Re: dependancy issues
On Sat, Jan 01, 2005 at 05:07:42PM -0800, Carl B. Constantine wrote: > I'm trying to trim my system a little bit. I wanted to purge Evolution > from my system since I use Mutt for email. But doing that wants to > remove Gnome. So it wants to remove the Gnome meta-package. So what? -- Marc Wilson | Some people say a front-engine car handles best. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Some people say a rear-engine car handles best. | I say a rented car handles best. -- P.J. O'Rourke
Re: GtkMozEmbed with Firefox not Mozilla
On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 10:01:10PM -0500, William Ballard wrote: > Why should I install an email client and web page editor, > the bloat that is Mozilla, just to get GtkMozEmbed? Not to include you in this group, instead it would appear that you actually have a clue, but most of the clueless horde do exactly that, install Firefox, Thunderbird, and Sunbird. And then somehow think they're superior for not simply installing Mozilla. -- Marc Wilson | Sometimes I wonder if I'm in my right mind. Then it [EMAIL PROTECTED] | passes off and I'm as intelligent as ever. -- | Samuel Beckett, "Endgame"
Re: Status of Kernel 2.4.28 packages?
On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 08:02:25PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote: > Converting to udev is an additional step, and caused me a lot more > work than the basic 2.6 upgrade (mostly getting my head around it, and > converting from usbmgr). Converting to udev is in no way a part of converting to a 2.6 kernel. Not even if you're using devfs. Only people unfortunate enough to be using Gnome 2.8 are required to have udev running. Udev. Just say no. -- Marc Wilson | Those who can't write, write manuals. [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
Re: Bug#293785: ITP: gnomebaker -- CD/DVD writer for the GNOME desktop
On Sat, Feb 05, 2005 at 04:18:23PM -0200, Goedson Teixeira Paixao wrote: > Obs.: version 0.3 has not been released, yet. Packages built from current > CVS can be found at > http://people.debian.org/~goedson/debian/packages/gnomebaker/snapshots/ There's a reason it spews all this cr*p to stdout? Oh, that's right, it's a Gnome application. Oh, and the 0.3-1 package segfaults right after it announces it's loading the GUI: (gdb) bt #0 0x401d15f1 in gnome_vfs_mime_get_value () from /usr/lib/libgnomevfs-2.so.0 (gdb) bt #0 0x401d15f1 in gnome_vfs_mime_get_value () from /usr/lib/libgnomevfs-2.so.0 #1 0x401cecd9 in gnome_vfs_mime_get_description () from /usr/lib/libgnomevfs-2.so.0 #2 0x08056553 in filebrowser_populate () #3 0x0805682d in filebrowser_sel_changed () #4 0x407f13b6 in g_cclosure_marshal_VOID__VOID () from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0 #5 0x407df6b6 in g_closure_invoke () from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0 #6 0x407f0ec8 in g_signal_emit_by_name () from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0 #7 0x407eff4c in g_signal_emit_valist () from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0 #8 0x407f01e6 in g_signal_emit () from /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0 #9 0x404e118e in _gtk_tree_selection_internal_select_node () from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 #10 0x404e00f6 in gtk_tree_selection_select_path () from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 #11 0x404e02d4 in gtk_tree_selection_select_iter () from /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 #12 0x0805776a in filebrowser_setup_tree () #13 0x08057d9f in filebrowser_new () #14 0x08058b09 in gnomebaker_new () #15 0x08051315 in main () -- Marc Wilson | If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Albert Einstein -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: is xprint still used by mozilla, etc?
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 05:16:09PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > It is *always* a good idea to use it if you can get it to work (and with > CUPS, setting the DPI correctly is usually all it takes). I think you mean setting the DIP *incorrectly* is all it takes, as you usually have to lie about what the printer supports in order to get CUPS + xprint to *not* produce either fantastically large printing, or microscopically small printing. -- Marc Wilson | This font is starting to come out very [EMAIL PROTECTED] | nicely Knghtbrd: oh dear, are you hacking up | another quake font in vi? :) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: is xprint still used by mozilla, etc?
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 07:37:16PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: > Otavio Salvador wrote: > > Not really. Like you did remember, exist some language that need it > > for printing and in this case i think it should be included. > > What languages (and why)? He may be referring to how poorly Mozilla supports non-English character sets unless you use Xprint instead of its built-in postscript support. -- Marc Wilson | But it does move! -- Galileo Galilei [EMAIL PROTECTED] | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: is xprint still used by mozilla, etc?
On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 11:59:37AM +1100, Drew Parsons wrote: > Finn-Arne Johansen wrote: > > I removed the xprint dependencies in debian-edu, cause it does not work > > out of the box, and it's confusing. Printing using cups works, both > > with mozilla (suite) and OOo. > > Xprint works perfectly fine out of the box. Apparently you missed the flamage when Mozilla's maintainer went insane and started requiring it. :) -- Marc Wilson | No purchase necessary. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Offer to take over the shadow package (passwd and login binary packages)
On Sun, Mar 13, 2005 at 10:31:36AM +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote: > * Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Since July 2004, I've got no news from Karl and any further attempt to > > get in touch with him has been unsuccessful. Even before this, it > > became quite obvious that the package is not very actively maintained. > > Same goes for his xscreensaver package, which is in a pitiful state There are unofficial xscreensaver packages available from Ari Pollock at: # ari pollock's xscreensaver packages deb http://people.debian.org/~ari unstable/ deb-src http://people.debian.org/~ari unstable/ Maybe he'd take over xscreensaver. :) -- Marc Wilson | Needs are a function of what other people have. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: is xprint still used by mozilla, etc?
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 05:30:50AM +0100, Jonas Gall wrote: > On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 14:04:40 -0800, Marc Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Apparently you missed the flamage when Mozilla's maintainer went insane and > > started requiring it. :) > That were the days of Xprint release 008 which was not a kicker - but > in the meantime both Xprint server (now at version 1.0) and Mozilla > client were improved a lot. So what you're saying is that now xprint breaks in slightly more obscure ways rather than the incredibly obvious way it did previously? -- Marc Wilson | "Dump the condiments. If we are to be eaten, we [EMAIL PROTECTED] | don't need to taste good." -- "Visionaries" cartoon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: xv and xorg
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 10:57:28PM -0700, Jiri Klouda wrote: > I just wanted to ask when xv is going to be updated It isn't. > or do I need to compile from sources? You can use this to fetch the last source package: # unofficial xv source deb-src http://debian.uni-essen.de/misc/local/ theo-phys local That'll get you the last debian package from back in the Potato days (-26). It's not hard to build it against the current stable or unstable. The -26 package had quite a few problems besides its licensing. Patches that didn't apply properly and so forth, and there are a couple of things you have to do to get it to build on gcc 4.x. I'm up to -39 in my own local copy, although I've patched the h*ll out of it too. Against unstable, of course, you have to deal with the modular X transition and move the binary into /usr/bin as well. There's no tool quite like xv, that wraps so many useful things into one binary. -- Marc Wilson | What soon grows old? Gratitude. -- Aristotle [EMAIL PROTECTED] | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: xv and xorg
On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 05:37:10AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: > Would you mind sharing the -39 or deb-src with us? xv isn't distributable by me as I'm not the copyright holder. Whoever controls where the original -26 source lives may not be OK either, but that's not for me to say. -- Marc Wilson | In the land of the dark the Ship of the Sun is driven [EMAIL PROTECTED] | by the Grateful Dead. -- Egyptian Book of the Dead signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: xv and xorg
On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 09:02:20PM +0200, Fabian Greffrath wrote: > BTW, if you have a look at the 'debian/copyright' file you will notice > that debian-unofficial.org is allowed to distribute those packages, > although the source code has been modified. Personally, *I* think that still fails the DFSG, as you can't convey the right to distribute, but what do I know? Wow... you've collected a lot more patches to it than I have. Fixes, too. -- Marc Wilson | Mencken and Nathan's Second Law of The Average [EMAIL PROTECTED] | American: All the postmasters in small towns read | all the postcards. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: not running depmod at boot time
On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 09:35:31AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > "make install" already runs depmod. What if you don't use the 'install' target? I certainly don't. Does the 'modules_install' target also run depmod? I don't claim to understand what the comments in the kernel Makefile say about it, other than that they imply there's some dependency on System.map. Speaking as the "user" in this discussion, if depmod is no longer going to be run at boot, and my current kernel installation method isn't going to do it, I need to make sure I do it myself or change how I install kernels. -- Marc Wilson | Cats, no less liquid than their shadows, offer no [EMAIL PROTECTED] | angles to the wind. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: LILO 21.6-2
A better question is WHY have links to the root? Not everyone uses kpkg... and lots of people see value in keeping the root clean. I certainly do. NEVER MAKE ASSUMPTIONS. You *think* you'll have the next version take a list of kernel locations? You are missing the whole point here... whyinhell are you deliberately overwriting the existing configuration, without asking? Why would you ever consider *NOT* actually bothering to look at where the system actually keeps its kernel(s)? Or removing options that the sysadmin *OBVIOUSLY* has in there for a reason (password settings come to mind...)? Meanwhile I've retrieved the last SANE version (Vincent's), reinstalled it, and put it on hold. After, of course, restoring my latest backup to get my configuration back. Running unstable isn't supposed to mean that there are deliberate attempts to destroy a box by people who are supposedly maintainers. - Marc Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.moonkingdom.net/mwilson -Original Message- From: Russell Coker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 05, 2001 8:44 PM To: Joey Hess Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Subject:Re: LILO 21.6-2 On Saturday 06 January 2001 15:08, Joey Hess wrote: > Russell Coker wrote: > > I have just uploaded LILO 21.6-2 to Woody. I have made it use debconf > > for all the common settings (I can configure lilo.conf for all my > > machines using only debconf). Please test it and let me know of any > > other settings that should be added for debconf. > > > > Also I am concerned about the risk of breaking things. Please let me > > know how it works. > > Well I rather agree with the bug reports that state it should not > overwrite existing working configurations. > > Also, it broke my configuration by pointing to these images: > > image=/vmlinuz > label=Linux > image=/vmlinuz.old > label=old > > That doesn't work, I have kernel-package configured to put them in > /boot. You don't have sym-links to the root directory? Why not? Hmm. I think I'll make the next version take a list of kernel locations. > It spewed something to the screen which overwrote/corrupted debconf's slang > frontend. I think I caught it using script, it seems to be: > > Running /usr/sbin/liloconfig > > This program only reinstall LiLO with the already given options. > You can reconfigure LiLO with the dpkg-reconfigure lilo or you can use > the old configuration tool, which is now named oldliloconfig. > Here we will run lilo, but now for security reasons we won't do it! > Please verify lilo.conf by hand and send comments to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks, and sorry about the data loss ;) > Here we will dd the mbr.b to /dev/sda. > > Finally, all the debconf questions are written in pretty bad English. Yes. They were submitted to me by a Hungarian. I am already in the process of fixing grammar and spelling. -- http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/projects.html Projects I am working on http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: CUPS should be the default print service in Debian/Sarge
On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 02:52:04PM +0100, Ross Burton wrote: > As a random reply... > However, I am biased, as I package the GNOME CUPS packages... :) And as a random comment, it's really sad that a printing system would have any sort of dependency whatsoever on Gnome (or KDE, for that matter). Hopefully it's only UI nonsense (although I freely admit that I'm not about to install it to find out). -- Marc Wilson | Ya'll hear about the geometer who went to the beach [EMAIL PROTECTED] | to catch some rays and became a tangent ? pgplZ3BBM9ypM.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: CUPS should be the default print service in Debian/Sarge
On Sat, Aug 02, 2003 at 02:51:53AM -0500, Joe Wreschnig wrote: > For the vast majority of situations, it's incredibly easier to configure, > and usually more reliable about output, than lprng. Implying that there are circumstances where CUPS will produce valid output, and lprng will not? I'm interested. Examples, please. -- Marc Wilson | Old programmers never die, they just hit account [EMAIL PROTECTED] | block limit. pgphd3U8NKqMo.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: MEI Whitelist Autoresponse
On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 07:12:47PM -0700, Joshua Kwan wrote: > Hmm, how about giving tmda its own special header so we can auto-filter > out messages from people who use C-R systems? It adds itself to X-Delivery-Agent, so it's not hard to filter out. I've started capturing C-R signatures where I can find them and adding them to procmail /dev/null recipies. Haven't got many yet, but I'm working on it. -- Marc Wilson | Stop searching. Happiness is right next to you. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Now, if they'd only take a bath ... pgpaBsXpKihMD.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Debian should not modify the kernels!
On Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 12:07:18AM +1000, Russell Coker wrote: > Bad analogy. Consider the way that the Harry Potter books have been modified > for the limited vocabulary of the American audience. You mean they were even worse before they were published in the US? Hard to believe. -- Marc Wilson | What use is magic if it can't save a unicorn? -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Peter S. Beagle, "The Last Unicorn"
Re: Status of brk vulnerability in kernel-source-2.4.20-11, 2.4.21-5, 2.4.22-3?
On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 05:38:11PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > The security advisory does not mention these (the current 2.4.x kernels > available in sarge), and the upstream fix is apparently not until 2.4.23. No offense... but (a) why would the DSA mention Sarge, and (b) isn't it obvious that the kernels in Sarge are affected, as (1) there has been no opportunity to move a patched kernel to Sarge, and (2) Sarge doesn't have security updates in the first place? It seems to me that all Sarge kernels have the vulnerability, and that you should proceed on that assumption. -- Marc Wilson | If there is no God, who pops up the next Kleenex? [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Art Hoppe
Re: Debian packages and freedesktop.org (Gnome, KDE, etc) menu entries
On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 12:57:53PM +0100, Mathieu Roy wrote: > > Some or all of: twm, pdmenu, blackbox, afterstep, fluxbox, gtk-menu, > > wmaker, fvwm2, enlightenment, etc, consult /etc/menu-methods for more. > > There are dozens of programs that use the debian menus that would have > > no reason to use the .desktop stuff. > > Can you name the ones that are still developed in that list? I couldn't pass this up: twm - admittedly, bug-fixes only pdmenu - this is a window manager? blackbox- alive and under current development afterstep - alive and under current development fluxbox - alive and under current development gtk-menu- this is a window manager? wmaker - alive and under current development fvwm2 - alive and under current development e - well, there are CVS commits, call it what you will I only see *one* window manager in that list that isn't alive (twm). Enlightenment is, of course, debatable, and always has been. ^_^ Not that whether or not a package has a release every ten minutes or every ten months has jack to do with whether or not it's useful software. There are any number of other window managers that couldn't care less about .desktop files, yet (a) provide menus, (b) are packaged in Debian. > Why do you say that this programs would have no reason to use the > .desktop stuff? What reasons would they have to use the Debian Menu > instead? They don't. That simple data point seems to be missing from the entire discussion. They use their own internal menu formats. Thus, we have the menu package, which takes *Debian's* window-manager-independent menu entries, and creates for each of these window managers something that they can digest in their own format. Saying "Debian should provide .desktop files" is all well and good. Perhaps it should even be encouraged. But there is still a great need for what the menu package does. It's highly conceited to say that Debian would force anything *it* packaged to comply with .desktop files upstream. For many of these projects, they have absolutely no reason to. -- Marc Wilson | A freelance is one who gets paid by the word -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] | per piece or perhaps. -- Robert Benchley
Re: Debian packages and freedesktop.org (Gnome, KDE, etc) menu entries
On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 06:02:16PM +0100, Mathieu Roy wrote: > I remember about a message from a guy from RedHat saying more or less > that he see no point in supporting an environment/wm that do not > follow the new standards decided at freedesktop.org... Just as a data point, you do realize that freedesktop.org is a wholly owned and operated subsidiary of RedHat, right? Oh, you don't think so? Take a look at who their god-king is. Take a look at where their mailing lists are hosted. Karsten has detailed in another thread his interactions with that group. Then think about whether RedHat has a vested interest in *not* supporting anything that doesn't view the world the same way their annointed "God of the Desktop" does. -- Marc Wilson | Stupid nick highlighting Whenever someone [EMAIL PROTECTED] | starts with "stupid" it highlights the nick. Hmm. | -- #Debian
Re: Debian packages and freedesktop.org (Gnome, KDE, etc) menu entries
On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 12:31:17PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote: > We don't have to map them onto anything. We just have to pass them > through to the menu methods in a fashion that allows them to generate > .desktop files. Other way around. You have to pass .desktop files through to the menu-methods in a fashion that allows them to generate menus digestible to applications not supporting .desktop files. Like just about any system other than KDE or Gnome. -- Marc Wilson | The mome rath isn't born that could outgrabe me. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Nicol Williamson signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian packages and freedesktop.org (Gnome, KDE, etc) menu entries
On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 09:08:38PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote: > On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 10:29:24PM -0800, Marc Wilson wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 12:31:17PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote: > > > We don't have to map them onto anything. We just have to pass them > > > through to the menu methods in a fashion that allows them to generate > > > .desktop files. > > > > Other way around. You have to pass .desktop files through to the > > menu-methods in a fashion that allows them to generate menus digestible to > > applications not supporting .desktop files. > > You seem to have lost the context. Not at all. You want to enforce on $RANDOM_UPSTREAM the idea that they have to support .desktop files. That is *not* going to work. Debian does not have that sort of power. On the other hand, the idea that an application desiring to participate in the menu system being required to provide the necessary menu-method to get from .desktop files to their own format is much more reasonable. Upstream can create that, or the package maintainer can, or the menu package can provide it. Boy... that sure sounds a lot like the current $APPLICATION-agnostic method Debian has right now. So, why does this change need to happen again? If what you want is for only Gnome and KDE to be able to participate in the menu system, you could just come out and say so. -- Marc Wilson | All kings is mostly rapscallions. --Mark Twain [EMAIL PROTECTED] | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian packages and freedesktop.org (Gnome, KDE, etc) menu entries
On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 09:37:51AM -0500, Colin Walters wrote: > On Fri, 2003-12-12 at 01:01, Marc Wilson wrote: > > > Not at all. You want to enforce on $RANDOM_UPSTREAM the idea that they > > have to support .desktop files. That is *not* going to work. Debian does > > not have that sort of power. > > > > On the other hand, the idea that an application desiring to participate in > > the menu system being required to provide the necessary menu-method to get > > from .desktop files to their own format is much more reasonable. Upstream > > can create that, > > The above two paragraphs don't make sense to me, in combination. The rest of the second paragraph, which you clipped, make it plain that what I was doing was listing sources for the .desktop file-converting-menu-method. It could be provided by upstream, it could be created by the Debian package maintainer, it could be part of the menu package. In short, it could be created by just about anyone. > If upstream can write code to convert from .desktop to their own format, > why can't they just include that directly in their software? Perhaps THEY don't want to, but do want to allow their software to participate in the Debian menu system. It would be their choice, one way, or the other. -- Marc Wilson | Debian Hint #7: You can use the cron-apt package [EMAIL PROTECTED] | to do automatic nightly downloads of updates for | packages installed on your system. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Appropriate? mutt/mailx requires mail-transport-agent
On Mon, Jan 07, 2002 at 03:05:41PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > My objection is simply that while there is a need for an available > SMTP server, there is no need for it to be local. I'm going to look > into some alternatives and post a recommendation. Mutt does not speak SMTP. A remote server won't do it any good at all, thus the dependency on mail-transfer-agent. Neither does mailx, if I remember correctly... thus it also needs the dependency. -- Marc Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpyG2pVK6BVV.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: serious bug. Evolution and Microsoft mentality.
On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 12:55:34PM -0600, John Hasler wrote: > > Evolution added an X-Evolution header to each message for status > > purposes. > > Merely _looking_ at a message with Evolution alters it? That is _truly_ > evil. Even mailx does *that*. -- Marc Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgplnb1TN5XeH.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 06:30:20AM +0300, Lasse Karkkainen wrote: > It's the hardware support. People are getting sick of VGA/VESA. I > thought that it would be obvious. Translation: I own one of the umpteen iterations of the Radeon that 4.1.0 doesn't support in a way I think it should, so I'm gonna whine until I get support for what *I* own, since I'm incapable of doing it for myself. Am I close? -- Marc Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.cox.net/msw -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 12:23:27AM -0400, Sean Middleditch wrote: > If you have one of the 3 chipsets only supported in 4.2, there is > nothing stopping you from installing that. Except that you are instead > mucking around spouting ideas straight from your ass on a mailing list, > instead of learning how to do what you need to (i.e., build X). One of them is Matrox's G550, one of them is one or another of the Radeon's, but what's the third? And actually, the G550 is a no-brainer to add support for and re-do the package. ^_^ /me wuvs his G550... -- Marc Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.cox.net/msw -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree 4.2.0 - again
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 07:37:11PM -0700, David D.W. Downey wrote: > On Tuesday 16 April 2002 00:29, Andreas Metzler wrote: > > Marc Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Probably Geforce4 (usable with the nonfree Nvidia-driver on 4.1.*) or > > some Laptop-Chipset (Savage-something?) > > > Well, so much for me going after 4.2 on my own then. I've got an nVidia GX200 > 4X AGP, basicly the same family. Then again, while I do bust Branden's nuts > on the debian-devel channel about wanting 4.2, he knows I'm joking. Perfectly > content with 4.1.x. I didn't say this. I have no idea what might or might not be supported regarding GeForce cards. Don't own one, don't plan on owning one. -- Marc Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.cox.net/msw pgpJTmz6srF8t.pgp Description: PGP signature
