-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Adam Williamson wrote on Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 12:05:17PM + :
Well I'm using Cooker with KDE 3.1, and Anti-Aliasing enabled with the
Luxi Sans [xft] font, and the desktop looks just magic. No Microsoft
fonts needed whatsoever. I think the
Le Mercredi 27 Novembre 2002 19:10, Todd Lyons a écrit :
St?phane Teletch?a wrote on Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 12:54:51PM +0100 :
OK, another time :
I tried with kppp and gnome-connect (the gnome equivalent, not really
sure of the name), and if i use them as a normal user, the connection
Le Mardi 26 Novembre 2002 19:33, Ben Reser a écrit :
Before anyone hits reply and says we can't do this read how it's done.
Basically this is a bootstrap RPM that takes and sets up a build
environment, builds a spec file that downloads the fonts (modified from
the sourceforge one), installs
On Sat, Nov 30, 2002 at 10:06:40PM +0100, Guillaume Rousse wrote:
Whatever dirty trick is used to comply with license, i also think it is a
very bad idea to have them in contrib. However, i would be a very nice PLF
package... So let's continue the discussion on plf-discuss instead of
On Thursday 28 November 2002 00:46, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 21:33, laurent Montel wrote:
On Wednesday 27 November 2002 21:56, Danny Tholen wrote:
On Wednesday 27 November 2002 19:03, Todd Lyons wrote:
I have tested this and it works well. Please look at the url
respond to cooker
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:Re: [Cooker] Microsoft True Type Fonts for Contrib...
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 07:38:04PM +0100, David BAUDENS wrote:
We did not remove them some months ago to see them back.
As far as I know they were never
On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 11:01:17AM +0100, David BAUDENS wrote:
On Thursday 28 November 2002 00:46, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 21:33, laurent Montel wrote:
On Wednesday 27 November 2002 21:56, Danny Tholen wrote:
On Wednesday 27 November 2002 19:03, Todd Lyons wrote:
On Thursday 28 November 2002 06:29 pm, Murray J. Root wrote:
What I don't understand is the offensive way of stating the position.
I guess it comes from the contempt MandrakeSoft has for its contributors.
Or possibly from knowing and dreading that no matter how they closed it, they
would get
On Thu, 2002-11-28 at 02:29, Murray J. Root wrote:
On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 11:01:17AM +0100, David BAUDENS wrote:
On Thursday 28 November 2002 00:46, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 21:33, laurent Montel wrote:
On Wednesday 27 November 2002 21:56, Danny Tholen wrote:
On
On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 02:55:03AM -0800, Quel Qun wrote:
On Thu, 2002-11-28 at 02:29, Murray J. Root wrote:
On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 11:01:17AM +0100, David BAUDENS wrote:
On Thursday 28 November 2002 00:46, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 21:33, laurent Montel wrote:
C'mon people, give it up. The difference between some
script that DLs them at install time and an RPM that
ships them directly is not immediately obvious to a
non-techie. What that means is, it's close enough for
Microsoft to sue, and MandrakeSoft to not be able to
get the case dismissed in a
On Thu, 2002-11-28 at 16:23, David Walser wrote:
C'mon people, give it up. The difference between some
script that DLs them at install time and an RPM that
ships them directly is not immediately obvious to a
non-techie. What that means is, it's close enough for
Microsoft to sue, and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2002-11-28 at 16:23, David Walser wrote:
I just don't think this is either accurate or true, and I worry about
the quality of Mandrake's legal advice. I thnik Mandrake is being way,
way too timid in this case. It's
On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 11:01:17AM +0100, David BAUDENS wrote:
For you, maybe. But for Microsoft, it is enough to start an action in
justice. So, I am sorry but I refuse to see Mandrake close for a such
stupid thing.
David,
I suggest you start packing your things...
Codeweavers plugin
On Thu, 2002-11-28 at 18:05, Buchan Milne wrote:
I am sure many people on this list consider Mandrake to be one of the
few viable competitors to Microsoft. Remember that Mandrake is probably
approaching the same market share Apple has. I think MS would take Apple
on if they had to.
For
This thread is getting absolutely ridiculous. Let's not forget that we are
talking about Microsoft's copyrighted binaries - it's much more serious than
patent issues that Mandrake constantly faces. If Mandrake ships freetype
without the bytecode interpreter because it MIGHT be a patent
On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 12:43:38PM -0600, Igor Izyumin wrote:
This thread is getting absolutely ridiculous. Let's not forget that we are
talking about Microsoft's copyrighted binaries - it's much more serious than
patent issues that Mandrake constantly faces. If Mandrake ships freetype
On Thursday 28 November 2002 12:31 pm, Ben Reser wrote:
On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 11:01:17AM +0100, David BAUDENS wrote:
For you, maybe. But for Microsoft, it is enough to start an action in
justice. So, I am sorry but I refuse to see Mandrake close for a such
stupid thing.
David,
I
On Thu, 2002-11-28 at 18:43, Igor Izyumin wrote:
This thread is getting absolutely ridiculous. Let's not forget that we are
talking about Microsoft's copyrighted binaries - it's much more serious than
patent issues that Mandrake constantly faces. If Mandrake ships freetype
without the
On Thursday 28 November 2002 12:56 pm, Ben Reser wrote:
It prohibits distribution for profit. Including the package in contrib
and making sure it never gets on the CDs doesn't count as for profit.
The words value add never occur in the license.
I am not a lawyer, and I will not pretend that I
Igor Izyumin wrote:
How about fixing the font packages instead? It's not that hard to make a set
of decent bitmap fonts from the TTF ones. I am pretty sure that someone
could get the FontLab people (www.pyrus.com) to donate a copy or at least
sell it at a reduced price. Then you could just
On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 01:01:15PM -0600, Igor Izyumin wrote:
There are two key differences:
1. Mandrake does not make Crossover. Codeweavers does. They are taking most
of the risk here. It's a much smaller risk for Mandrake than including a
script that auto-installs fonts.
No difference
On Thursday 28 November 2002 19:56, Ben Reser wrote:
There is no clause in copyright law about failing to protect your
copyright. That only applies to trademark and patent law.
AFAIK it does not apply to patents, only trademark. Remember lzw/gif?
Igor:
Finally, you have to understand that a
On Thursday 28 November 2002 20:01, Igor Izyumin wrote:
There are two key differences:
1. Mandrake does not make Crossover. Codeweavers does. They are taking
most of the risk here. It's a much smaller risk for Mandrake than
including a script that auto-installs fonts.
Strange reasoning.
On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 01:47:05PM -0600, Igor Izyumin wrote:
I am not a lawyer, and I will not pretend that I understand what for profit
means in the context of this license. In this case, I am assuming this could
mean adding value to another product or service. Even putting it in
On Thursday 28 November 2002 01:37 pm, Giuseppe Ghibò wrote:
Igor Izyumin wrote:
How about fixing the font packages instead? It's not that hard to make a
set of decent bitmap fonts from the TTF ones. I am pretty sure that
someone could get the FontLab people (www.pyrus.com) to donate a
On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 08:33:52PM +0100, Danny Tholen wrote:
AFAIK it does not apply to patents, only trademark. Remember lzw/gif?
It applies to patents. Unisys has never actually gone to court over
lzw. Adobe and other big companies settled with undisclosed terms. The
rest of the industry
On Thursday 28 November 2002 01:40 pm, Danny Tholen wrote:
On Thursday 28 November 2002 20:01, Igor Izyumin wrote:
There are two key differences:
1. Mandrake does not make Crossover. Codeweavers does. They are taking
most of the risk here. It's a much smaller risk for Mandrake than
Igor Izyumin wrote:
Pfaedit is a good outline editor, but it doesn't do hinting yet. Fontlab
currently has the best hinting, but even that doesn't approach the quality of
the Monotype (microsoft) fonts. I think Monotype just programmed the
bytecode directly.
Are you talking about TTF or
Igor Izyumin wrote:
How about fixing the font packages instead? It's not that hard to make a
set of decent bitmap fonts from the TTF ones.
Decent bitmap fonts...Am I reading this well?
Please read a book about font technology before arguing. Bitmap fonts
typically look better than
David BAUDENS wrote:
On Thursday 28 November 2002 00:46, Adam Williamson wrote:
To say it again:
NO ONE IS ASKING YOU TO PUT THE MICROSOFT CORE FONTS IN MANDRAKE.
Is that clear enough? Do you want it up in lights somewhere?
Ben wants his WRAPPER SCRIPT THAT DOWNLOADS AND INSTALLS THE
Sorry, Ben, but as you may imply from my signature below, I maintain a
current (up to 15 minutes ago) mirror of all Mandrake's Change Logs and
binary output.
There has been no mention of crossover anything in the change log or in
the cooker contrib tree or in the unsupported/MandrakeClub tree.
Williamson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Posted At: Thursday, November 28, 2002 11:37 AM
Posted To: Cooker
Conversation: [Cooker] Microsoft True Type Fonts for Contrib...
Subject: Re: [Cooker] Microsoft True Type Fonts for Contrib...
On Thu, 2002-11-28 at 16:23, David Walser wrote:
C'mon people, give it up
We've been playing with it all afternoon on pclo and it works great! Nice job
Ben. The only issue I had so far is if I recompile the source rpm with the
tahoma font enabled, I get a recursion error when attempting it install the
new rpm.
On Wednesday 27 November 2002 01:42 am, nDiScReEt
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 02:13:27AM -0600, Texstar wrote:
We've been playing with it all afternoon on pclo and it works great! Nice job
Ben. The only issue I had so far is if I recompile the source rpm with the
tahoma font enabled, I get a recursion error when attempting it install the
new
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
It is like I have a brand new computer! I didn't realize just how bad the old
fonts were until after I installed this package! I went the urpmi route and I
love it! You are the man, Ben! Thank you for your work on putting together
this package. I
Rocco Stanzione wrote:
On Tuesday 26 November 2002 12:33 pm, Ben Reser spake thusly:
Ben, very well and creatively done. I don't think it could have (legally)
been made any easier, and if there's one thing that's frustrated me about
Mandrake release after release it's having to go through
Le Mardi 26 Novembre 2002 19:33, Ben Reser a écrit :
Before anyone hits reply and says we can't do this read how it's done.
Basically this is a bootstrap RPM that takes and sets up a build
environment, builds a spec file that downloads the fonts (modified from
the sourceforge one), installs
Hello,
Isn't it about time that a single user Linux box could do auto dial up ?
I mean if window$ can do it I'm sure Linux can too. I've tried with
diald and had very mixed results usually not working at all. I read
somewhere that ppp was capable but I have never managed to get it to
work !
I agree. I find that as a laptop user the fonts look even better with
the rgba = rgb; lines commented back in in XftConfig.
However TT fonts still look pretty rough in Mozilla and Opera, maybe
they do things there own way ?
Owen
John Allen wrote:
Rocco Stanzione wrote:
On Tuesday 26
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Stéphane Teletchéa wrote:
Le Mardi 26 Novembre 2002 19:33, Ben Reser a écrit :
Before anyone hits reply and says we can't do this read how it's done.
Basically this is a bootstrap RPM that takes and sets up a build
environment, builds a spec file
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 10:49:47AM +0100, Stéphane Teletchéa wrote:
You always assume people have a DSL connection
Most computers still have a simple RTC modem and in that case, you'll need to
set up the connection, transferring, assuming everything is going fine.
I remind everybody
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 12:18:59PM +0200, Buchan Milne wrote:
[ -e /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-ppp0 ] ifup ppp0
I'm not sure this is a good idea however...
I haven't had a chance to look at the rpm yet, but my beef with the
original one was that it didn't 'wget -c', so if one
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ben Reser wrote:
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 12:18:59PM +0200, Buchan Milne wrote:
[ -e /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-ppp0 ] ifup ppp0
I'm not sure this is a good idea however...
Just wanted to show it was possible ... don't think it should
Ben Reser [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Before anyone hits reply and says we can't do this read how it's done.
Basically this is a bootstrap RPM that takes and sets up a build
environment, builds a spec file that downloads the fonts (modified from
the sourceforge one), installs the resulting
On Wed, 27 Nov 2002, Warly wrote:
I do not know to what extend providing a way to do something that can
be illegal can be punished.
Yes, but distributing the fonts is not illegal. Read the licence.
d
On Wednesday 27 November 2002 12:27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 27 Nov 2002, Warly wrote:
I do not know to what extend providing a way to do something that
can be illegal can be punished.
Yes, but distributing the fonts is not illegal. Read the
These fonts will not be integrated in
Stéphane Teletchéa wrote:
I remind everybody that kppp isn't working if you are not root in 9.0 ... (of
course when you use the rpm, you are, but i'm not sure i'll like a kppp root
connection !)
Wot? This is just not true. I have never used kppp with anything
but my own user name. No
Le Mercredi 27 Novembre 2002 12:27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
On Wed, 27 Nov 2002, Warly wrote:
I do not know to what extend providing a way to do something that can
be illegal can be punished.
Yes, but distributing the fonts is not illegal. Read the licence.
However, at the end, what is
Le Mercredi 27 Novembre 2002 12:33, vous avez écrit :
Stéphane Teletchéa wrote:
I remind everybody that kppp isn't working if you are not root in 9.0 ...
(of course when you use the rpm, you are, but i'm not sure i'll like a
kppp root connection !)
Wot? This is just not true. I have
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Stéphane Teletchéa wrote:
Le Mercredi 27 Novembre 2002 12:27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
I think doing such a trick will be counter-productive.
And what about Microsoft's attitude if it suddenly move these files
off ???
They already did. The
On Wed, 27 Nov 2002, David BAUDENS wrote:
These fonts will not be integrated in Mandrake's distribution. Period.
This is our last answer about this topic.
Hey, no need to get rude. It is your distro not mine. If you do not want
to improve it, what can I say?
But, ofcourse, your opinion is
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 09:18, John Allen wrote:
Well I'm using Cooker with KDE 3.1, and Anti-Aliasing enabled with the
Luxi Sans [xft] font, and the desktop looks just magic. No Microsoft
fonts needed whatsoever. I think the latest Qt anti-aliasing is just
fantastic.
That's because it's
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 10:11, Owen Savill wrote:
I agree. I find that as a laptop user the fonts look even better with
the rgba = rgb; lines commented back in in XftConfig.
Outdated. That's the Xft1 config file. Cooker no longer uses Xft1, but
Xft2/fontconfig. You can enabled subpixel hinting
On Wed, 27 Nov 2002, [iso-8859-15] Stéphane Teletchéa wrote:
However, at the end, what is really a problem, is that we don't have good GPL
fonts, or softwares to show them.
Both.
I think doing such a trick will be counter-productive.
Nice opinion, no arguments?
And what about
Le Mercredi 27 Novembre 2002 13:10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
I think doing such a trick will be counter-productive.
Nice opinion, no arguments?
Time spent in the ML reading those stuff, time spent in building the rpm
(although a really good idea, i don't disagree to this point) : my
Sorry, I should have said that I have made all the edits for Mozilla. My
comment was really that even when this is done TT fonts still don't look
as smooth as KDE's.
I found a freetype2 gz source file with the naughty bits in it so I
installed that. I will try the PLF version in case it has
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 13:15, Owen Savill wrote:
Sorry, I should have said that I have made all the edits for Mozilla. My
comment was really that even when this is done TT fonts still don't look
as smooth as KDE's.
I found a freetype2 gz source file with the naughty bits in it so I
Le Mercredi 27 Novembre 2002 12:40, David BAUDENS a écrit :
On Wednesday 27 November 2002 12:27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 27 Nov 2002, Warly wrote:
I do not know to what extend providing a way to do something that
can be illegal can be punished.
Yes, but distributing the fonts
Stéphane Teletchéa wrote:
Le Mercredi 27 Novembre 2002 12:33, vous avez écrit :
Stéphane Teletchéa wrote:
I remind everybody that kppp isn't working if you are not root in 9.0 ...
(of course when you use the rpm, you are, but i'm not sure i'll like a
kppp root connection !)
Wot? This is
Thanks for that.
Owen
Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 13:15, Owen Savill wrote:
Sorry, I should have said that I have made all the edits for Mozilla. My
comment was really that even when this is done TT fonts still don't look
as smooth as KDE's.
I found a freetype2 gz source
On Wednesday 27 November 2002 05:18 pm, John Allen wrote:
I'm using Cooker with KDE 3.1, and Anti-Aliasing enabled with the
Luxi Sans [xft] font, and the desktop looks just magic. No Microsoft
fonts needed whatsoever. I think the latest Qt anti-aliasing is just
fantastic.
So _with_ the fonts
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 06:15, Warly wrote:
IANAL but at some point I guess than there is no real difference in a
trial between providing microsof fonts, or providing a one click
feature to get them.
As a consequence, I do not favor putting it in contribs, however if
any have more clues about
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 15:11, Austin Acton wrote:
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 06:15, Warly wrote:
IANAL but at some point I guess than there is no real difference in a
trial between providing microsof fonts, or providing a one click
feature to get them.
As a consequence, I do not favor
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 15:20, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 15:11, Austin Acton wrote:
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 06:15, Warly wrote:
IANAL but at some point I guess than there is no real difference in a
trial between providing microsof fonts, or providing a one click
feature
Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 15:11, Austin Acton wrote:
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 06:15, Warly wrote:
IANAL but at some point I guess than there is no real difference in a
trial between providing microsof fonts, or providing a one click
feature to get them.
As a consequence, I do
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 10:20, Adam Williamson wrote:
urpmi-compatible source RPM, it makes no difference. It's still just a
script, it contains nothing at all over which Microsoft has any legal
right, it's completely unimpeachable. As would be placing an unmodified
copy of the .cab file on a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ben Reser wrote on Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 10:33:09AM -0800 :
It complies with Microsoft's license because the fonts are being
distributed as is without modification and are not included in the
bootstrap RPM whatsoever.
This makes it trivial for an
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
St?phane Teletch?a wrote on Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 12:54:51PM +0100 :
OK, another time :
I tried with kppp and gnome-connect (the gnome equivalent, not really sure of
the name), and if i use them as a normal user, the connection launches, and
On Wednesday 27 November 2002 19:03, Todd Lyons wrote:
I have tested this and it works well. Please look at the url below,
grab the rpm, and test it. You will like the results and you will want
to put this rpm in Contribs.
Interesting, so now we have 1 mandrake employee in favour of it
On Wednesday 27 November 2002 21:56, Danny Tholen wrote:
On Wednesday 27 November 2002 19:03, Todd Lyons wrote:
I have tested this and it works well. Please look at the url below,
grab the rpm, and test it. You will like the results and you will want
to put this rpm in Contribs.
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 10:33:11PM +0100, laurent Montel wrote:
It's not a attitude, we are against, and it's finished.
Discution is closed, you can continue to speak, if you want, but we will not
re-add these font in MDK.
Laurent,
Please clarify when were these fonts ever included in the
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 02:24:08PM -0800, Ben Reser wrote:
Second the fonts are part of the package anyway. It's just a bootstrap
RPM that downloads and installs them for you. So I think there is a
huge difference here.
That should be Second the fonts aren't...
--
Ben Reser [EMAIL
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 12:15:59PM +0100, Warly wrote:
I do not know to what extend providing a way to do something that can
be illegal can be punished.
e.g. providing a computer, or linux, even wihtout illegal components
does not prevent you copying DVD or hacking army internal network.
Mandrake currently ships several things that walk the fine line of
licensing. Perfect example of this is the mp3 decoders included in the
distribution. It is unclear if Mandrake should have to pay royalties on
every CD it ships (though I think free downloads it is clear that they
would
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 21:33, laurent Montel wrote:
On Wednesday 27 November 2002 21:56, Danny Tholen wrote:
On Wednesday 27 November 2002 19:03, Todd Lyons wrote:
I have tested this and it works well. Please look at the url below,
grab the rpm, and test it. You will like the results and
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 23:36, Michael Scherer wrote:
Mandrake currently ships several things that walk the fine line of
licensing. Perfect example of this is the mp3 decoders included in the
distribution. It is unclear if Mandrake should have to pay royalties on
every CD it ships (though
Before anyone hits reply and says we can't do this read how it's done.
Basically this is a bootstrap RPM that takes and sets up a build
environment, builds a spec file that downloads the fonts (modified from
the sourceforge one), installs the resulting RPM, and removes the build
enviornment and
On Tuesday 26 November 2002 19:33, Ben Reser wrote:
Before anyone hits reply and says we can't do this read how it's
done.
[...]
We did not remove them some months ago to see them back.
--
David BAUDENS
MandrakeSoft - http://www.mandrakesoft.com
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 07:38:04PM +0100, David BAUDENS wrote:
We did not remove them some months ago to see them back.
As far as I know they were never in contrib. And I'm not seeing any
reference to them being in the distro in the archives (cooker or
changelog lists). The only discussion
Great idea Ben, I would love to see this show up in contribs
tjfontaine
On Tuesday 26 November 2002 12:33 pm, Ben Reser spake thusly:
Ben, very well and creatively done. I don't think it could have (legally)
been made any easier, and if there's one thing that's frustrated me about
Mandrake release after release it's having to go through the font
deuglification
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I second that and I'm going to try and test it now! I will post my findings.
On Wednesday 27 November 2002 12:47 am, Rocco Stanzione wrote:
On Tuesday 26 November 2002 12:33 pm, Ben Reser spake thusly:
Ben, very well and creatively done. I don't
83 matches
Mail list logo
