing the nvidia/amd drivers for the graphics cards, the partly 
proprietary drivers for some network cards (especially wlan).
This is a question of usability of the distro.

But I don't like us providing more and more nonfree applications.
It really is not that difficult to install things like flash, skype, teamviewer 
and so on.
In my eyes it would be the far better solution to provide documentation on how 
to install them then provide a lot of those "get-foo" packages.

Although "easy usability" is a good thing, people should remember they are 
working on the most complex machine they do have in their homes.
While nobody expects to be able to use a modern video recorder without reading 
the manual first, everybody expects to be able to use a far more complex 
machine like a computer without reading anyting?

I don't like to support that view, so why not tell people:
"We are an OpenSource project and our goal is to support OpenSource software. 
Now it is possible to install your precious applications, just look at this 
wiki page and you will be able to do it without a problem, but be aware, that 
is proprietary software and it would be better to find OpenSource 
alternatives."

Oliver

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-28 Thread Florian Hubold

Am 28.11.2011 14:55, schrieb Guillaume Rousse:
> Le 28/11/2011 11:45, Robert Fox a écrit :
>> There a few "key" proprietary softwares which make the Linux work a bit
>> easier to integrate and play nice with the others . . . Like Skype,
>> Picasa&  Teamviewer (to name a few).  Other distros get this (like Linux
>> Mint!):
>>
>> http://www.liberiangeek.net/2010/04/how-to-install-teamviewer-on-linux-mint-and-connect-to-windows/
>>
> Why not switch to linux mint then, if you feel it better suited for your need 
> ?
>
> I'm more and more concerned about this whole attitude: "you guys should make
> my own life easier, because other already do it". That's just plain 
> consumerism.
>
Uhmm, converse argument would that you want to make your life
(and also that of other distribution users) harder because you don't
want to be that consumer-like? Doesn't sound that reasonable to me,
and please remember, it's not always plain black vs. white decisions.

I can live without a get-teamviewer package, but just because of the facts
that i'm able to install/troubleshoot it without help, because i know
the tools to do this (rpm/urpmi) and doing that for a long time.

In the end the question should be: Do we want to make the distribution
just for ourselves, just for the sake of having "our own" linux distro,
or do we want also some other people to use it, who aren't IT
specialists, programmers or rocket scientists?

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-28 Thread Guillaume Rousse


Le 28/11/2011 11:45, Robert Fox a écrit :

There a few "key" proprietary softwares which make the Linux work a bit
easier to integrate and play nice with the others . . . Like Skype,
Picasa&  Teamviewer (to name a few).  Other distros get this (like Linux
Mint!):

http://www.liberiangeek.net/2010/04/how-to-install-teamviewer-on-linux-mint-and-connect-to-windows/
Why not switch to linux mint then, if you feel it better suited for your 
need ?


I'm more and more concerned about this whole attitude: "you guys should 
make my own life easier, because other already do it". That's just plain 
consumerism.


--
BOFH excuse #361:

Communist revolutionaries taking over the server room and demanding all 
the computers in the building or they shoot the sysadmin. Poor misguided 
fools.

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-28 Thread Michael Scherer

Le lundi 28 novembre 2011 à 12:09 +0100, Kamil Rytarowski a écrit :
> On 28.11.2011 11:32, Guillaume Rousse wrote:
> > Le 28/11/2011 11:28, Kamil Rytarowski a écrit :
> >> There were a few requests for TeamViewer in my local Mageia site - I
> >> suggest to add it to our repositories (probably as tainted and as a
> >> downloading script).

That's non-free, not tainted. 

> > They are better ways to contribute to the distribution than helping 
> > 'poor little users' to install crappy proprietary software. Such as 
> > writing documentation about dependency management, for instance.
> >
> I wouldn't like to follow the OpenBSD way...

Why ?

They managed to be a highly recognized system, seen as one of the best
in his category, and was able to be developed since 1994. 

>  There is software like 
> TrueCrypt, Skype, TeamViewer that many users need. And there is no harm 
> to add it to repositories.

I would like to remind that our focus is doing free software. And it is
not "becoming a dumping ground for proprietary software". 

There is several pragmatic reasons for that and, there is also some long
term harm by shipping more and more proprietary software like : 
- we cannot support them ( no source code, most of the time, no proper
bug report tools, anything ), with the implied consequence of "we cannot
trust them".

- it also make the distinction between application we trust and buggy
stuff that we don't ( skype, flash ) harder to see. We can no longer say
to people "you can trust us, everything in our repository is checked and
supported", since this is not the case. So I personally no longer say to
people to trust us because of that.

- Most if not all proprietary softwares do not permit proper
cooperation, which mean that we cannot plan much around it. So we cannot
place them as proeminent features, unless we want to later risk not
fullfilling our promises ( and I will not talk about how it goes against
cooperation values ). This also place in a uncomfortable position since
we are just treated as 2nd class citizen.

- such software can have a impact on migration to new softwares, and may
requires us to keep old compatibility version, thus adding more QA and
more complexity ( again, I can think of skype, who took a long time to
support pulseaudio, thus forcing more hack to integrate, or the whole
32b/64bits system who was solely needed just for stuff like flash or
wine ). 

- some softwares like nvidia or flash are notoriously buggy, thus making
our distribution look bad when it crash, make people lose time on it
( http://vizzzion.org/?blogentry=819 ), and requires in depth changes to
accommodate them. 

That's just very pragmatic high level points, explaining why we should
avoid them. Please note that I do not even of ethics or anything, just
real life impacts ( impact that people tend to forget to replace them by
philosophical point since that's easier to dismiss as "non important",
but that's just wrong ).

On a more precise point of distributing when the developers do not want
us to do ( like flash, etc ), using a download script is just a ugly
hack as said in the past, since :

- it can break at each change of the website, thus requiring a quick
fix, and sometimes a not so easy one ( what if adobe start to really
protect flash download with a more convoluted approach, like some kind
of JS ? ). So that's fragile and demanding more work. 

- it can be made illegal ( or at least, not authorized by the license
that people never read ). Maybe it is already the case for some
software. Maybe that's not legit to have a contract in electronic form.
While the risk is IMHO rather low, things may changes. I am sure that
Gael Duval didn't think "I could have issues by creating a small
distribution called mandrake". He rightfully thought he would be
protected. Yet, I would rather be cautious to not be too adventurous,
especially for non cooperative software.
As a side note, that would be one reason for me to not propose myself as
president and/or treasurer of the association ( or if I do, . 

- it doesn't work without a working internet connexion. While
flash-plugin and skype are not useful without network access ( so that
point is silly ), some others tools can be, and this would bring more
frustration to people, and more risk of weird errors. I am pretty sure
that people will be puzzled if everything work from their own mirror,
except a few software.

Personally, I aim for better stuff than fragile unsustainable hacks like
this. And we should not start to settle on lower standards, especially
if forced to us by non cooperative company or group. One could be
tolerable. Two, likely. More, that's starting to generalize, and that's
just sending the wrong signal to the whole community, and saying to
company "it is ok to treat us like parias". It is hard to be credible
when saying "we want to provides a solid system" and in the same time,
do the contrary.

I doubt we will be able to bring real long term credibility an

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-28 Thread Michael Scherer

Le lundi 28 novembre 2011 à 12:31 +0100, Oliver Burger a écrit :

> Each and every one of those proprietary tools has to be looked at on its own.
> E.g. some years ago there was quite a discussion about TrueCrypt and its 
> license which led to the exclusion of truecrypt from almost all major 
> distros. 
> If that license issue isn't solved, I wouldn't change a jota of that decision.

Guess that could help : 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=743497

-- 
Michael Scherer

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-28 Thread Colin Guthrie

'Twas brillig, and Oliver Burger at 28/11/11 11:59 did gyre and gimble:
> Am Montag, 28. November 2011, 12:51:14 schrieb Kamil Rytarowski:
>> On 28.11.2011 12:31, Oliver Burger wrote:
>>> E.g. some years ago there was quite a discussion about TrueCrypt and its
>>> license which led to the exclusion of truecrypt from almost all major
>>> distros. If that license issue isn't solved, I wouldn't change a jota
>>> of that decision.
>> Thank you for information.
>> Have you got a reference to this discussion?
> 
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/distributions/2008-October/000273.html

Also:
http://lists.mandriva.com/cooker/2008-10/msg00344.php
(which stared as a forward to Cooker ML of the above mail).

Col

-- 

Colin Guthrie
colin(at)mageia.org
http://colin.guthr.ie/

Day Job:
  Tribalogic Limited http://www.tribalogic.net/
Open Source:
  Mageia Contributor http://www.mageia.org/
  PulseAudio Hacker http://www.pulseaudio.org/
  Trac Hacker http://trac.edgewall.org/

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

Am Montag, 28. November 2011, 12:51:14 schrieb Kamil Rytarowski:
> On 28.11.2011 12:31, Oliver Burger wrote:
> > E.g. some years ago there was quite a discussion about TrueCrypt and its
> > license which led to the exclusion of truecrypt from almost all major
> > distros. If that license issue isn't solved, I wouldn't change a jota
> > of that decision.
> Thank you for information.
> Have you got a reference to this discussion?

http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/distributions/2008-October/000273.html


Oliver

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-28 Thread Kamil Rytarowski


On 28.11.2011 12:31, Oliver Burger wrote:

E.g. some years ago there was quite a discussion about TrueCrypt and its
license which led to the exclusion of truecrypt from almost all major distros.
If that license issue isn't solved, I wouldn't change a jota of that decision.

Thank you for information.
Have you got a reference to this discussion?

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

Am Montag, 28. November 2011, 12:09:27 schrieb Kamil Rytarowski:
> On 28.11.2011 11:32, Guillaume Rousse wrote:
> > Le 28/11/2011 11:28, Kamil Rytarowski a écrit :
> >> There were a few requests for TeamViewer in my local Mageia site - I
> >> suggest to add it to our repositories (probably as tainted and as a
> >> downloading script).
> > 
> > They are better ways to contribute to the distribution than helping
> > 'poor little users' to install crappy proprietary software. Such as
> > writing documentation about dependency management, for instance.
> 
> I wouldn't like to follow the OpenBSD way... There is software like
> TrueCrypt, Skype, TeamViewer that many users need. And there is no harm
> to add it to repositories.

Let's not make a rule out of this.
Each and every one of those proprietary tools has to be looked at on its own.
E.g. some years ago there was quite a discussion about TrueCrypt and its 
license which led to the exclusion of truecrypt from almost all major distros. 
If that license issue isn't solved, I wouldn't change a jota of that decision.

Oliver

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-28 Thread Kamil Rytarowski


On 28.11.2011 11:32, Guillaume Rousse wrote:

Le 28/11/2011 11:28, Kamil Rytarowski a écrit :

There were a few requests for TeamViewer in my local Mageia site - I
suggest to add it to our repositories (probably as tainted and as a
downloading script).
They are better ways to contribute to the distribution than helping 
'poor little users' to install crappy proprietary software. Such as 
writing documentation about dependency management, for instance.


I wouldn't like to follow the OpenBSD way... There is software like 
TrueCrypt, Skype, TeamViewer that many users need. And there is no harm 
to add it to repositories.

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

On Mon, 2011-11-28 at 11:32 +0100, Guillaume Rousse wrote:
> Le 28/11/2011 11:28, Kamil Rytarowski a écrit :
> > There were a few requests for TeamViewer in my local Mageia site - I
> > suggest to add it to our repositories (probably as tainted and as a
> > downloading script).
> They are better ways to contribute to the distribution than helping 
> 'poor little users' to install crappy proprietary software. Such as 
> writing documentation about dependency management, for instance.
> 

Guillaume - it may be "crappy proprietary software" - but in order to
support various Mac/Winblows users - I need this. and would prefer to
stay under Linux using it!  I have used it in the past without issue.

There a few "key" proprietary softwares which make the Linux work a bit
easier to integrate and play nice with the others . . . Like Skype,
Picasa & Teamviewer (to name a few).  Other distros get this (like Linux
Mint!):

http://www.liberiangeek.net/2010/04/how-to-install-teamviewer-on-linux-mint-and-connect-to-windows/

Let's not be so elitist here . . .

Thx,
Robert

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-28 Thread Colin Guthrie

'Twas brillig, and Robert Fox at 28/11/11 10:39 did gyre and gimble:
> On Mon, 2011-11-28 at 12:27 +0200, Thomas Backlund wrote:
>> Robert Fox skrev 28.11.2011 12:22:
>>
>>> [root@foxbase Download]# urpmi --allow-nodeps teamviewer_linux\(1\).rpm
>>> warning: teamviewer_linux(1).rpm: Header V3 DSA/SHA1 Signature, key ID
>>> 72db573c: NOKEY
>>> The following package has bad signature:
>>> teamviewer_linux(1).rpm: Invalid signature (NOT OK (no key):
>>> teamviewer_linux(1).rpm: Header V3 DSA/SHA1 Signature, key ID 72db573c:
>>> NOKEY)
>>> Do you want to continue installation ? (y/N) y
>>> installing teamviewer_linux(1).rpm
>>> Installation failed:
>>> glibc(x86-32)>= 2.7 is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
>>> alsa-lib(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
>>> zlib(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
>>> libSM(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
>>> libXext(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
>>> libXtst(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
>>> libXdamage(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
>>> libXfixes(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
>>> libXrender(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
>>> freetype(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
>>
>> So just make sure you have all those installed, and then use --allow-force.
>>
>> Or use their tarball.
>>
>> --
>> Thomas
> 
> 
> Thanks Thomas -
> 
> I just wanted to understand why the package from the website states
> 32/64 bit but so much 32 bit stuff needs to be installed.  I am also not
> cure that the 32 bit versions of the needed requires will conflict with
> their 64 bit counterparts.  I prefer not to mix and match when possible.

I suspect they just mean it's a 32 bit package that has been tested and
known to work on 64 bit systems - their statement probably doesn't state
that there are separate 64 bit implementations of their utility.

And generally speaking our packaging policy is such that 32 and 64 bit
libraries happily coexist. We put a lot of time and effort into ensuring
this is the case both by design and by poking people who get it wrong!

Which reminds me to poke at the oxygen-gtk3 packager for exactly this
reason

Col



-- 

Colin Guthrie
colin(at)mageia.org
http://colin.guthr.ie/

Day Job:
  Tribalogic Limited http://www.tribalogic.net/
Open Source:
  Mageia Contributor http://www.mageia.org/
  PulseAudio Hacker http://www.pulseaudio.org/
  Trac Hacker http://trac.edgewall.org/

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

On Mon, 2011-11-28 at 12:27 +0200, Thomas Backlund wrote:
> Robert Fox skrev 28.11.2011 12:22:
> 
> > [root@foxbase Download]# urpmi --allow-nodeps teamviewer_linux\(1\).rpm
> > warning: teamviewer_linux(1).rpm: Header V3 DSA/SHA1 Signature, key ID
> > 72db573c: NOKEY
> > The following package has bad signature:
> > teamviewer_linux(1).rpm: Invalid signature (NOT OK (no key):
> > teamviewer_linux(1).rpm: Header V3 DSA/SHA1 Signature, key ID 72db573c:
> > NOKEY)
> > Do you want to continue installation ? (y/N) y
> > installing teamviewer_linux(1).rpm
> > Installation failed:
> > glibc(x86-32)>= 2.7 is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
> > alsa-lib(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
> > zlib(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
> > libSM(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
> > libXext(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
> > libXtst(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
> > libXdamage(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
> > libXfixes(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
> > libXrender(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
> > freetype(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
> 
> So just make sure you have all those installed, and then use --allow-force.
> 
> Or use their tarball.
> 
> --
> Thomas


Thanks Thomas -

I just wanted to understand why the package from the website states
32/64 bit but so much 32 bit stuff needs to be installed.  I am also not
cure that the 32 bit versions of the needed requires will conflict with
their 64 bit counterparts.  I prefer not to mix and match when possible.

Cheers,
R.Fox

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-28 Thread Colin Guthrie

'Twas brillig, and Guillaume Rousse at 28/11/11 10:32 did gyre and gimble:
> Le 28/11/2011 11:28, Kamil Rytarowski a écrit :
>> There were a few requests for TeamViewer in my local Mageia site - I
>> suggest to add it to our repositories (probably as tainted and as a
>> downloading script).
> They are better ways to contribute to the distribution than helping
> 'poor little users' to install crappy proprietary software. Such as
> writing documentation about dependency management, for instance.

That as it may be, but it doesn't make this kind of helper package any
less useful.

While you are at it, it would be nice if we could have a google talk
plugin package...

The upstream one does funny things with it's scripts relating to setting
up urpmi repositories etc.

I'm not necessarily against an upstream repository, but we should make
it easier than the hacky way they do it (modifying urpmi setup via a
cronjob as they cannot modify mid transaction... ug!

This is off-topic tho'.. maybe one for Pascal Terjan seeing as this is
kinda his field :D

Col


-- 

Colin Guthrie
colin(at)mageia.org
http://colin.guthr.ie/

Day Job:
  Tribalogic Limited http://www.tribalogic.net/
Open Source:
  Mageia Contributor http://www.mageia.org/
  PulseAudio Hacker http://www.pulseaudio.org/
  Trac Hacker http://trac.edgewall.org/

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-28 Thread Guillaume Rousse


Le 28/11/2011 11:28, Kamil Rytarowski a écrit :

There were a few requests for TeamViewer in my local Mageia site - I
suggest to add it to our repositories (probably as tainted and as a
downloading script).
They are better ways to contribute to the distribution than helping 
'poor little users' to install crappy proprietary software. Such as 
writing documentation about dependency management, for instance.


--
BOFH excuse #259:

Someone's tie is caught in the printer, and if anything else gets 
printed, he'll be in it too.

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

On Mon, 2011-11-28 at 11:28 +0100, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> On 28.11.2011 10:52, Robert Fox wrote:
> > Is there a way to get Teamviewer working under Cauldron x86_64??
> >
> > [root@foxbase Download]# urpmi teamviewer_linux.rpm
> > A requested package cannot be installed:
> > teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386 (due to unsatisfied libXdamage(x86-32))
> > Continue installation anyway? (Y/n)
> >
> >
> > Thx,
> > R.Fox
> >
> This is a duplicate of a message from 11.10.2011 09:51
> 
> There were a few requests for TeamViewer in my local Mageia site - I 
> suggest to add it to our repositories (probably as tainted and as a 
> downloading script).

I second that!  It would be great to have an "official" - but tainted
Mageia RPM package!

Cheers,
R.Fox

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-28 Thread Kamil Rytarowski


On 28.11.2011 10:52, Robert Fox wrote:

Is there a way to get Teamviewer working under Cauldron x86_64??

[root@foxbase Download]# urpmi teamviewer_linux.rpm
A requested package cannot be installed:
teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386 (due to unsatisfied libXdamage(x86-32))
Continue installation anyway? (Y/n)


Thx,
R.Fox


This is a duplicate of a message from 11.10.2011 09:51

There were a few requests for TeamViewer in my local Mageia site - I 
suggest to add it to our repositories (probably as tainted and as a 
downloading script).

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-28 Thread Thomas Backlund


Robert Fox skrev 28.11.2011 12:22:


[root@foxbase Download]# urpmi --allow-nodeps teamviewer_linux\(1\).rpm
warning: teamviewer_linux(1).rpm: Header V3 DSA/SHA1 Signature, key ID
72db573c: NOKEY
The following package has bad signature:
teamviewer_linux(1).rpm: Invalid signature (NOT OK (no key):
teamviewer_linux(1).rpm: Header V3 DSA/SHA1 Signature, key ID 72db573c:
NOKEY)
Do you want to continue installation ? (y/N) y
installing teamviewer_linux(1).rpm
Installation failed:
glibc(x86-32)>= 2.7 is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
alsa-lib(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
zlib(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
libSM(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
libXext(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
libXtst(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
libXdamage(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
libXfixes(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
libXrender(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
freetype(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386


So just make sure you have all those installed, and then use --allow-force.

Or use their tarball.

--
Thomas

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

On Mon, 2011-11-28 at 12:19 +0200, Thomas Backlund wrote:
> Robert Fox skrev 28.11.2011 12:17:
> > On Mon, 2011-11-28 at 11:03 +0100, Guillaume Rousse wrote:
> >> Le 28/11/2011 10:52, Robert Fox a écrit :
> >>> Is there a way to get Teamviewer working under Cauldron x86_64??
> >>>
> >>> [root@foxbase Download]# urpmi teamviewer_linux.rpm
> >>> A requested package cannot be installed:
> >>> teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386 (due to unsatisfied libXdamage(x86-32))
> >>> Continue installation anyway? (Y/n)
> >> As any other 32 bits application on a 64 bits system: install the 32
> >> bits version of the needed libraries.
> >>
> >
> > The 32bit version is already installed . .
> >
> > [root@foxbase Download]# rpm -qa | grep libxdamage
> > libxdamage1-1.1.3-2.mga2
> >
> > Any other hints?
> >
> 
> Install with --nodeps as our libxdamage1-1.1.3-2.mga2 probably does not 
> provide: libXdamage(x86-32)
> 
> --
> Thomas

I think you meant "--allow-nodeps" - I tried that and you can see the
result below:

[root@foxbase Download]# urpmi --nodeps teamviewer_linux\(1\).rpm 
Unknown option: nodeps
A requested package cannot be installed:
teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386 (due to unsatisfied libXdamage(x86-32))
Continue installation anyway? (Y/n) 

[root@foxbase Download]# urpmi --allow-nodeps teamviewer_linux\(1\).rpm 
warning: teamviewer_linux(1).rpm: Header V3 DSA/SHA1 Signature, key ID
72db573c: NOKEY
The following package has bad signature:
teamviewer_linux(1).rpm: Invalid signature (NOT OK (no key):
teamviewer_linux(1).rpm: Header V3 DSA/SHA1 Signature, key ID 72db573c:
NOKEY)
Do you want to continue installation ? (y/N) y
installing teamviewer_linux(1).rpm
Installation failed:
glibc(x86-32) >= 2.7 is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
alsa-lib(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
zlib(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
libSM(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
libXext(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
libXtst(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
libXdamage(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
libXfixes(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
libXrender(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
freetype(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
Try installation without checking dependencies? (y/N) 
Installation failed:glibc(x86-32) >= 2.7 is needed by
teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
alsa-lib(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
zlib(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
libSM(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
libXext(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
libXtst(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
libXdamage(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
libXfixes(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
libXrender(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386
freetype(x86-32) is needed by teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

Am Montag, 28. November 2011, 11:18:47 schrieb Robert Fox:
> On Mon, 2011-11-28 at 11:03 +0100, Guillaume Rousse wrote:
> > Le 28/11/2011 10:52, Robert Fox a écrit :
> > > Is there a way to get Teamviewer working under Cauldron x86_64??
> > > 
> > > [root@foxbase Download]# urpmi teamviewer_linux.rpm
> > > A requested package cannot be installed:
> > > teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386 (due to unsatisfied libXdamage(x86-32))
> > > Continue installation anyway? (Y/n)
> > 
> > As any other 32 bits application on a 64 bits system: install the 32
> > bits version of the needed libraries.
> 
> Funny enough, the package from the website says it is both 32/64 bit
> RPMs (for Redhat, Fedora & Mandriva!!)
> 
> http://www.teamviewer.com/en/download/index.aspx
> 
> Strange . .
Not really. That sounds to me like a f at teamviewer's packaging. The 
dependancy needs another name. So try installing it with
"urpmi --allow-nodeps".

Oliver

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-28 Thread Thomas Backlund


Robert Fox skrev 28.11.2011 12:17:

On Mon, 2011-11-28 at 11:03 +0100, Guillaume Rousse wrote:

Le 28/11/2011 10:52, Robert Fox a écrit :

Is there a way to get Teamviewer working under Cauldron x86_64??

[root@foxbase Download]# urpmi teamviewer_linux.rpm
A requested package cannot be installed:
teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386 (due to unsatisfied libXdamage(x86-32))
Continue installation anyway? (Y/n)

As any other 32 bits application on a 64 bits system: install the 32
bits version of the needed libraries.



The 32bit version is already installed . .

[root@foxbase Download]# rpm -qa | grep libxdamage
libxdamage1-1.1.3-2.mga2

Any other hints?



Install with --nodeps as our libxdamage1-1.1.3-2.mga2 probably does not 
provide: libXdamage(x86-32)


--
Thomas

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

On Mon, 2011-11-28 at 11:03 +0100, Guillaume Rousse wrote:
> Le 28/11/2011 10:52, Robert Fox a écrit :
> > Is there a way to get Teamviewer working under Cauldron x86_64??
> >
> > [root@foxbase Download]# urpmi teamviewer_linux.rpm
> > A requested package cannot be installed:
> > teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386 (due to unsatisfied libXdamage(x86-32))
> > Continue installation anyway? (Y/n)
> As any other 32 bits application on a 64 bits system: install the 32 
> bits version of the needed libraries.
> 


Funny enough, the package from the website says it is both 32/64 bit
RPMs (for Redhat, Fedora & Mandriva!!)

http://www.teamviewer.com/en/download/index.aspx

Strange . .

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

On Mon, 2011-11-28 at 11:03 +0100, Guillaume Rousse wrote:
> Le 28/11/2011 10:52, Robert Fox a écrit :
> > Is there a way to get Teamviewer working under Cauldron x86_64??
> >
> > [root@foxbase Download]# urpmi teamviewer_linux.rpm
> > A requested package cannot be installed:
> > teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386 (due to unsatisfied libXdamage(x86-32))
> > Continue installation anyway? (Y/n)
> As any other 32 bits application on a 64 bits system: install the 32 
> bits version of the needed libraries.
> 

The 32bit version is already installed . .

[root@foxbase Download]# rpm -qa | grep libxdamage
libxdamage1-1.1.3-2.mga2

Any other hints?

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

2011-11-28 Thread Guillaume Rousse


Le 28/11/2011 10:52, Robert Fox a écrit :

Is there a way to get Teamviewer working under Cauldron x86_64??

[root@foxbase Download]# urpmi teamviewer_linux.rpm
A requested package cannot be installed:
teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386 (due to unsatisfied libXdamage(x86-32))
Continue installation anyway? (Y/n)
As any other 32 bits application on a 64 bits system: install the 32 
bits version of the needed libraries.


--
Un chômeur en fin de droit pendu dans le Maine-et-Loire,
C'est un trader à New York qui reprend espoir.

Re: [Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .

Am Montag, 28. November 2011, 10:52:11 schrieb Robert Fox:
> Is there a way to get Teamviewer working under Cauldron x86_64??
> 
> [root@foxbase Download]# urpmi teamviewer_linux.rpm
> A requested package cannot be installed:
> teamviewer6-6.0.9258-1.i386 (due to unsatisfied libXdamage(x86-32))
> Continue installation anyway? (Y/n)
> 
> 
Installing the needed 32bit libs?

Oliver

[Mageia-dev] Teamviewer and X86_64 build . . .