Danny Tholen wrote:
On Monday 10 March 2003 21:33, George Mitchell wrote:
I have nothing against proprietary software in general or soundfonts in
particular. I only find it odd that cards that provide /dev/sequencer
support under free software should see that support discontinued when
the sou
On Monday 10 March 2003 21:33, George Mitchell wrote:
>
> I have nothing against proprietary software in general or soundfonts in
> particular. I only find it odd that cards that provide /dev/sequencer
> support under free software should see that support discontinued when
> the source is freely
Buchan Milne wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
George Mitchell wrote:
Buchan Milne wrote:
Ah, so this is a proprietary technology using non-free 'soundfonts'.
What happened to the old synthesizer OPL3 method used back in the 7.1
days?
Well, you are always free t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
George Mitchell wrote:
> Buchan Milne wrote:
>
> Ah, so this is a proprietary technology using non-free 'soundfonts'.
> What happened to the old synthesizer OPL3 method used back in the 7.1
> days?
Well, you are always free to develop free sound font
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
George Mitchell wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
> Thanks Danny! Which Sound Blaster card are you using if I may ask?
Don't know about Danny, but I have a SB Live! Value Digital
> And
> it would really be nice if these capabilities were outline
Buchan Milne wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 9 Mar 2003, George Mitchell wrote:
I would be delighted to see a few posts by people who actually have
/dev/sequencer (soundcard midi) working with such apps as Rosegarden and
kmid, revealin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 9 Mar 2003, George Mitchell wrote:
I would be delighted to see a few posts by people who actually have
/dev/sequencer (soundcard midi) working with such apps as Rosegarden and
kmid, revealing what sound card they are using and what there
/etc/modules.conf fi
Buchan Milne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I thought the idea was that if a bug gets voted to a confirmed
> > state than the developer would have a pretty good idea that the
> > bug is in fact valid.
>
> Sure, but you still want him to be able to reproduce it easily.
>
> >
> > I was also under
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Mar 2003, George Mitchell wrote:
>
>
>>I would be delighted to see a few posts by people who actually have
>>/dev/sequencer (soundcard midi) working with such apps as Rosegarden and
>>kmid, revealing what sound card
On Sun, 9 Mar 2003, George Mitchell wrote:
> I would be delighted to see a few posts by people who actually have
> /dev/sequencer (soundcard midi) working with such apps as Rosegarden and
> kmid, revealing what sound card they are using and what there
> /etc/modules.conf file looks like. So fa
Buchan Milne wrote:
On Sun, 9 Mar 2003, George Mitchell wrote:
The same is true of /dev/sequencer support under a number of
cards that used to work with OPEN SOURCE drivers but no longer do.
Sorry, but I do not believe posts like this until I see the bug numbers,
please post them.Or at
On Sun, 2003-03-09 at 15:25, Robert L Martin wrote:
> These folks just want it to work after M$ decides that M$ doesn't
> Kernel , X, Multimedia and basic office/network should be "Stop Presses" level bugs
> by default. If Joe Luser can boot the system with X, play cds/mp3s, type notes, surf
> an
On Sun, 9 Mar 2003, George Mitchell wrote:
> And the real irony here of course is that ATI chipsets are NOT closed
> source.
Some are, some are not.
> My ATI Radeon in fact works splendidly with OPEN SOURCE
> XFree/DRI software under Red Hat 8.0. But what kind of answer do you
> get when yo
On Sat 08 Mar 2003 05:26, Giuseppe Ghibò posted as excerpted below:
> Consider also that NVidia drivers contains modules built with obsolete
> compilers like egcs 1.1.2 (see for instance libGLcore.so.1.0.4191)
> that any distribution no longer uses since two years...
I'm not yet into development e
Robert L Martin wrote:
Problems with ATI and nVidea products. Only the two most
popular video cards on the market.
.. And the two that prefer to make proprietary drivers rather than, if
they want the speed and quality, making their work fully open..
--
Problems with ATI and nVidea products. Only the two most
popular video cards on the market.
.. And the two that prefer to make proprietary drivers rather than, if they
want the speed and quality, making their work fully open..
---
On Friday 07 March 2003 03:40 pm, James Sparenberg wrote:
> Do you honestly think one of the largest
> firms in the industry (who is now using our product) would like it if we
> told them "We'll fix your bug when we get enough votes."
Yes. They'd institute a twice-daily bug-voting-for rota among t
Danny Tholen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> But, what I would have liked more is that you provided an alternative
> solution. Because you do not dispute that a (small) problem exists. And there
> is some truth in your critic, however, without alternative solution, why not
> try it. Than again, p
Duncan wrote:
On Fri 07 Mar 2003 21:18, George Mitchell posted as excerpted below:
Non productive work? How about 3D accelleration that doesn't work on
Radeon cards? Is that one of the things you consider trivial and not
which Radeon cards? There are 27 kinds of Radeon cards, starting
from R100
Le Thu, 06 Mar 2003 21:09:31 -0800, Curtis Hildebrand a écrit :
> On Thu, 2003-03-06 at 08:52, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
>> N Smethurst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > Le Jeudi 6 Mars 2003 16:47, Guillaume Cottenceau a écrit :
>> > > Well that depends. Most non-kernel and non-install bugs a
On Fri 07 Mar 2003 21:18, George Mitchell posted as excerpted below:
> Non productive work? How about 3D accelleration that doesn't work on
> Radeon cards? Is that one of the things you consider trivial and not
> worth correcting? I have a Radeon VE that works flawlessly on install
> with Red Ha
On Thu, 2003-03-06 at 08:52, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> N Smethurst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Le Jeudi 6 Mars 2003 16:47, Guillaume Cottenceau a écrit :
> > > Well that depends. Most non-kernel and non-install bugs are
> > > looked at even in unconfirmed state - most of them are real an
Sascha Noyes wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Friday 07 March 2003 11:09, Warly wrote:
George Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
And this exactly illustrates the problem with the current development
model. Come hell or high water the product WILL ship, even if it
Levi Ramsey wrote:
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Andi Payn wrote:
A compromise might be to do a QA'd sub-release of Cooker every two months,
rather than every six months. A single team can work on a project with
release dates this short, spending a couple of weeks in freeze every two
months. I think
Warly wrote:
George Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
And this exactly illustrates the problem with the current development
model. Come hell or high water the product WILL ship, even if it
turns out to be the buggiest ever. Mandrake and other distributors
are entering a period where they
On Friday 07 March 2003 12:37, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> Danny Tholen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Maybe more overworked than I am? People may also have different
> views on how cooperation must happen with external contributors..
> Or maybe they use ineffective mail client programs? :)
yes of
On Friday 07 March 2003 20:32, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Sorry, but this characterisation is wrong. There's some trivial bugs
> currently; there's also some that ought to delay the distribution on
> their own. See the bug which means anyone who has a PPP connection and
> tries to activate Mandrake's
On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 02:25, Andi Payn wrote:
> On Thursday 06 March 2003 06:17, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > If the problem is contractual obligations, perhaps the 9.0 experience
> > ought to indicate that such contracts should not be made.
>
> How do you propose that Mandrake release their softwar
On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 16:09, Warly wrote:
> I do not agree.
>
> There is no point spending 4 months in stabilizing a already deprecated
> distribution.
>
> Strict release date are good because it is worthless to correct all
> the very single bug that will be ignore by 95 percent of the customers
On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 16:54, Sascha Noyes wrote:
> I agree with Warly here. People do not seem to notice that Mandrake has a
> certain development philosophy:
>
> 1. Release every 6 months
> 2. Include the latest stable versions of popular software, irrespective
> whether it might be unpolishe
On Thursday 06 March 2003 23:40, James Sparenberg wrote:
> Do you honestly think one of the largest
> firms in the industry (who is now using our product) would like it if we
> told them "We'll fix your bug when we get enough votes.". *sigh*
Well, when you're doing corporate development, you u
>
> I do not agree.
>
> There is no point spending 4 months in stabilizing a already deprecated
> distribution.
There is something quite different to be said about including entirely new,
distro-written software of alpha quality at best at the RC stage 2 weeks
before release, however.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
James Sparenberg wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 05:33, Buchan Milne wrote:
>
> Problem here is you can't vote. I used up my vote a while back and
> although I could confirm a number of bugs... I can't ...no vote left.
Give your bug id's, and what the
On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 08:15, Frederic Crozat wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Mar 2003 10:03:48 -0600, Bret Baptist wrote:
>
> > On Friday 07 March 2003 9:51 am, Warly wrote:
> >> Bret Baptist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> > It is a bit hard to confirm bugs if you only have 1 vote per component.
> >> > I h
On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 08:39, Frederic Crozat wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Mar 2003 10:30:55 -0600, Bret Baptist wrote:
>
> > On Friday 07 March 2003 10:15 am, Frederic Crozat wrote:
> >> I think the BIG problem with UNCONFIRMED bug is their test case scenario :
> >>
> >> If you check all the bugs I replied
On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 08:15, Frederic Crozat wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Mar 2003 10:03:48 -0600, Bret Baptist wrote:
>
> > On Friday 07 March 2003 9:51 am, Warly wrote:
> >> Bret Baptist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> > It is a bit hard to confirm bugs if you only have 1 vote per component.
> >> > I h
On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 05:33, Buchan Milne wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> James Sparenberg wrote:
> > On Thu, 2003-03-06 at 07:17, Buchan Milne wrote:
> >
> >>-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> >>Hash: SHA1
> >>
> >>Lissimore wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Yes more bugs are
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Greg Meyer wrote:
> You have just described exactly why I chose Mandrake. I am willing to
put up
> with some "issues" to have the latest and greatest.
>
Of course, the idea is to try and reduce that number of issues ...
anyway, seems like Fred just
On Friday 07 March 2003 11:54 am, Sascha Noyes wrote:
>
> I agree with Warly here. People do not seem to notice that Mandrake has a
> certain development philosophy:
>
> 1. Release every 6 months
> 2. Include the latest stable versions of popular software, irrespective
> whether it might be unpoli
Sascha Noyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Friday 07 March 2003 10:54, Warly wrote:
>> Bret Baptist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > It is a bit hard to confirm bugs if you only have 1 vote per component.
>> > I have tried to vote for a ton of bugs but can not because of the one
>> > vote limi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Bret Baptist wrote:
> On Friday 07 March 2003 11:20 am, Buchan Milne wrote:
>
> I thought the idea was that if a bug gets voted to a confirmed state
than the
> developer would have a pretty good idea that the bug is in fact valid.
Sure, but you still
On Friday 07 March 2003 11:28 am, Buchan Milne wrote:
> IOW, instead of everyone discussing how the development model should be
> changed (long term, not going to have any effect on 9.1), rather spend
> your time triaging bugs. If you do not have edit_bug status, at least go
> and try and get a wor
On Friday 07 March 2003 11:20 am, Buchan Milne wrote:
> Bret Baptist wrote:
>> The moving from UNCONFIRMED to NEW is what I would like to do. One of the
>> issues I have is that I test a component for bugs (say kdebase). I can
>> only vote for one bug out of that component. So that means that
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Frederic Crozat wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Mar 2003 10:30:55 -0600, Bret Baptist wrote:
>>>This is really an area where YOU (cooker community) can help.. If I can't
>>>reproduce crash/bugs, I can't fix them..
>>
>>So what you are saying is voting for bugs is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Bret Baptist wrote:
> On Friday 07 March 2003 10:39 am, Frederic Crozat wrote:
>
>>>So what you are saying is voting for bugs is not as important as
>>>commenting on a bug that someone files and making the test case more
>>>clear? I would like to be a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Friday 07 March 2003 11:09, Warly wrote:
> George Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > And this exactly illustrates the problem with the current development
> > model. Come hell or high water the product WILL ship, even if it
> > turns out to b
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Friday 07 March 2003 10:54, Warly wrote:
> Bret Baptist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > It is a bit hard to confirm bugs if you only have 1 vote per component.
> > I have tried to vote for a ton of bugs but can not because of the one
> > vote limit
On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> Well, the initiative shows your support for Mandrake. But I think
> it would be uneffective. First, here at Mandrake we are paid for
> what we're doing, so it enforces a behaviour and assume some
> tasks that are sometimes not immediately pleasant
On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, Paul Dorman wrote:
> >On the one hand, an open source project can just use an existing protocol
> >(say, gnutella) rather than building something new from scratch, and doesn't
> >need to worry about billing, etc. And just distributing SHA URI's on official
> >mirrors would b
On Friday 07 March 2003 10:39 am, Frederic Crozat wrote:
> > So what you are saying is voting for bugs is not as important as
> > commenting on a bug that someone files and making the test case more
> > clear? I would like to be able to do both. :-)
>
> I can only speak for myself but since there
On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, Paul Dorman wrote:
> That's interesting. There seem to be a bunch of projects applying p2p in
> interesting and imaginative ways, so perhaps any problems wouldn't last
> for long... The Linux community is getting bigger all the time; there
> has to be some threshold past wh
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Bret Baptist wrote:
> On Friday 07 March 2003 10:15 am, Frederic Crozat wrote:
>
>>I think the BIG problem with UNCONFIRMED bug is their test case scenario :
>>
>>If you check all the bugs I replied to this week, more than 500f reply
>>are : give me re
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Andi Payn wrote:
> A compromise might be to do a QA'd sub-release of Cooker every two months,
> rather than every six months. A single team can work on a project with
> release dates this short, spending a couple of weeks in freeze every two
> months. I think most Cooker use
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Timothy R. Butler wrote:
> What about using the three tier approach of Debian? New stuff goes in
> unstable, after a few weeks of qa, it goes into "stable Cooker" (that is,
> testing), and then the releases are "stable." As it stands, Cooker at any
> particular moment can
On Friday 07 March 2003 10:15 am, Frederic Crozat wrote:
> I think the BIG problem with UNCONFIRMED bug is their test case scenario :
>
> If you check all the bugs I replied to this week, more than 500f reply
> are : give me reproducible facts, give me testcase, etc... And when I
> think bug are fi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> George Staikos has addressed that on the KDE3.1.1 branch.
> See:
> http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-cvs&m=104701980622556&w=2
> http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-cvs&m=104701957322386&w=2
> http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-cvs&m=104702055522978&w=2
> http://lists.kd
On Friday 07 March 2003 9:51 am, Warly wrote:
> Bret Baptist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > It is a bit hard to confirm bugs if you only have 1 vote per component.
> > I have tried to vote for a ton of bugs but can not because of the one
> > vote limit.
>
> I first though that having only one per
George Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> And this exactly illustrates the problem with the current development
> model. Come hell or high water the product WILL ship, even if it
> turns out to be the buggiest ever. Mandrake and other distributors
> are entering a period where they are merel
Bret Baptist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It is a bit hard to confirm bugs if you only have 1 vote per component. I
> have tried to vote for a ton of bugs but can not because of the one vote
> limit.
I reduce it to 1.
--
Warly
Bret Baptist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It is a bit hard to confirm bugs if you only have 1 vote per component. I
> have tried to vote for a ton of bugs but can not because of the one vote
> limit.
I first though that having only one person to confirm a bug will not be enough,
so I set the
> Yes, that's true. But is more a problem for Mandrake as a vendor, then
> e.g. for KDE. If something doesn't work on Mandrake's KDE but works
> elsewhere (even because the packager made a hack to get it to work), it
> will make Mandrake look bad, not KDE, at least not that much.
Don't underestim
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
James Sparenberg wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-03-06 at 07:17, Buchan Milne wrote:
>
>>-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>>Hash: SHA1
>>
>>Lissimore wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Yes more bugs are being reported. But also keep in mind the bugs
>>
>>that were
>>
>>>report
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Friday 07 March 2003 02:56, Maks Orlovich wrote:
> What you're also forgetting is that Mandrake is not the only group that's
> affected. Changes Mandrake makes to KDE, Gnome, Mozilla, etc., reflect on
> people's opinion of the respective software; a
Danny Tholen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> However, there is one thing that I sometimes see and which annoys me a bit.
> Some mandrakesoft people have a habit of not, or only rarely reply on emails,
> even when there are patches for the problem in it. Some people (like
Maybe more overworked th
Andi Payn wrote:
On Thursday 06 March 2003 22:00, Paul Dorman wrote:
Or what about some kind of p2p solution? Where -light machines are
networked to and updated from other -light machines across the net?
Checksumming and other tools could be used to address security concerns.
You k
On Thursday 06 March 2003 22:00, Paul Dorman wrote:
> Or what about some kind of p2p solution? Where -light machines are
> networked to and updated from other -light machines across the net?
> Checksumming and other tools could be used to address security concerns.
You know, I almost took
On Thu, 2003-03-06 at 07:17, Buchan Milne wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Lissimore wrote:
>
> > Yes more bugs are being reported. But also keep in mind the bugs
> that were
> > reported, and nothing done about them. So they get reported
> > again...and...again...an
Andi Payn wrote:
And no development project can stay in "release mode" all the time, without
separate branches for blue-sky/experimental/unstable work. So really, you'd
need to split Mandrake development into three branches instead of two: 9.1
upgrades, a mostly-stable "pre-9.2" Cooker, and a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> But I still think that the current Cooker system is actually useful. I have
> a Cooker-based workstation that's stable enough to rely on for all of my
> daily work. I have a server that I wouldn't put even a "stable Cooker"
> release on. I don't rea
On Thursday 06 March 2003 19:16, Timothy R. Butler wrote:
> What about using the three tier approach of Debian? New stuff goes in
> unstable, after a few weeks of qa, it goes into "stable Cooker" (that is,
> testing), and then the releases are "stable." As it stands, Cooker at any
> particular mo
On Thursday 06 March 2003 19:08, George Mitchell wrote:
> Andi, there is a solution to this problem. That is to maintain a stable
> version of cooker. Do the actual work of upgrading and fixing various
> components offline, and merge them into the stable cooker tree only when
> they have been tho
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> Andi, there is a solution to this problem. That is to maintain a stable
> version of cooker. Do the actual work of upgrading and fixing various
What about using the three tier approach of Debian? New stuff goes in
unstable, after a few weeks o
Andi Payn wrote:
On Thursday 06 March 2003 06:17, Adam Williamson wrote:
If the problem is contractual obligations, perhaps the 9.0 experience
ought to indicate that such contracts should not be made.
How do you propose that Mandrake release their software, then? If they wait
until there
On Thursday 06 March 2003 06:17, Adam Williamson wrote:
> If the problem is contractual obligations, perhaps the 9.0 experience
> ought to indicate that such contracts should not be made.
How do you propose that Mandrake release their software, then? If they wait
until there is a stable release b
Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
There are two kinds of bugs: hardware and software. People who
can't install mostly experience hardware problems, and for this
kind of problems we have little influence for fixing..
So when, for example, I have problems on install with my Radeon 7500 (as
in 9.0), is th
On Thursday 06 March 2003 08:33, Austin wrote:
> On 2003.03.06 10:43 Buchan Milne wrote:
> > IIRC there were beta ISOs more than two weeks ago ...
>
> True. But my point was that I'm sure some people download a beta,
> report a bug, and then wait for the next beta to see if it's fixed.
> They coul
Jan Ciger wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I am pretty much green here, but I have to agree - let's push the release
> date few days. There are bugs, which are pretty bad/annoying and will earn
> pretty bad image to Mandrake.
What you're also forgetting is that Mandra
> Not confirmed, and 12MB of junk is a lot of wasted space, we can fit a
> lot of really important things in that space.
I take Mandrake 9.1 wouldn't be shipping xscreensaver and gnome-themes as
well?
On Thursday 06 March 2003 04:47, Thomas Backlund wrote:
> Now there is no way for MDK to address this problem, as it
> should be adressed by nVidia, since they keeps the specs/driver
> source "well guarded"... ;-)
>
> We'll have to try to make the best of what we have,
> and hopefully nVidia will r
On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 10:14:54PM +0100, Danny Tholen wrote:
> I perfectly understand that reading/answering a 1000 mails a day is not
> something you generally like doing. Certainly not when you are already
> stressed with trying to fix your packages bugs. Not everybody can handle
> that. That
On 2003.03.06 16:14 Danny Tholen wrote:
However, there is one thing that I sometimes see and which annoys me a
bit.
Some mandrakesoft people have a habit of not, or only rarely reply on
emails,
even when there are patches for the problem in it. Some people (like
yourself) are very cooperative. This
On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 09:28:55PM +0200, Buchan Milne wrote:
> Jan Ciger wrote:
> > Similar thing was asked already - how ? It is not written anywhere and an
> > "outsider" has no way to know it. I support the idea of the HOWTO
> > mentioned in other threads, that could help a lot.
>
> It was som
On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 11:08:54AM -0500, Levi Ramsey wrote:
> The various editions would be nothing more than subsets of the whole
> shebang, so to speak. Hell, most mirrors would carry, between main and
> contribs, everything. The separate editions would only be different CD
> images and differ
On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 10:43:03PM +0200, Buchan Milne wrote:
> Timothy R. Butler wrote:
> > How is it determined when people receive "edit_bug"? It sounds like
> > a lot of regulars here don't have it...
>
> That is another of the mysteries of Mandrake development ;-).
>
> You are supposed to
On Wed, Mar 05, 2003 at 09:24:33PM -0600, Timothy R. Butler wrote:
> If Microsoft's late *betas* had this many problems, they'd get bad
> press all over the place.
You've obviously never participated in a Microsoft beta.
a) They do have lots of problems. Lots of hardware = Lots of hard to
track
On Friday 07 March 2003 12:03 am, N Smethurst wrote:
> Le Jeudi 6 Mars 2003 16:22, Austin a écrit :
>> It's because 90% of the bug reporters ONLY install linux from ISO's.
>> We should teach them about urpmi and/or network installs.
> A HOWTO-be-mandrake-bug-tester-without-annoying-everyone would
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Danny Tholen wrote on Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 10:14:54PM +0100 :
> it is perfectly understandable that the maintainer did not fix the
> issues (either because he did not read his mail, or that he planned to
> fix it with an update later in the process). H
On Thursday 06 March 2003 01:33 pm, Luca Olivetti wrote:
> Miark wrote:
> > On Thu, 06 Mar 2003 14:57:25 +0100
> >
> > Luca Olivetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>I'm not a gamer, but I specifically bought a nvidia card because I read
> >>it was well supported under Linux.
> >>
> >>Now I don't rea
On Thursday 06 March 2003 10:31 am, Todd Lyons wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Brook Humphrey wrote on Wed, Mar 05, 2003 at 07:51:28PM -0800 :
> > To be honest I just had this problem with my last install also. In my
> > case I forgot the sblive was even in the box. I d
On Thursday 06 March 2003 14:45, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
>
> Let it clear: we all want the most bug-free release possible.
Generally, I agree with all your points. What you say is as far as I can just
mostly right. And people on this list will probably always complains about
certain desission
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thursday 06 March 2003 02:17 pm, Greg Meyer wrote:
> But that is not how release candidate is defined here. rc stage is when
> cooker is frozen from feature add, not when there is a setup MandrakeSoft
> thinks could go out. Clarifying what these t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jason Greenwood wrote on Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 10:21:50AM +1300 :
>Yup, that is basically what I am doing now except that I usually just
>freshen (rpm -Fvh *.rpm) instead of URPMI Auto Select. I will try your
>method and see how it wor
Miark wrote:
On Thu, 06 Mar 2003 14:57:25 +0100
Luca Olivetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm not a gamer, but I specifically bought a nvidia card because I read
it was well supported under Linux.
Now I don't really think so, won't get burnt by nvidia again.
nVidia _is_ well supported. Have you
Yup, that is basically what I am doing now except that I usually just freshen
(rpm -Fvh *.rpm) instead of URPMI Auto Select. I will try your method and
see how it works. I wish I could figure out how to use rsync via an ftp client,
then I wouldn't be downloading all the packages, just the chang
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jason Greenwood wrote on Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 09:47:23AM +1300 :
>PS, I DON'T use urpmi/software manager on my cooker box at home cause
>I'm on dialup and URPMI doesn't resume if the connection is broken on
>remote sources AFAIK. As such
Buchan Milne wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Paul Dorman wrote:
[Rant on]
Whilst I am confident that the Mandrake developers can get this version
pretty polished by the current release date, I do think that Tim has an
important point with regards to calling these things "rel
It's not just the CD installer that gets tested. URPMI does not test an installer
AT ALL. Therefore, having people test ISO installs/Network installs is crucial
to the beta process.
Cheers
Jason
PS, I DON'T use urpmi/software manager on my cooker box at home cause I'm
on dialup and URPMI doe
lto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 8:34 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Cooker] Mandrake 9.1 Should be Delayed
On 2003.03.06 10:43 Buchan Milne wrote:
> IIRC there were beta ISOs more than two weeks ago ...
True. But my point was that I'm sure some people downlo
On Thu, 2003-03-06 at 10:21, N Smethurst wrote:
> Le Jeudi 6 Mars 2003 17:33, Austin a écrit :
> > It just seems to me that people are really stuck in the idea of ISO's
> > because they've never known otherwise.
>
> This is so true.
>
Personally, I use urpmi and update each day. It is good to ha
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Timothy R. Butler wrote:
>
>
>>These would be people who are in "edit_bug". The only issue is that this
>>is not well known enough. Any cooker regulars should have this status,
>>if they are willing to do the job well.
>
>
> How is it determined when
1 - 100 of 209 matches
Mail list logo
