Jens Petersen wrote:
The YumLangpackPlugin Feature that I am planning to propose for F12 may help
with this providing langpack-support metapackages.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/YumLangpackPlugin
About the gdm menu itself I chatted to Ankit earlier in the week and came up
with this
I have read a lot of people voice their opinion on what they think to be a
flaw in the benchmark. How about we as a group put together a documented
benchmark process along with justification as to why those methods were
chosen to reflect real world scenarios and from there send it to reviewers
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 08:54:19PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 8:39 PM, Christoph
Wickertchristoph.wick...@googlemail.com wrote:
need it because things need to be predictable for package maintainers.
Some updates are processed after a day, others not for two weeks.
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 01:34:25PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 10:38 AM, Richard W.M. Jonesrjo...@redhat.com wrote:
(Posting here because the fedora-ppc list is a bit overrun with spam
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/fedora-ppc/ )
Does anyone know what
Am Freitag, den 12.06.2009, 19:55 +1000 schrieb Eric Springer:
2009/6/12 Christoph Höger choe...@cs.tu-berlin.de:
Could you explain why mp3 (or ogg) encoding is not a real world
benchmark? I do this quite often.
Because they are comparing file system on what is a CPU bound test. Notice
On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 10:59 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 01:34:25PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 10:38 AM, Richard W.M. Jonesrjo...@redhat.com
wrote:
(Posting here because the fedora-ppc list is a bit overrun with spam
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 01:48:15PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
In file included from /usr/include/sys/capability.h:23,
from myinclude.c:1:
/usr/include/stdint.h:41: error: conflicting types for ?int64_t?
/usr/include/linux/types.h:98: note: previous declaration of ?int64_t?
was here
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 01:48:15PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
Is there a trick for that or is it a bug ?
Adding #include sys/types.h seems to fix it, so I reckon its a bug in
libcap-devel's header files.
Actually already reported and closed rawhide, so it
On 12.06.2009 13:33, Christoph Höger wrote:
Am Freitag, den 12.06.2009, 19:55 +1000 schrieb Eric Springer:
2009/6/12 Christoph Höger choe...@cs.tu-berlin.de:
Could you explain why mp3 (or ogg) encoding is not a real world
benchmark? I do this quite often.
Because they are comparing file
I've been tired for some time of watching rpmnew and rpmsave files. I've
been looking for some tool, but did not find any, so I wrote my own.
http://miroslav.suchy.cz/fedora/rpmconf/rpmconf
Before I spend more times on this script, I would like to hear your
opinion. Do you find it useful? Did
All the packages with my name against them should be fixed now.
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Emerging Technologies, Red Hat http://et.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
Fedora now supports 75 OCaml packages (the OPEN alternative to F#)
Kyle McMartin wrote:
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 01:48:15PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
In file included from /usr/include/sys/capability.h:23,
from myinclude.c:1:
/usr/include/stdint.h:41: error: conflicting types for ?int64_t?
/usr/include/linux/types.h:98: note: previous declaration of
On 06/11/2009 10:41 PM, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:
Eric Sandeen wrote:
I don't know much about apache but I bet a default ./configure winds up
with different builds depending on the build environment, which in this
case is probably dictated by whatever the default generic OS intall
contains.
On Fri, 12 Jun 2009, Luke Macken wrote:
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 08:54:19PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 8:39 PM, Christoph
Wickertchristoph.wick...@googlemail.com wrote:
need it because things need to be predictable for package maintainers.
Some updates are processed
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 03:02:39PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
Grumf ! that's annoying :(
Thank you very much for your quick answer ! :)
As I only need the CAP_SYS_BOOT, I will define it manually in the source
code and will remove the include, that's ugly but anyway... :/
As I
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 03:03:58PM +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote:
Nice find!
Maybe we can run the real world test suite (benchmark) before the
next release and try to straighten out such odds.
Most of the benchmark results they post are not showing scientific
results, only when something is
Josh Boyer wrote:
No. It simply is not possible. See my (and Luke's) email on how long
a single push takes.
Seth says the 22-hour run is a bug. If a run can be done in ~8 hours, that
means an automated update procedure could do about 3 per day.
But of course, if it takes one day, then let's
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 8:11 AM, Thorsten Leemhuisfed...@leemhuis.info wrote:
IOW: a lot of those phoronix articles that contain benchmarks could be
half as long or even shorter if you rip out the results that are of no
value and replace them by No unexpected side effects could be found
when
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 9:14 AM, Kevin Koflerkevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
Josh Boyer wrote:
No. It simply is not possible. See my (and Luke's) email on how long
a single push takes.
Seth says the 22-hour run is a bug. If a run can be done in ~8 hours, that
means an automated update
Eric Springer wrote:
Especially considering how many people will use these benchmarks to make
conclusions about Fedora, we should make sure it presents as best as it
can.
I think we should rather do an informative press campaign on the lines
of Why Phoronix benchmarks are utter bullsh*t.
Kyle McMartin wrote:
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 03:02:39PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
Grumf ! that's annoying :(
Thank you very much for your quick answer ! :)
As I only need the CAP_SYS_BOOT, I will define it manually in the source
code and will remove the include, that's ugly but
On 06/12/2009 09:24 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Eric Springer wrote:
Especially considering how many people will use these benchmarks to make
conclusions about Fedora, we should make sure it presents as best as it
can.
I think we should rather do an informative press campaign on the lines
of
On 06/12/2009 06:42 PM, Kyle McMartin wrote:
It's almost certainly attributable to the default install using audit.
Roland and various others have done a lot of work improving things, but
there is always going to be a per-syscall overhead to this kind of
thing. A few extra usec a syscall adds
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 03:24:45PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
Correct. I tried with different distro lenny, ubuntu 8.04, fedora 10,
opensuse 11 and I hadn't this problem.
It was a local Fedora patch that tickled it with recent kernels, Karsten
has sorted it out (but too late for Fedora 11
I'm retired firestarter, I picked it up recently as it was orphaned
but as we are moving towards PolicyKit and there's no upstream to
assist with the port and after a discussion we had here on the list I
decided it was time to retire it.
Now, with that being said, I have some users on the
Casey Dahlin wrote:
Because they gave us a bad grade and now we're butthurt and we're taking
our ball and going home so there? Because that's what everyone's going to
hear, even if its not what we say.
If they love hearing bullsh*t, they should just go use a distro for bullsh*t
lovers, like
Kyle McMartin wrote:
...
Someone else suggested including sys/types.h first, which should work
around it. That's what GNU coreutils did... (a change in the include
ordering broke it.)
I'm surprised the man page for cap_get_flag etc don't show an include of
sys/types.h before sys/capability.h
Am Freitag, den 12.06.2009, 05:34 +0200 schrieb Kevin Kofler:
Christoph Wickert wrote:
IMO this is something we should discuss on this list. We need to find a
fine balance between pushing updates in time to make maintainers happy
and not too many updates for the users. Maybe something like
Jens Petersen (peter...@redhat.com) said:
- Bill Nottingham nott...@redhat.com wrote:
Well, there are languages we would support fine that don't have a
specific language-support group (most anything that uses a Latin-1
like
charset, and no specific input method.) Moreover, the groups
Christoph Wickert wrote:
In most cases the biggest part (consuming time and cpu cycles) of the
updates is not installing them but everything else like checking for new
packages, downloading the metadata, calculating dependencies,
downloading the packages and running the transaction test.
On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 19:01 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 06/12/2009 06:42 PM, Kyle McMartin wrote:
It's almost certainly attributable to the default install using audit.
Roland and various others have done a lot of work improving things, but
there is always going to be a per-syscall
On 06/12/2009 09:14 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 19:01 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 06/12/2009 06:42 PM, Kyle McMartin wrote:
It's almost certainly attributable to the default install using audit.
Roland and various others have done a lot of work improving things, but
On 06/12/2009 08:14 AM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
Am Freitag, den 12.06.2009, 05:34 +0200 schrieb Kevin Kofler:
I don't see what it buys our users if they get one big update over 2 small
ones.
In most cases the biggest part (consuming time and cpu cycles) of the
updates is not installing
Once upon a time, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com said:
On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 19:01 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Is there a benefit to running audit by default? Is it worth the cost?
...and how does one disable it, so the people doing the benchmarks can
confirm that's the cause?
At the
On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 14:30 +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
I've been tired for some time of watching rpmnew and rpmsave files. I've
been looking for some tool, but did not find any, so I wrote my own.
http://miroslav.suchy.cz/fedora/rpmconf/rpmconf
Before I spend more times on this script,
Adam Williamson wrote:
On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 19:01 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Is there a benefit to running audit by default? Is it worth the cost?
...and how does one disable it, so the people doing the benchmarks can
confirm that's the cause?
put selinux=0 audit=0 in kernel line at
On 06/12/2009 09:35 PM, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:
put selinux=0 audit=0 in kernel line at /boot/grub/grub.conf
then reboot
$ dmesg | egrep -i audit|selinux
Kernel command line: ro root=UUID=c99c0f86-6ebc-4e0f-91ee-4a6ae7ae6aa9
vga=791 selinux=0 audit=0
audit: disabled (until reboot)
On Jun 12, 2009, at 11:11 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 06/12/2009 09:35 PM, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:
put selinux=0 audit=0 in kernel line at /boot/grub/grub.conf
then reboot
$ dmesg | egrep -i audit|selinux
Kernel command line: ro
root=UUID=c99c0f86-6ebc-4e0f-91ee-4a6ae7ae6aa9 vga=791
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 5:28 AM, Casey Dahlincdah...@redhat.com wrote:
Because they gave us a bad grade and now we're butthurt and we're taking our
ball and going home so there? Because that's what everyone's going to hear,
even if its not what we say.
What I have a problem with is the lack
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 10:10 PM, Mike McGrathmmcgr...@redhat.com wrote:
Can anyone with F11 installed look at what is in their /etc/fedora-release
and tell me which one you have, and how you installed? Also what version
of fedora-release you have.
$ cat /etc/fedora-release
Fedora release 11
Mike McGrath wrote:
Can anyone with F11 installed look at what is in their /etc/fedora-release
and tell me which one you have, and how you installed? Also what version
of fedora-release you have.
F10 to F11 system using preupgrade here.
$ cat /etc/fedora-release
Fedora release 11
On Thursday 11 June 2009, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
Le mercredi 10 juin 2009 à 17:06 -0500, Matt Domsch a écrit :
Fedora Rawhide-in-Mock Build Results for x86_64
using the first rawhide of the Fedora 12 development cycle, cut on
6/8/2008.
Full logs at
Michael Cronenworth wrote:
F10 to F11 system using preupgrade here.
$ cat /etc/fedora-release
Fedora release 11 (Leonidas)
$ rpm -q fedora-release
fedora-release-11-1.noarch
When I brought up smolt the OS is Fedora 11 Leonidas so is this a
smolt issue?
It seems smolt is under stress
On 12/06/09 17:00, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 14:30 +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
I've been tired for some time of watching rpmnew and rpmsave files. I've
been looking for some tool, but did not find any, so I wrote my own.
http://miroslav.suchy.cz/fedora/rpmconf/rpmconf
On Thursday 11 June 2009 17:04:03 Jon Stanley wrote:
Here's a list of topics for tomorrow's FESCo meeting, taking place in
#fedora-meeting on freenode at 17:00UTC.
160 Announce EOL date for F-9
162 Milestone Adjustment Proposal
161 Proposal for fedora-release version-release naming
On 06/12/2009 12:44 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
I don't have a problem getting a bad grade. I do have a general
problem with people who publish unexpected behavior regressions but
don't actually use the open development process to drive feedback
directly to developers. If we deserve a black eye
Heya,
I've added a patch to bluetoothd in F-12 to support being started via
udev, on-demand. bluetoothd will now only start up when you have a
Bluetooth adapter plugged, and will exit 30 seconds after the last one
went away.
The only purpose of the bluetooth initscript is now to switch HID proxy
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 07:05:39PM +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
I've added a patch to bluetoothd in F-12 to support being started via
udev, on-demand. bluetoothd will now only start up when you have a
Bluetooth adapter plugged, and will exit 30 seconds after the last one
went away.
The only
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 8:11 PM, Kyle McMartink...@mcmartin.ca wrote:
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 07:05:39PM +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
I've added a patch to bluetoothd in F-12 to support being started via
udev, on-demand. bluetoothd will now only start up when you have a
Bluetooth adapter
On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 20:20 +0200, drago01 wrote:
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 8:11 PM, Kyle McMartink...@mcmartin.ca wrote:
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 07:05:39PM +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
I've added a patch to bluetoothd in F-12 to support being started via
udev, on-demand. bluetoothd will now
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Bastien Nocerabnoc...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 20:20 +0200, drago01 wrote:
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 8:11 PM, Kyle McMartink...@mcmartin.ca wrote:
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 07:05:39PM +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
I've added a patch to bluetoothd in
On 06/12/2009 11:35 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote:
Heya,
I've added a patch to bluetoothd in F-12 to support being started via
udev, on-demand. bluetoothd will now only start up when you have a
Bluetooth adapter plugged, and will exit 30 seconds after the last one
went away.
Can you add these
On Fri, 12.06.09 19:26, Bastien Nocera (bnoc...@redhat.com) wrote:
Every time there's an add action for a Bluetooth device, udev will run
bluetoothd --udev.
bluetoothd will fail with an error if D-Bus isn't started (on bootup),
and the udev coldplug (done in udev-post) will run the rule
Hi list,
Yesterday, when I pointed my browser to
http://monnerat.fedorapeople.org/, I got a directory index. Today, the
output is:
Forbidden
You don't have permission to access / on this server.
Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use
an ErrorDocument to
Here's the minutes and IRC log of today's FESCo meeting
Minutes:
http://www.scrye.com/~kevin/fedora/fedora-meeting/2009/fedora-meeting.2009-06-12-17.01.html
Log:
http://www.scrye.com/~kevin/fedora/fedora-meeting/2009/fedora-meeting.2009-06-12-17.01.log.html
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
On 2009-06-12 08:46:48 PM, Patrick MONNERAT wrote:
I did not change anything to my public_html path permissions.
I can still access files in this directory, like
http://monnerat.fedorapeople.org/php-captchaphp.spec
I do not have a .htaccess file (neither did I yesterday!)
I do not have an
On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 14:39 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 2:26 PM, Bastien Nocerabnoc...@redhat.com wrote:
bluetoothd will exit itself after 30 seconds when no adapters are
present. There's a potential race if the udev add event happens in
between the time the time
On Fri, 12.06.09 20:10, Bastien Nocera (bnoc...@redhat.com) wrote:
This could be fixed by first releasing the service name synchronously,
then processing all queued requests and only then closing/exiting.
Hmm, will bluetoothd also be started via bus activation? If so, it
wuld probably
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 07:55:56PM +1000, Eric Springer wrote:
I agree with the sentiment that phoronix reviews are lazy, poor, etc
-- but that doesn't mean nothing is revealed by them. Especially
considering how many people will use these benchmarks to make
conclusions about Fedora, we should
Hi,
Our Apache results on the Phoronix tests, AIUI, are from an
Apache they compiled, which is not what most people are going to
use.
Do similar results occur when you compare the installed Apaches instead,
or does the discrepancy go away?
There's also no mention of whether they
I'm trying to figure out whats going on here so I'm off to the list.
Smolts.org is reporting people checking in with both:
Fedora 11 Leonidas
and
Fedora release 11 (Leonidas)
Can anyone with F11 installed look at what is in their /etc/fedora-release
and tell me which one you have, and
The EPEL SIG team is asking for your participation at the first EPEL
Bug Day. Please step up and help make EPEL a successful supplement to
Enterprise Linux.
When: July 11, 2009 00:00 UTC - 23:59 UTC.
Goal: Squash (close) as many bugs as possible with proper solutions.
More Information:
*
Hello,
I forgot to give my conf.
I run a fully updated fedora 10
[r...@jack ~]# uname -a
Linux jack.lutty.net 2.6.27.24-170.2.68.fc10.i686 #1 SMP Wed May 20
23:10:16 EDT 2009 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linu
If nobody has a clue about that, I will bug Zilla, probably under
On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 15:24 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Eric Springer wrote:
Especially considering how many people will use these benchmarks to make
conclusions about Fedora, we should make sure it presents as best as it
can.
I think we should rather do an informative press campaign on
On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 04:33 +0300, Gilboa Davara wrote:
On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 15:24 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Eric Springer wrote:
Especially considering how many people will use these benchmarks to make
conclusions about Fedora, we should make sure it presents as best as it
can.
On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 00:47 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
I know its a pipe dream...the laypress taking a proactive interest in
seeing problems resolved instead of just talking about them.
I don't think it's ever going to happen. The laypress should just die,
people need to go directly to
On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 04:33 +0300, Gilboa Davara wrote:
You don't like Phoronix' benchmark? Why? What should they have done
differently? Have you ever contacted Phoronix (E.g. Using their forums)
and tried to resolve these issues? Did they refuse?
They should use distribution-compiled
On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 17:25 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 07:55:56PM +1000, Eric Springer wrote:
I agree with the sentiment that phoronix reviews are lazy, poor, etc
-- but that doesn't mean nothing is revealed by them. Especially
considering how many people will use
On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 04:33 +0300, Gilboa Davara wrote:
Kevin,
I must admit that I didn't expect such childish reaction from someone
like you.
BTW, I suspect that Kevin's position has a lot to do with the response
KDE 4 got in the press...which is understandable.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 9:31 AM, Rahul
Sundaramsunda...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On 06/12/2009 06:42 PM, Kyle McMartin wrote:
It's almost certainly attributable to the default install using audit.
Roland and various others have done a lot of work improving things, but
there is always going to
On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 19:08 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 04:33 +0300, Gilboa Davara wrote:
Kevin,
I must admit that I didn't expect such childish reaction from someone
like you.
BTW, I suspect that Kevin's position has a lot to do with the response
KDE 4 got
On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 19:05 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 04:33 +0300, Gilboa Davara wrote:
You don't like Phoronix' benchmark? Why? What should they have done
differently? Have you ever contacted Phoronix (E.g. Using their forums)
and tried to resolve these issues?
Gilboa Davara wrote:
Might I remind everyone here that Phoronix was the first to offer a
comprehensive benchmark suite to the OSS world.
On the other hand, they actively hurt Free Software by continuously
providing free advertising for the latest and greatest graphics hardware
with only
On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 05:43 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
and no, glxgears is not a benchmark!
Indeed, glxgears really sucks as as a benchmark, Phoronix's benchmark suite
(as imperfect as it is) is definitely more useful.
I keep meaning to file a feature request for glxgears - remove the FPS
Author: pnemade
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/lcdf-typetools/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv9806/devel
Added Files:
Makefile import.log lcdf-typetools.spec sources
Removed Files:
dead.package
Log Message:
- Initial import for devel
Index: Makefile
Author: pnemade
Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/lcdf-typetools/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv10973
Added Files:
.cvsignore
Log Message:
- added .cvsignore
Index: .cvsignore
===
RCS file: .cvsignore
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=102652
--- Additional comments from eros...@openoffice.org Fri Jun 12 12:04:28
+ 2009 ---
Please, try to rebuild font cache with fc-cache.
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=102652
User kpalagin changed the following:
What|Old value |New value
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455510
Christopher Beland bel...@alum.mit.edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Hi Team,
Name : Ashwin Muni
Country : India
City : Mumbai
State : Maharashtra
Timezone : +5:30
Experience in FOSS : 5 years
I am a Linux System and Network Administrator working for an IT
Company. I Would
like to join the Fedora Project and work with the community because i
have found immense
On Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Parag Radke wrote:
Hello Everyone, I am Parag Radke. i recently completed my Bachelors’ in
Computer Sci. Engg. I am Interested in
Operating Systems and Compiler Design. I join this team because i want to
contribute to the world of open source and
want to learn the
On Fri, 12 Jun 2009, Ashwin Muni wrote:
Hi Team,
Name : Ashwin Muni
Country : India
City : Mumbai
State : Maharashtra
Timezone : +5:30
Experience in FOSS : 5 years
I am a Linux System and Network Administrator working for an IT
Company. I Would
like to join the Fedora Project and work
On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 3:21 AM, stackoverflow
teamt...@stackoverflow.com wrote:
more info here:
http://code.google.com/p/dotnetopenid/issues/detail?id=186
I have confirmed that the https://login.launchpad.net/+openid OP endpoint is
not
sending the session_type parameter back in the associate
Hi!
In former times, there was an excellent cooperative relationship between the
development of cdrtools and the various Linux distributions (in special with
Debian). Unfortunately, this changed in Spring 2004, a few months after the
Debian package maintainer for the cdrtools has been replaced
I know nothing about this story :-) but I happen to remember a part of the
original debate back in 2006, so for context here it is:
http://lwn.net/Articles/198171/
The licence issue referred to, AFAICT, is that Joerg Schilling changed
cdrtools from GPL to CDDL (in 2006) so someone (Debian?)
Christoph Höger choe...@cs.tu-berlin.de wrote:
I am not in any way officially speaking for fedora, Just my 2ct:
1. FSF is very explicit about GPL and CDDL:
The FSF has no relevence for the cdrtools project as the FSF does not
own Copyright on the project. Please let us discuss relevent text
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 2:45 PM, Joerg Schilling
joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de wrote:
Ciaran O'Riordan cia...@member.fsf.org wrote:
I know nothing about this story :-) but I happen to remember a part of the
original debate back in 2006, so for context here it is:
Frank Murphy frankl...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/06/09 20:45, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Ciaran O'Riordancia...@member.fsf.org wrote:
I know nothing about this story :-) but I happen to remember a part of the
original debate back in 2006, so for context here it is:
Christofer C. Bell christofer.c.b...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Joerg
Schillingjoerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de wrote:
I am not going to re-introduce a license that acording to the private
interpretation from the initiator of the fork is not a valid OSS license,
On 12/06/09 21:33, Joerg Schilling wrote:
The rest contains a lot of accusations but not a single legal proof.
Please read the relvent information I did provide already, see e.g.:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-legal-list/2009-June/msg00017.html
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 4:27 PM, Joerg
Schillingjoerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de wrote:
Frank Murphy frankl...@gmail.com wrote:
http://lists.gpl-violations.org/pipermail/legal/2007-July/001065.html
This message is from a lawyer.
You are mistaken: Patent attorneys are not lawyers.
Now
On 12/06/09 22:27, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Frank Murphyfrankl...@gmail.com wrote:
Please read this:
http://www.rosenlaw.com/Rosen_Ch06.pdf
Why, they didn't write the GPL.
Give me a lawyer from the GPL Copyright holders.
you may have then have something worth peoples time to read.
Frank Murphy frankl...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/06/09 22:27, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Frank Murphyfrankl...@gmail.com wrote:
Please read this:
http://www.rosenlaw.com/Rosen_Ch06.pdf
Why, they didn't write the GPL.
But Rosen gives useful and cleanly legal based explanations.
Give
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Joerg
The FSF has no relevence in this case as the FSF does not hold
any Copyright on the related code. The text on the FSF web pages
was written by laymen and does not contain legal based explanations.
Please take this as constructive criticism. This
Christofer C. Bell christofer.c.b...@gmail.com wrote:
Please read this:
http://www.rosenlaw.com/Rosen_Ch06.pdf
It gives valid legal theories for all claims and it explains why there is no
problem.
So far I've read the first 1/3 of the document and everything I've
read
Hello,
I am trying to use grep
But this gives me a 'segmentation fault'
after p.e.
ps -ef | grep cpio
As i understand, this has something to do with script errors or compile
errors?
How can I solve this? Reinstall it? Or...
--
Roland Brouwers
C.A.T. bvba
B-2660 Antwerp
Tel: +32 3 830
2009/6/7 François Patte francois.pa...@mi.parisdescartes.fr:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Le 06/06/2009 18:50, Frank Cox a écrit :
On Sat, 06 Jun 2009 11:37:13 +0200
François Patte wrote:
That was my first idea: I try to get to grips with NM, but I did not see
anything
Okay,
Just got Fedora 11 installed on a fresh partition in one of my desktops.
It feels VERY snappy indeed. The first boot certainly didn't seem to
work in 20 secs or less, more like 30 or 40, but I wonder if that's
because it was the first boot.
Two quick observations:
ONE:
The system updater
Kevin Kempter wrote:
good point. Will lame do this for me as well?
No, you'd use oggenc for that. But you can just use one of the GUIs, e.g.
the ones recommended by the other replies, or the ones you'll find via yum
search, most of those GUIs can convert pretty much any format to any other
On 06/12/2009 12:35 PM, Fernando Cassia wrote:
Two quick observations:
ONE:
The system updater downloads and fetches 362.5 MB of fixes and updates
on the first connection. Where is DeltaRPM?? Do I have to manually
enable it?? Does it even work?. With DeltaRPM I certianly expected 50
MB of
1 - 100 of 326 matches
Mail list logo
