-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
At some point hitherto, [EMAIL PROTECTED] hath spake thusly:
> First, I agree with you,. Removing options just for the sake of
> dumbing-down the UI is, well, dumb.
The GNOME developers don't agree...
> Second: The way to solve this problem (fo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
At some point hitherto, [EMAIL PROTECTED] hath spake thusly:
> It used to be under "Foot -> Programs -> Settings -> Desktop -> Window
> Manager", although I expect you already knew that.
>
> One thing that has worked for finding hidden stuff for
On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, at 3:24pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Apparently, it is a friggin' *stated goal* to remove many configuration
>> options from Gnome.
>
> So where's the value add to switch from MS? Sure, there's the "it's free"
> argument, but for most users, they don't care.
Define "user
On 7 Oct 2002, at 2:55pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> ... Apparently, it is a friggin' *stated goal* to remove many
> configuration options from Gnome. This is supposedly to prevent confusion
> among non-technical users. ... My question is, what pray tell, does having
> more options have to do wit
On 7 Oct 2002, at 3:50pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> Minor nit: I know the inside story about why there was a 7.3 and can
>>> only say that it had zero to do with the problems or lack of problems
>> >with 7.2.
>
> The basic issue is that Red Hat only bumps major release numbers when
> there are
On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, at 10:14pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> OK, where does one change the window manager in Gnome in Red Hat 8?
> I can't find it in any of the Preferences or Settings menus.
It used to be under "Foot -> Programs -> Settings -> Desktop -> Window
Manager", although I expect you al
On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, at 10:08pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I can't remember ever hearing of such a thing - all this would really
> amount to is something on the order of a 1-port KVM switch implemented as
> (say) a PCI card, right?
That would work if your laptop had a PCI slot. Which it don't.
On 7 Oct 2002, Ben Boulanger wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 22:14, Thomas M. Albright wrote:
> > OK, where does one change the window manager in Gnome in Red Hat 8?
>
> In KDE (not sure about gnome), it's under Extras, System Settings,
> Desktop Switching Tool.
>
I can change the desktop. I nee
On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 22:14, Thomas M. Albright wrote:
> OK, where does one change the window manager in Gnome in Red Hat 8?
In KDE (not sure about gnome), it's under Extras, System Settings,
Desktop Switching Tool.
Ben
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
Apparently, it ain't there. The way I do it (I'm in 7.x, but I don't see
why it wouldn't work) is:
1) Kill my current window manager (eg. "killall sawfish")
2) Startup up the window manager I want ("nohup enlightenment&")
3) Save my session (Foot -> Programs -> Settings -> Session -> Save curren
OK, where does one change the window manager in Gnome in Red Hat 8?
I can't find it in any of the Preferences or Settings menus.
--
TARogue (Linux user number 234357)
You can always tell a Texan, but you can't tell him much. - Chris Wall
___
gnhlug-
Let's say there's a machine (probably out at some
customer's site) that normally runs without any
KVM (Keyboard/Video/Mouse) HW attached, but I
temporarily need to hook up to that machine in
order to diagnose a problem or install/reconfig
some SW. Wouldn't it be nice if my laptop
had (say) a car
Paul Iadonisi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Well, unless Sun plans on having 'uname -r' return 5.99 or some such
> nonsense, there is little choice. And six probably isn't the best
SunOS 5.99 would be a long way off, in any case. The next release after
5.9 would be 5.10. Remember, this is not
On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 20:36, John Abreau wrote:
> "Matthew J. Brodeur" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >The important question is what will they call Solaris after SunOS bumps
> > to 6.x?
>
> The move from SunOS 4.x to SunOS 5.x was the switch from a BSD system
> to a SYSV system. So what f
"Matthew J. Brodeur" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>The important question is what will they call Solaris after SunOS bumps
> to 6.x?
The move from SunOS 4.x to SunOS 5.x was the switch from a BSD system
to a SYSV system. So what fundamental architectural change would justify
a switch from 5
Suzanne said:
>>> NASA claims that, for the first time, they'll have a
>>> live camera on the external tank of STS-112 (Atlantis),
>>> which will be broadcasting the entire liftoff and ascent,
>>> including the release and burnup of the tank itself.
>>> Lanuch is scheduled for 3:46pm EST Oct 7th,
>> Debian rules, RH Sucks
>> vi is for wimps
>> Linux
> Hm, can't really find much to disagree with.
Inconsistent rubbish. Any *real* Debianer knows it's GNU/Linux -- just
like Debian prints on its web site.
And while vi isn't my favorite editor, I'm afraid to nominate
Begin forwarded message:
> From: "Lisa M. Opus Goldstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Mon Oct 7, 2002 10:18:04 AM US/Eastern
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Upcoming event - Richard Stallman Speaking in Burlington
>
>
> Dear People,
>
>
> Richard Stallman, author of the GPL and founder of th
"Matthew J. Brodeur" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>The important question is what will they call Solaris after SunOS bumps
> to 6.x?
Linux? (-:
--kevin
--
Kevin D. Clark / Cetacean Networks / Portsmouth, N.H. (USA)
cetaceannetworks.com!kclark (GnuPG ID: B280F24E)
alumni.unh.edu!kdc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 7 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> What do mean by that? Solaris is still on 2.x, 2.9 just got released?
>
> (Remember, it's only the output of 'uname' that matters, since we
> tech weenies never pay attention to marketing efforts ;)
Hey, all. It appears to me that OpenLDAP has an almost complete dearth of
dead-tree documentation. Is this true? Does anyone know of a reasonably
good book that is still in print that I might be able to find? Just
looking for implementation -- but preferably in English, as opposed to the
stuff
In a message dated: 07 Oct 2002 15:50:12 EDT
Paul Iadonisi said:
> The basic issue is that Red Hat only bumps major release numbers when
>there are backward (or is it forward? Or both maybe? I forgot) binary
>compatibility issues. I think the fact that they stuck with the .0, .1,
>.2 release
On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 15:26, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> In a message dated: 07 Oct 2002 15:07:26 EDT
> Paul Iadonisi said:
>
> >On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 11:02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >[snip]
> >
> >>- and an X.3 release is pretty much unheard of, and IMO,
> >> indicative of just
On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 15:24, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
>
>
> I know Gnome, and KDE, CDE, etc. for that matter, are more than
> "window managers". However, I explicitly asked if you need to be
> "running GNOME". This implies, IMO, that I am *not* running Gnome,
> but rather, using AN
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
At some point hitherto, Paul Iadonisi hath spake thusly:
> > - and an X.3 release is pretty much unheard of, and IMO,
> > indicative of just how much was wrong with the entire 7.x
> > series :)
>
> Minor nit: I know the inside stor
In a message dated: 07 Oct 2002 15:07:26 EDT
Paul Iadonisi said:
>On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 11:02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>> - and an X.3 release is pretty much unheard of, and IMO,
>>indicative of just how much was wrong with the entire 7.x
>>series :)
>
> Minor
In a message dated: 07 Oct 2002 14:55:11 EDT
Paul Iadonisi said:
>On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 11:14, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>> > It's now impossible to have the Gnome panel(s) be anything but
>> >always-on-top.
>>
>> Is this only if you're running Gnome? Or does it apply to running the
On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 11:02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
> - and an X.3 release is pretty much unheard of, and IMO,
> indicative of just how much was wrong with the entire 7.x
> series :)
Minor nit: I know the inside story about why there was a 7.3 and can
only say
On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 11:14, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
> > It's now impossible to have the Gnome panel(s) be anything but
> >always-on-top.
>
> Is this only if you're running Gnome? Or does it apply to running the
> panel in other windows managers?
Gnome is not a window manager. You
Hi all,
I just saw this on /., which surprised me, since I've been an avid
fan and subscriber of The Perl Journal since issue #1!!!
Anyway, if you're serious about Perl, or just really enjoy well
written technical articles by very intelligent people, the TPJ is for
you. Please subscribe if
On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, Ed Lawson wrote:
=>On Mon, 07 Oct 2002 10:48:15 -0400
=>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
=>
=>
=>> Hmm, now that I think about it, it's been a while since we had a
=>> decent flame war around here, so, since I remembered my asbestos
=>> underwear today, let me lob the first volley ;
On Mon, 07 Oct 2002 10:48:15 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hmm, now that I think about it, it's been a while since we had a
> decent flame war around here, so, since I remembered my asbestos
> underwear today, let me lob the first volley ;)
>
> Debian rules, RH Sucks
How can you st
In a message dated: 05 Oct 2002 22:35:55 EDT
Paul Iadonisi said:
> Here, I'm afraid, I somewhat agree. The new window manager for Gnome
>2.0, metacity, is basically crippling for me.
Well, it's good to know that I haven't missed *anything* by sticking
with fvwm over the years :) Someone wa
> Hmm, now that I think about it, it's been a while since we had a
> decent flame war around here, so, since I remembered my asbestos
> underwear today, let me lob the first volley ;)
>
> Debian rules, RH Sucks
> vi is for wimps
> Linux
Hm, can't really find much to disagree
In a message dated: Sat, 05 Oct 2002 20:52:46 EDT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>I have always, by accident rather then by dint of planning, moved from
>N.1 or N.2 to N+1.1 so I have yet to experience a RH N.0 release.
I do this by design. My rule of thumb is *always* avoid an X.0
release of *anyt
On Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 10:48:15AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Hmm, now that I think about it, it's been a while since we had a
> decent flame war around here, so, since I remembered my asbestos
> underwear today, let me lob the first volley ;)
>
> Debian rules, RH Sucks
>
In a message dated: Sat, 05 Oct 2002 19:54:03 EDT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>Guys, I just did an upgrade of my system
Not that this is any help or consolation to you, but I have yet to
see *any* OS "upgrade" go smoothly. I've heard the occasional report
of a RH 6.1->6.2 or maybe even 7.2->7.
In a message dated: Sat, 05 Oct 2002 18:49:53 EDT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Certain other rabid zealots fired back remarks about how KDE is under the
>GPL, so Red Hat can do anything they darn well please. Naturally, they also
>had to bring up the throughly dead KDE/Qt licensing issue one mor
In a message dated: Sat, 05 Oct 2002 17:12:59 EDT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>On Wed, 2 Oct 2002, at 3:11pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Anyone running apache 2.x yet?
>
> Yes. Not me, though. ;-)
>
>> I just installed it, and for some reason I can't get it to recognize my
>> DocumentRoot. The s
On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 03:58:39PM -0400, Michael O'Donnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The problem is that SSH apparently fails to distinguish
> between SSH connecting TO a system versus THRU a system;
> when I switch (between saying
>
>ssh B # Connecting TO system B
>
So I've got my digital camcorder, got the video downloaded using dvgrab,
and edited it with kino (all under RH 8.0 BTW). Now I want to actually
make an SVCD/VCD and be able to send said camcorder recordings to the rest
of my family so they can watch it on their DVD/VCD players.
Only problem is,
On Sun, 6 Oct 2002, Ed Robitaille wrote:
> I am running SuSe 7.3 on a dual boot system with Windows 95 (gotta keep
> the other half happy). I updated some software and can no longer play
> audio cd's either using the console or in X. The cd player will flash
> like its playing, I can here audio wh
When there is a great load on the system and there is a lot of swapping and
thrashing going on, the first thing the system does is try to unload itself,
and the first thing it does is "suspend" process accounting. Usually a sign
of low memory levels, perhaps generated by the release of many jobs
i saw these in my log last night:
Oct 7 02:23:10 yyy kernel: Process accounting paused
Oct 7 02:23:42 yyy kernel: Process accounting resumed
it happened several times, for generally about 30 seconds.
i've never seen it before. none of my filesystems are full.
anyone have any idea? have i b
44 matches
Mail list logo
