get the latest wine rpm:
http://winebin.netpedia.net/wine/wine-990426-1.i386.rpm
install is (as root):
rpm -Uvh wine-990426-1.i386.rpm
(you may need mesa 3.0
ftp://rufus.w3.org/linux/powertools/5.2/i386/Mesa-3.0-2.i386.rpm
rpm -Uvh Mesa-3.0-2.i386.rpm
)
btw, next time look at
On Thu, May 20, 1999 at 01:34:14AM +0300, Alex Shnitman wrote:
Yes, I'm aware of Teleport. I like the idea of xmove more, though,
because xmove proxies for individual clients, while Teleport creates a
nested X server in a window (much like Xnest), lets you start apps on
it and then lets you
Hi,
Is anyone using ISDN with Redhat 6.0?
I've tried compiling the latest ISDN kernel patch and isdn4kutils from
ftp.suse.com, but they don't compile with the 2.2.5 kernel supplied with
RedHat 6.0 (it can't find some include files).
n.b. Why isn't the ISDN kernel patch integrated into the 2.2 tree? It's been
going like this for a very long time!
The latest kernels (beginning with 2.2.7 or 2.2.8), include their
own support for ISDN. Contrary to ISDN4Linux, it targets all the
platforms (including non-Intel), but is inferior
Hello,
It has been a while, but I have good news! I have the preliminary search
pages up for the Consultants Howto. You can now search via country or state.
There is more to come but I thought you guys/gals might want to take a look
and let me know what you think.
The next step is to have a
unsubscribe
__
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
On Thu, May 20, 1999 at 03:55:29PM +0300, Eli Marmor wrote:
P.S. Since 2.2.10 is going to be cool, I hope RedHat will supply
an update in their errata page (they add some stuff which is
specific to RH, so building your own kernel is not an alternative).
If they don't, the only way to force
Eli Marmor writes:
What?! I didn't know that. What do they add? So you're not supposed to
build your own kernel on Red Hat?
Of course you can build your own. But it is better to use THEIR.
That mightly sucks. 1) they can add security holes with their patches,
and little people would
Hi,
Before going on, let me say a small note: After a private e-mail
dialog between us, you may include linux-il as a CC, but please
quote the full message of me.
That mightly sucks. 1) they can add security holes with their patches,
etc...
This is why there are SRPMs.
And now my full
Alex Shnitman wrote:
That mightly sucks. 1) they can add security holes with their patches,
and little people would know because the code isn't reviewed like the
rest of the kernel, actually most people don't see that code at all;
What the hell is going on here? How do people accept this
EM You are not the only one to be surprised; I was surprised too.
I'm rather surprised, but not entirely to the bad. This means they take QA
seriously and target serious corporate market. If you want to conquer
large corporate market, you can't allow any "oops" in the product you
ship. At least
On Thu, May 20, 1999 at 05:08:15PM +0300, Stanislav Malyshev a.k.a Frodo wrote:
AS That mightly sucks. 1) they can add security holes with their patches,
AS and little people would know because the code isn't reviewed like the
AS rest of the kernel, actually most people don't see that code at
Gaal Yahas wrote:
Hey - what's going on here? I'm making an educated guess "AS"
stands for Alex[1], but I never got his message! Is the list eating
up messages, or maybe sending them out-of order for some people?
Read again the note I sent to Alex. If you don't have it, a short
description:
Stanislav Malyshev a.k.a Frodo writes:
AS That mightly sucks. 1) they can add security holes with their patches,
AS and little people would know because the code isn't reviewed like the
AS rest of the kernel, actually most people don't see that code at all;
Same with every program -
Eli Marmor writes:
Hey - what's going on here? I'm making an educated guess "AS"
stands for Alex[1], but I never got his message! Is the list eating
up messages, or maybe sending them out-of order for some people?
Read again the note I sent to Alex. If you don't have it, a short
On Thu, May 20, 1999 at 04:40:29PM +0300, Alex Shnitman wrote:
this general approach -- of forking your own version instead
of doing the regular well-established route of submitting the patches
to linux-kernel -- makes me sick.
What the hell is going on here? How do people accept this
Has anyone played Civilization CTP for Linux, know if there's a demo
available for download, and know if it is sold anywhere in Israel?
Also I was wondering what people think of the new linux.com
- Oren
17 matches
Mail list logo
