[opensuse] ClusterIP anyone?

[Martin Cordova]

Hello:

I am interested in learning about configuring load balancing without a
load balancer, now that IPTables includes support for this. It's hard
to find easy-to-follow intructions about it, the netfilter how-to does
not help me too much (because of my limited experience with iptables
and networking concepts)

I wonder if someone has already experimented with ClusterIP and can
share his/her scripts?

Is there a SuSE-specific config file to setup clusterIP nodes? Could
not find anything on Yast2/FireWall module. BTW, it would be nice to
have a config option for this in yast2.

I already looked into a very nice software called "balancer", which is
an open source TCP proxy, very easy to configure,  but I suspect that
an IPTable-based solution could  be much faster, right? I would
appreciate comments on this if it is not the case.

Thank you,
Martin
--
Dinamica - Open source J2EE framework
Free, easy and powerful
http://www.martincordova.com

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] Where is postgresql?

[Ken Leyba]

Well, that's exactly what I didn't want or need to do.  I guess
openSUSE isn't for me.  I installed Mandriva which includes
PostgreSQL.  My application is now running.  Normally I use CentOS but
it didn't like the video card on my test machine (needed the GUI for a
demo), so I thought I'd give openSUSE a shot.  Oh well.

On 10/27/05, Joan Manuel Ventura Felix <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i installed the postgresql. i went to any mirror, and i downloaded all the
> package from suse/i586.
>
> next
>
> rpm -i *
>
> and thats all.
>
>
> 2005/10/26, Christoph Thiel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > On Wed, 26 Oct 2005, Ken Leyba wrote:
> >
> > > I can't seem to find the correct YAST repository for PostgreSQL. Can
> > > anyone give me a pointer?
> >
> > - http://lists.opensuse.org/archive/opensuse/2005-Sep/0775.html
> > - http://www.opensuse.org/Released_Version
> > - http://www.opensuse.org/Package_Repositories
> >
> >
> > Regards
> > Christoph
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
>
>


--
Ken Leyba
"I think you're the opposite of a paranoid. I think you go around with
the insane delusion that people like you."-Harry Block, Deconstructing
Harry

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] RPM dependency hell: back to the drawing board?

[Janne Karhunen]

On Monday 31 October 2005 01:24, Pascal Bleser wrote:

> My point, about this and as a reply to Janne, is that Linux is a highly
> modular system, and that it's actually one of it's key benefits. 

Yep. This is yet another double-edged sword.


-- 
// Janne

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: [opensuse] RPM dependency hell: back to the drawing board?

[Daniel Hatfield]

> Now Klik has very little to do with this.
> Or, rather, Klik definately does *not* solve this, it's the exact
> opposite.

Pascal,

Sorry if this came out the wrong way, I was just trying to lighten the
mood.  I agree with everything you've stated.

Cheers,
Daniel 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] Loop mounting iso doesn't seem to work...

[M.Blackmore]

On Mon, 2005-10-31 at 00:03 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Let's say you have user id = 1000 and group id = 1000. The easy way goes like 
> this (this is what I did): 
>  
> mkdir ~/suse 
> mount xx.iso ~/suse -ouid=1000,gid=1000,loop 

Thanks Konstantin, that bit works works OK, in that from the server
where I just setup the loopback, a ls of the /suse directory
(well, /suse10.0 in this instance) shows the contents of the dvd.iso.
(How does this relate to the command hoaghi gives in his mounting the
iso: mount -o loop /dadadadum.iso /anywhere; 
does the ouid and gid alter where the loop goes, or is the loop optional
front or back of the command?).

> ftpd -D 

err just tried ftpd, came back with an error (this is in suse 9.3)
saying "bash command not found". This is su'd into a terminal window as
root immediately after executing the mount command given above.

What is ftpd and where would it normally be resident? 

(I must get a grip of path commands in linux some day, old Dos was s
easy to set up a path command...)

Thanks for the help so far!


>  
> When the installer prompts you for your ftp server, give the corresponding IP 
> address and log in with your username and password. When it asks for a 
> directory, just enter "suse". Remember to remove the "/" it has by default or 
> the source will not be found! 
>  
> 
> Konstantinos Tampouris 
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[opensuse] SOLVED: IP forwarding/masquerading problem in OpenSUSE 10.0

[ktamp]

Let's remember my problem first: 
 
I have two computers with ethernet cards connected to each other by a  
cross-over cable. The first computer is connected to the internet by modem 
(dynamic IP's for computer and gateway). The LAN is configured with static 
IP's: 192.168.0.1/24 for the gateway (IP forwarding and masquerading enabled, 
as well as the DNS servers of the external connection), 192.168.0.2/24 for the 
client (DNS servers also set). The problem is the client cannot see anything 
outside my LAN. 
 
The solution does not involve IP masquerading; it only has to do with IP 
forwarding. First we enable IP routing in YaST or by manually 
editing /etc/sysconfig/SuSEfirewall2 and setting FW_ROUTE="yes". Then we have 
to manually set FW_FORWARD="192.168.0.0/24,0/0". "0/0" is the heart of every 
network in the computer. 
 
This should definitely have been included in YaST, or at least mentioned in 
the relevant documentation... 
 
BTW, pinging outside the LAN is another story. 
 
 
Konstantinos Tampouris 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] RPM dependency hell: back to the drawing board?

[Pascal Bleser]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Daniel Hatfield wrote:
>> Yes, but things pile up. Packages depend on packages depend on
>> packages etc. Packager has very hard time to get these right.
>> And speaking of Avg. Joe trying to install them..
> 
> Anybody else looking forward the maturation of Klik?
> http://www.opensuse.org/SUPER_KLIK

Now Klik has very little to do with this.
Or, rather, Klik definately does *not* solve this, it's the exact opposite.

Klik - at least as of now - requires having such a "base system" consisting of 
a certain number of
packages, including things like KDE and GNOME.

Actually what we're talking about mostly turns around such a base system.

Klik simply makes the assumption that, as you're using SUSE 10.0, you're having 
a certain number of
libraries installed. Those are not "packaged" as part of the cmg image.
Which means that if you don't have a certain library installed that Klik 
assumes you have, the
application simply won't run. Period. It'll die very quickly during runtime 
linkage.

Klik is great at other things (1-click-install, a single file for an 
application, use as non-root
user, transportable image, it doesn't install files on your system, etc...).
But this is precisely one of its defects: where to draw the line between what's 
part of such a "base
system" and what's not.

My point, about this and as a reply to Janne, is that Linux is a highly modular 
system, and that
it's actually one of it's key benefits. Which means that there is no such thing 
as a "base system".
Klik excels on so-called "live" distributions that consist of a read-only 
ISO/CD/DVD, because you
always have the same set of packages installed. There, you actually have a base 
system, as it
doesn't vary.

cheers
- --
  -o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/
  /\\ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 _\_v The more things change, the more they stay insane.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDZVZIr3NMWliFcXcRAs4pAJ47IOdagMXhzwLPAFkopRrxVeQ4YwCgiYTT
IgPadz4JsNtzHd2JAmzUFYY=
=qmX9
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] Exporting Evolution address book, mail, to another machine.

[Randall R Schulz]

Kenneth,

On Sunday 30 October 2005 10:19, Kenneth Aar wrote:
> Randall R Schulz wrote:
> > Are you a programmer? There are virtually no trivial but useful
> > programs, today.
>
> Uh? Sorry, I don't understand what you are trying to say.

I'm saying that while it is truly easy to proclaim "It is dead easy to 
implement feature X",  it is not usually so easy to actually implement 
that feature. File format conversions are, in fact, notoriously tricky.


> > And what do you mean by "I would submit...". Are you going to
> > submit it or not?
>
> OK, you are right. So I have submitted a bug. See bugzilla #131515.
> Please add to it if you feel like it. :-)

Good. I'm in no position to contribute to that feature request because, 
as I pointed out in my previous post, I am a happy, happy KMail user 
and have only looked at Evolution in passing (the last time I did so, I 
had a 1280x1024 monitor, and Evolution had too much screen real estate 
tied up in extraneous stuff for my taste).


Randall Schulz

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] Loop mounting iso doesn't seem to work...

[ktamp]

Αρχικό μήνυμα από  "M.Blackmore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: 
 
> Utterly no idea how to set ftp up!! Only time I tried a couple of months 
> ago using yast tools I totally failed to be able to do it - the 
> installer simply didn't find the source on the server. 
 
Let's say you have user id = 1000 and group id = 1000. The easy way goes like 
this (this is what I did): 
 
mkdir ~/suse 
mount xx.iso ~/suse -ouid=1000,gid=1000,loop 
ftpd -D 
 
When the installer prompts you for your ftp server, give the corresponding IP 
address and log in with your username and password. When it asks for a 
directory, just enter "suse". Remember to remove the "/" it has by default or 
the source will not be found! 
 
 
Konstantinos Tampouris 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] Network Problems after Xen Installation

[Juerg Schneider]

Hi Andi

> http://www.opensuse.org/Installing_Xen3
>
> After reboot my network interfaces doesn't work.

I had the same. Update to 
http://www.suse.de/~garloff/linux/xen/RPMs-100/ does fixed this for 
me.
 
Regards

Juerg

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] Thunderbird localization not working in 10.0

[Kenneth Aar]

Reinhard Gimbel schrieb:
I grabbed the "de-de.xpi", put it into a newly generated folder called 
"language" in "/opt/MozillaThunderbird/lib" and called [Extra]-[Extension]


I think I have found the culprit! It seems that the Norwegian 
languagepack can't be installed. I tried the German one and it worked 
like a charm.


--
Grusse
Kenneth Aar

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] Exporting Evolution address book, mail, to another machine.

[Pete Connolly]

On Sunday 30 October 2005 09:38, Kenneth Aar wrote:
> Pete Connolly wrote:
> > I can see why there's no import facility for Evolution to Evolution
> > transfer - you don't need it.
>
> I adamantly disagree. This is just the sort of thing that is dead easy
> to implement but is very obscure for newcomers to linux to find their
> way around. I would submit this as a usability bug to the evolution team.

Point taken.  For those of us who are used to just tarring up home directories 
to copy to a new machine or partition it is straightforward.

Maybe a trivial little 'wizard' that tars and compresses the ~/.evolution and 
~/.gconf folders then tells you what is the best step to take next (scp, 
write to CD/DVD etc.) would be useful.  Sounds like a nice little starter 
project for someone - I'll have a look.

Cheers

Pete


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] Wlan doesn't start at boot time

[Reinhard Gimbel]

Hi !

Ilker wrote a top-post :-( :


I have no encryption, and also system gone mad and i even cant connect to
the net, i'm writing this mail on windows, hoping someone would
help.Mywireless card is Linksys
WMP54G.Hardware is present but it's not connecting.I can't configure dhcpd
via Yast because it says there's a problem with config file.

On 10/30/05, 'o-Dzin Tridral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

On 30/10/05, Ilker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Hi all,
I just installed OpenSUSE 10.0 on my desktop PC.I almost solved everything
and it installed my printer and scanner (wow, it made it automatically).I
also managed to show my Linksys WMP54G wireless lan card.The operating
system sees the card but everytime i boot into system, i have to type
"dhcpcd -G http://192.168.1.1 wlan0" as root.On my last distro, i just
changed the permissions as 755 and put a "script" includes that command
into
init.d and worked fine, but on SUSE i couldn't get it working.I even tried
it with a suid bit but no luck.Is there any way to get it connected
automatically at boot ? I don't want to use NetGO.



Dear Ilker,

In case it is of use to you, I've had this problem (or one that sounds
similar). The workaround that works for me has been to disable WEP and
then
the wireless network comes up on boot. I'd like to go back to using WEP at
some point but it's ok for now.

I hope this is helpful!

'ö-Dzin


I can use the Intel PRO/wireless 2200BG which is installed in my 
notebook without any problem with WPA-PSK even after booting.


Are you using ndiswrapper to drive your WLAN ports ? I don't if this is 
related to your problems, but you should consider this in your analysis.

--
Never give up !

Best regards,
Reinhard.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] Will fuse be part of suse-10.1?

[Christoph Thiel]

On Sun, 30 Oct 2005, Pascal Bleser wrote:

> It's just the userspace tools. FUSE kernel support is included from 10.0 
> on.
> 
> Obviously, SUSE Linux should also include the userspace tools ;)

We already have the userspace tools + I'll make sure to get them into the 
next alpha release (they should show up in $EDGE soon).

Fuse packages for SUSE Linux 10.0 can be found at 
ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/people/cthiel/10.0/ (and on ftp.suse.com mirrors).


Regards
Christoph

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] Wlan doesn't start at boot time

[Ilker]

I have no encryption, and also system gone mad and i even cant connect to
the net, i'm writing this mail on windows, hoping someone would
help.Mywireless card is Linksys
WMP54G.Hardware is present but it's not connecting.I can't configure dhcpd
via Yast because it says there's a problem with config file.

On 10/30/05, 'o-Dzin Tridral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 30/10/05, Ilker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> > I just installed OpenSUSE 10.0 on my desktop PC.I almost solved
> everything
> > and it installed my printer and scanner (wow, it made it
> automatically).I
> > also managed to show my Linksys WMP54G wireless lan card.The operating
> > system sees the card but everytime i boot into system, i have to type
> > "dhcpcd -G http://192.168.1.1 wlan0" as root.On my last distro, i just
> > changed the permissions as 755 and put a "script" includes that command
> > into
> > init.d and worked fine, but on SUSE i couldn't get it working.I even
> tried
> > it with a suid bit but no luck.Is there any way to get it connected
> > automatically at boot ? I don't want to use NetGO.
> >
> >
> Dear Ilker,
>
> In case it is of use to you, I've had this problem (or one that sounds
> similar). The workaround that works for me has been to disable WEP and
> then
> the wireless network comes up on boot. I'd like to go back to using WEP at
> some point but it's ok for now.
>
> I hope this is helpful!
>
> 'ö-Dzin
>
> --
> 'ö-Dzin Tridral
> Caerdydd, Cymru
> www.spacious-passion.org  <
> http://www.spacious-passion.org>
>
>

Re: [opensuse] Thunderbird localization not working in 10.0

[Reinhard Gimbel]

Kenneth Aar schrieb:

Reinhard Gimbel wrote:
I had no trouble in incorporating german localization with my 
Thunderbird 1.0.6. What I did was just adding the localization as an 
extension.


This is what I did too. On two freshly installed computers with SUSE 10 
with two different copies (one from dvd and one with the 5 CDs). It was 
the first thing I tried next to installing thunderbird.


Again, what are the access rights for the localization xpi (no-no.xpi ?) 
? And where it has been located ?


I grabbed the "de-de.xpi", put it into a newly generated folder called 
"language" in "/opt/MozillaThunderbird/lib" and called [Extra]-[Extension]


That's it.

Hope this helps !
--
Never give up !

Best regards,
Reinhard.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] Thunderbird localization not working in 10.0

[Kenneth Aar]

Reinhard Gimbel wrote:
I had no trouble in incorporating german localization with my 
Thunderbird 1.0.6. What I did was just adding the localization as an 
extension.


This is what I did too. On two freshly installed computers with SUSE 10 
with two different copies (one from dvd and one with the 5 CDs). It was 
the first thing I tried next to installing thunderbird.


--
Regards
Kenneth Aar

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] Thunderbird localization not working in 10.0

[Anders Johansson]

On Sunday 30 October 2005 19:23, Anders Johansson wrote:
> On Sunday 30 October 2005 19:21, Reinhard Gimbel wrote:
> > BTW: Why is there no offical 1.0.7 for SuSE 10.0 ?
>
> Because there is. Run online update and you'll get it

Oops, you were talking about thunderbird, not firefox, sorry

I don't know why thunderbird hasn't been updated yet. Perhaps the security 
flaw in 1.0.6 doesn't apply to the suse version?!


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] Thunderbird localization not working in 10.0

[Anders Johansson]

On Sunday 30 October 2005 19:21, Reinhard Gimbel wrote:
> BTW: Why is there no offical 1.0.7 for SuSE 10.0 ?

Because there is. Run online update and you'll get it


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] Thunderbird localization not working in 10.0

[Reinhard Gimbel]

Hi !

Kenneth Aar wrote:

In Suse 10 I can't get the localization files for Norwegian to work in 
thunderbird. Installing the Norwegian extension in suse 9.3 worked 
flawlessly. Spell checking was also a problem, but that was solved by 
changing the privileges in opt/MozillaThunderbird/lib/components/myspell


I had no trouble in incorporating german localization with my 
Thunderbird 1.0.6. What I did was just adding the localization as an 
extension.


BTW: Why is there no offical 1.0.7 for SuSE 10.0 ?

No idea what went wrong with your system. Some access right mismatches ?
--
Never give up !

Best regards,
Reinhard.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] Exporting Evolution address book, mail, to another machine.

[Kenneth Aar]

Randall R Schulz wrote:
Are you a programmer? There are virtually no trivial but useful 
programs, today.


Uh? Sorry, I don't understand what you are trying to say.

And what do you mean by "I would submit...". Are you going to submit it 
or not?


OK, you are right. So I have submitted a bug. See bugzilla #131515.
Please add to it if you feel like it. :-)

--
Regards
Kenneth Aar


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] Will fuse be part of suse-10.1?

[Richard Bos]

Op zondag 30 oktober 2005 14:01, schreef Pascal Bleser:
> > Short question: Will fuse be part of suse-10.1?  I noticed that Pascal
> > already provides an rpm, but it would be nice to have fuse be part of
> > suse10.1
>
> It's just the userspace tools. FUSE kernel support is included from 10.0
> on.
>
> Obviously, SUSE Linux should also include the userspace tools ;)

Thanks to all that replied.  I got what I wanted to hear in only a couple of 
bytes ;)

-- 
Richard Bos
Without a home the journey is endless

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] SaX questions

[Alexander S. Usov]

On Sunday 30 October 2005 14:00, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Am Samstag 29 Oktober 2005 22:13 schrieb "Alexander S. Usov"
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > > > - Edit "xorg.conf"
> > > > > == [extract of "/etc/X11/xorg.conf"] ==
> > >
> > > Section "InputDevice"
> > >   Driver "synaptics"
> > >   Identifier "Mouse[1]"
> > >   Option "Device" "auto-dev"
> > >   Option "SHMConfig" "on"
> > > EndSection
> > >
> > > Section "InputDevice"
> > >   Driver "mouse"
> > >   Identifier "Mouse[3]"
> > >   Option "Buttons" "5"
> > >   Option "Device" "/dev/input/mice"
> > >   Option "Protocol" "imps/2"
> > >   Option "ZAxisMapping" "4 5"
> > > EndSection
> > >
> > > > > == [/extract of "/etc/X11/xorg.conf"] ==
> > >
> > > man synaptics
> >
> > Sorry, I didn't understood the point.
>
> Hi Alexander,
>
> > You mean that one doesn't have to specify the exact device for
> > synaptics driver?
>
> the InputDevice stanza that sax generated does not work properly for me.
> The Device for a synaptics touchpad is not /dev/input/mice. auto-dev
> should find the correct device (/dev/input/eventX). Maybe you have to
> use another Device for the external mouse, for me /dev/input/mice
> works, but if not, try /dev/input/eventY Also the Protocol is not
> explorerps2 because synaptics has much more features, look at the
> man-page. (Substitute X and Y by the correct numbers for your system)

Strange, it seems to work fine for me. I have a following entry for the 
touchpad:

Section "InputDevice"
  Driver   "synaptics"
  Identifier   "Mouse[3]"
  Option   "Device" "/dev/input/mice"
  Option   "Emulate3Buttons" "on"
  Option   "Name" "Touchpad"
  Option   "SHMConfig" "on"
  Option   "Vendor" "Synaptics"
  Option   "ZAxisMapping" "4 5"
EndSection


-- 
Best regards,
  Alexander.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: [opensuse] RPM dependency hell: back to the drawing board?

[Daniel Hatfield]

> Yes, but things pile up. Packages depend on packages depend on
> packages etc. Packager has very hard time to get these right.
> And speaking of Avg. Joe trying to install them..

Anybody else looking forward the maturation of Klik?
http://www.opensuse.org/SUPER_KLIK

Cheers,
Daniel

Re: [opensuse] RPM dependency hell: back to the drawing board?

[Janne Karhunen]

On Sunday 30 October 2005 17:38, Anders Johansson wrote:

> > This goes off topic, but why is it bad thing to expect the system
> > to have a HTML renderer in the year 2006 (earliest)?
>
> The bad thing isn't that it's there, the bad thing is that it's so tightly
> integrated that it's impossible to get rid of if you want to replace it
> with something else

That I agree on, but this has very little or nothing to do with 
the discussion at hand.


> > > (yes, I put
> > > quotes there) that one cannot install Windows without a graphical user
> > > interface that uses at least 40 to 100MB of RAM, permanently, having a
> > > sh*tload of DLLs and applications running in memory, including IE.
> >
> > The fact is, it's almost as impossible to do this with Linux as
> > well or you end up breaking many, many things. Applications are
> > the first to suffer.
>
> That simply isn't true. You break graphical programs. apache and mysql will
> happily run on such a system

Absolutely. Server and the desktop are two different things that
should be dealt with differently. That's why I suggested having
something in the area of 10-20 base system packages. This makes
it possible.


> > Setting up embedded stuff like ultra-lite firewall should be a
> > thing to worry for the firewall builder, not every frigging end
> > user. In the end, stripping Linux to bare bones has very little
> > real use.
>
> If you set up a server, rule number of 1 is to only install that which is
> necessary

Yep. See above.


> > That's a one thing. But having the working ABI will not get the
> > RPM to install.
>
> Of course it will, if the requirements are set properly in the rpm. A
> packager should only require what he requires, not irrelevant things

Yes, but things pile up. Packages depend on packages depend on
packages etc. Packager has very hard time to get these right.
And speaking of Avg. Joe trying to install them..


> > As I said, ABI is the other thing. But making that truly stable for
> > Linux is too much to ask right now. Just having the applications to
> > install would be OK for now.
>
> Most ABIs actually are stable in Linux. It's only the kernel that keeps
> breaking, but the user space programs rarely see that

Kernel, C++ and very rapidly moving versions cause bugs among
others. 


-- 
// Janne

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] Thunderbird localization not working in 10.0

[eescar]

Kenneth Aar a écrit :
> Hi
Hi,
>
> In Suse 10 I can't get the localization files for Norwegian to work in
> thunderbird. Installing the Norwegian extension in suse 9.3 worked
> flawlessly. Spell checking was also a problem, but that was solved by
> changing the privileges in opt/MozillaThunderbird/lib/components/myspell
>
> Any thoughts?
>
For french localization (spell and langpack), I first install .xpi files as
normal user ... did not complain, but did not work.

I then installed them as root and back to my normal account, the localisation
worked when I lauch:
# /usr/bin/thunderbird  -contentLocale FR -UILocale fr-FR

Hope it helped

MaNU


--

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] RPM dependency hell: back to the drawing board?

[Anders Johansson]

On Sunday 30 October 2005 16:15, Janne Karhunen wrote:
> > I'm sorry, but that's not correct. As you're mentioning IE: Windows
> > bundles a number of components. That's also one of its technical defects,
> > because they're so tightly integrating into the "operating system"
>
> This goes off topic, but why is it bad thing to expect the system
> to have a HTML renderer in the year 2006 (earliest)?

The bad thing isn't that it's there, the bad thing is that it's so tightly 
integrated that it's impossible to get rid of if you want to replace it with 
something else

> > (yes, I put
> > quotes there) that one cannot install Windows without a graphical user
> > interface that uses at least 40 to 100MB of RAM, permanently, having a
> > sh*tload of DLLs and applications running in memory, including IE.
>
> The fact is, it's almost as impossible to do this with Linux as
> well or you end up breaking many, many things. Applications are
> the first to suffer.

That simply isn't true. You break graphical programs. apache and mysql will 
happily run on such a system

> Setting up embedded stuff like ultra-lite firewall should be a
> thing to worry for the firewall builder, not every frigging end
> user. In the end, stripping Linux to bare bones has very little
> real use.

If you set up a server, rule number of 1 is to only install that which is 
necessary

> > And, as we all know, that also implies a large number of security issues.
> > Do we want that for Linux ? I don't think so.
>
> Okay, now you go off topic. Of course we could argue for ever
> whether integration is a good thing or not. I think it is, and
> it is one of the key design concepts of KDE for one. That's
> why I like it.
>
> > If a commercial vendor requires libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0, fine.
> > What you're talking about is rather having consistent and
> > backwards-compatible APIs and ABIs.
>
> That's a one thing. But having the working ABI will not get the
> RPM to install.

Of course it will, if the requirements are set properly in the rpm. A packager 
should only require what he requires, not irrelevant things

> As I said, ABI is the other thing. But making that truly stable for
> Linux is too much to ask right now. Just having the applications to
> install would be OK for now.

Most ABIs actually are stable in Linux. It's only the kernel that keeps 
breaking, but the user space programs rarely see that


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] Loop mounting iso doesn't seem to work...

[M.Blackmore]

On Sat, 2005-10-29 at 22:16 +0200, Alexander S. Usov wrote:
> why not do the install over ftp/http using the same image?
> Worked fine for me.
> 
Utterly no idea how to set ftp up!! Only time I tried a couple of months
ago using yast tools I totally failed to be able to do it - the
installer simply didn't find the source on the server. In the end I
managed to get a downloaded directory of 9.3 off the ftp server at a
mirror onto my hard disk (shorn of the 64 bit stuff which I can't use)
and that exported fine via nfs. 10.0 doesn't seem to exist in that form
last time I looked at a mirror!

I assume one has to set up the file server as an ftp server as well,
with the export/suse/suse10.0 directory as the directory served up. I
tried that (with 9.3) and the installer failed to find it.

If it don't work in yast then I'm sunk without trace knowledge wise. And
snatching 10 minutes here, 5 there, between small kids when I'm well
enough to think (which with a long term illness a bit like FM/MS can be
pretty seldom) means that the learning process is slow...

I find most how-tos very difficult. I suspect they are written as aides
memoires for tekkies to each other - i.e. you have to know how to do
soemthing before you can understand the howto or help page, which just
jogs the memory if can't quite recall the exact syntax etc. Not much use
for the utterly ignorant and time-restrained!

With ftp what sort of things need I be looking out for that could be
making me trip up when doing it with yast? Or something I have to delve
into an initiation or config file to twiddle about that yast won't do or
won't do properly? And seeing as I don't have a clue where most of these
things reside or what they are called anymore that can be problematic.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] RPM dependency hell: back to the drawing board?

[Janne Karhunen]

On Sunday 30 October 2005 15:57, Pascal Bleser wrote:

> > Let's be fair here - i would say 95% of them do. That's pretty
> > drastic figure. We definitely need to be asking why the case
> > is such.
>
> because 95% = Windows user market share on the desktop .. ?
>
> Let's face it: most end users just don't know anything beyond Windows.
> Just because they want it to look like Windows, including its many defects,
> is not a reason for making Linux distributions like that.

Who exactly is doing it? I certainly did not suggest anything
like that.



> > Tools built on top of RPM are not really helping much.
>
> I think that's a serious misconception.
> The package management backend is a major asset of most Linux
> distributions, and it's a key feature to provide stability (dependencies
> being installed), quality and security (a well-defined, common package
> upgrade mechanism).

I agree 100%.

It's just that it is not well defined as it is now.


> I think we definately have to precisely define what we're talking about, as
> it seems we're mixing two IMHO different topics here:
> - end-users coming from Windows and who want Linux to look and behave
> exactly like Windows - commercial vendors who want to package their
> applications for various Linux distributions

Please stop saying that. That is *NOT* what i suggested.


> >> But it's not because they prefer to shoot themselves into the foot with
> >> an inferior software management concept that we should actually give
> >> them the gun.
> >
> > Let's not move the target now. Nobody is really taking anything away.
>
> But you implied RPM being an issue, RPM frontends being crap.
> Where I disagree. YaST2's Software Management module does more than a
> decent job at installing packages and its dependencies properly.

Yet, most times I fall back to using plain RPM as either repositories
are incomplete, broken dependency wise or just too busy to talk to me.
And that's just one of the reasons RPM itself needs to 'just work'.


> > No-one is forgetting this either. I'm well aware that most of
> > the money Linux is making comes from the server room. What you're
>
> I didn't mention "money". I meant *users*.
> You seem to discard people using Linux in the server room and who want
> features that are in direct opposition with what you're asking for.

I gave this some more thinking, 

In theory, we wouldn't need to break the 'eons-of-packages with
circular dependencies in the base system for nothing' concept by
using another old concept: meta RPM, 'selection' of smaller RPMs.
By making 3rd party RPMs to depend on these selection RPMs we 
would get rid of some of the dependency jungle.

I'm bit confused that no-one really raised the one valid concern
about this: how to handle security updates and such. Deltas of
course are a one possible solution, but RH for one is highly 
against them as they claim they 'just don't work'.


> > party development is as bad as it is. So this is contributing
> > significantly to the fact that 3rd party commercial SW vendors
> > are avoiding Linux.
>
> Oh, I never said that, I didn't even imply that.
> Linux won't stay away from the desktop. Actually, Linux is already very
> usable on the desktop. I, and many others, do that every single day.

So have I as my sole desktop, for the past 6 years. However, 
that does not mean it couldn't be made better. 


> I agree, it currently definately is an issue for vendors who want to
> provide their proprietary software on Linux.

Okay, now we're getting somewhere :)


> >> What you describe as "dependency hell" is a *feature* that's miles ahead
> >> of what Windows provides as software management facilities.
> >
> > Depends on the point of view. Windows does not allow creating
> > broken installations - basic elements to be expected from modern
> > desktop are always in place. Example: 3rd party SW vendor can
> > safely expect the MSIE html rendering component to be there. He
> > can build on it. This is not the case with Linux. There is no
> > common base, and there definitely should be.
>
> I'm sorry, but that's not correct. As you're mentioning IE: Windows bundles
> a number of components. That's also one of its technical defects, because
> they're so tightly integrating into the "operating system" 

This goes off topic, but why is it bad thing to expect the system
to have a HTML renderer in the year 2006 (earliest)?


> (yes, I put 
> quotes there) that one cannot install Windows without a graphical user
> interface that uses at least 40 to 100MB of RAM, permanently, having a
> sh*tload of DLLs and applications running in memory, including IE.

The fact is, it's almost as impossible to do this with Linux as
well or you end up breaking many, many things. Applications are
the first to suffer.

Setting up embedded stuff like ultra-lite firewall should be a
thing to worry for the firewall builder, not every frigging end
user. In the end, stripping Linux to bare bones has very little
real use.

Re: [opensuse] Exporting Evolution address book, mail, to another machine.

[Randall R Schulz]

Kenneth,

On Sunday 30 October 2005 01:38, Kenneth Aar wrote:
> Pete Connolly wrote:
> > I can see why there's no import facility for Evolution to Evolution
> > transfer - you don't need it.
>
> I adamantly disagree. This is just the sort of thing that is dead
> easy to implement but is very obscure for newcomers to linux to find
> their way around. I would submit this as a usability bug to the
> evolution team.

Are you a programmer? There are virtually no trivial but useful 
programs, today.

And what do you mean by "I would submit...". Are you going to submit it 
or not?

Randall Schulz
-- 
Happy, happy KMail user

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] SaX questions

[meister]

Am Samstag 29 Oktober 2005 22:13 schrieb "Alexander S. Usov" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > > - Edit "xorg.conf"
> > > > == [extract of "/etc/X11/xorg.conf"] ==
> >
> > Section "InputDevice"
> >   Driver "synaptics"
> >   Identifier "Mouse[1]"
> >   Option "Device" "auto-dev"
> >   Option "SHMConfig" "on"
> > EndSection
> >
> > Section "InputDevice"
> >   Driver "mouse"
> >   Identifier "Mouse[3]"
> >   Option "Buttons" "5"
> >   Option "Device" "/dev/input/mice"
> >   Option "Protocol" "imps/2"
> >   Option "ZAxisMapping" "4 5"
> > EndSection
> >
> > > > == [/extract of "/etc/X11/xorg.conf"] ==
> >
> > man synaptics
>
> Sorry, I didn't understood the point.

Hi Alexander,

> You mean that one doesn't have to specify the exact device for
> synaptics driver?

the InputDevice stanza that sax generated does not work properly for me. 
The Device for a synaptics touchpad is not /dev/input/mice. auto-dev 
should find the correct device (/dev/input/eventX). Maybe you have to 
use another Device for the external mouse, for me /dev/input/mice 
works, but if not, try /dev/input/eventY Also the Protocol is not 
explorerps2 because synaptics has much more features, look at the 
man-page. (Substitute X and Y by the correct numbers for your system)

-- mdc

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[opensuse] Thunderbird localization not working in 10.0

[Kenneth Aar]

Hi

In Suse 10 I can't get the localization files for Norwegian to work in 
thunderbird. Installing the Norwegian extension in suse 9.3 worked 
flawlessly. Spell checking was also a problem, but that was solved by 
changing the privileges in opt/MozillaThunderbird/lib/components/myspell


Any thoughts?

--
Regards
Kenneth Aar


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] RPM dependency hell: back to the drawing board?

[Ken Schneider]

On Sun, 2005-10-30 at 14:21 +0100, Pascal Bleser wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Ken Schneider wrote:

> > 
> > Precisely why it is the packagers responsibility to provide all of the
> > required packages. If it cannot be done legally then the package should
> > not be provided at all. CYA
> 
> That's mostly correct. Tell that to the many users who whine about DeCSS, 
> proprietary codec and MP3
> support ;)
> 
> But on the other hand, we packagers definately want to get together and avoid 
> having to package
> something a dozen times, because
> a) it's redundant work, and it's our unpaid spare time
> b) it's only causing issues for the end-users, package conflicts, etc..
> 
> That's why a single repository is not necessarely consistent when used alone, 
> without some other
> repositories. At Packman we do have that rule: don't have dependencies 
> towards packagers that are
> not provided in Packman or in the base SUSE distribution.
> But Packman is by far the largest community package repository for SUSE Linux 
> and it's feasible
> there. It is not necessarely doable for other, smaller repositories.

I always include Packman as a YaST repository because it seems to always
be complete and not make me chase all over the net looking for a
required third party package.
Keep up the GOOD work, it is -appreciated- more than you think.

-- 
Ken Schneider
UNIX  since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE  since 1998


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] RPM dependency hell: back to the drawing board?

[Pascal Bleser]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Janne Karhunen wrote:
> On Sunday 30 October 2005 11:45, Pascal Bleser wrote:
 RPM is a powerful tool for system administrator, but as ironic as it
 is, end user is much happier with windows installer :/.
>> Maybe. *Some* end-users prefer a windows installer.
> 
> Let's be fair here - i would say 95% of them do. That's pretty
> drastic figure. We definitely need to be asking why the case
> is such.

because 95% = Windows user market share on the desktop .. ?

Let's face it: most end users just don't know anything beyond Windows.
Just because they want it to look like Windows, including its many defects, is 
not a reason for
making Linux distributions like that.

> Tools built on top of RPM are not really helping much.

I think that's a serious misconception.
The package management backend is a major asset of most Linux distributions, 
and it's a key feature
to provide stability (dependencies being installed), quality and security (a 
well-defined, common
package upgrade mechanism).

What may be argued upon is that there are different package management backends 
(let's just keep RPM
and dpkg, others being either highly experimental (conary), unfinished (conary) 
or unable to fulfill
the role (slackware)) and, hence, you don't have a single package format to 
cover all Linux
distributions.
That's definately the kind of issue faced by commercial vendors.

Admittedly, and I'm certainly amongst the first to critize that, distributions 
don't unify their
packaging schemes. What I mean is that e.g. the project "libfoo" is packaged as 
"libfoo + libfoo-doc
+ libfoo-devel" on Fedora, as "libfoo1 + libfoo1-devel" on Mandriva, "libfoo + 
libfoo-dev" on Debian
and "libfoo + libfoo-devel" (or just "libfoo") on SUSE.


But I don't see any hope for unifying that. Linux distributions don't want to 
make that compatible,
don't talk to each other. Never mind if they're "commercial" (Redhat, SUSE, 
Mandriva, Ubuntu, ...)
or "community" (Debian, Slackware). The first probably don't want this because 
of their market
shares, the latter because of ideologic/religious reasons.
This is not intended to be Debian flaming, as I highly respect their excellent 
work, and Debian has
a lot of excellent features. But let's face it, most Debian 
packagers/committers are quite convinced
their way is the best and don't really give much about other distributions.
Just see the state of LSB support in Debian - admittedly, it got better, but it 
took a couple of
years and is still far from being complete - compare Debian init scripts with 
SUSE... actually... on
Redhat/Fedora it's different, again.. because they don't give a  about LSB 
either.

While LSB is geared towards solving part of these issues, I don't see the 
overwhelming
industry/community support for it. SUSE probably is the only really LSB 
compliant distribution.
And Redhat doesn't care, they're the market leader in the enterprise sector.

But maybe that's just me being wrong or too pessimistic about LSB ;)


But let's get back to the thread... ;)
I think we definately have to precisely define what we're talking about, as it 
seems we're mixing
two IMHO different topics here:
- - end-users coming from Windows and who want Linux to look and behave exactly 
like Windows
- - commercial vendors who want to package their applications for various Linux 
distributions

>> But it's not because they prefer to shoot themselves into the foot with an
>> inferior software management concept that we should actually give them the
>> gun.
> Let's not move the target now. Nobody is really taking anything away.

But you implied RPM being an issue, RPM frontends being crap.
Where I disagree. YaST2's Software Management module does more than a decent 
job at installing
packages and its dependencies properly.

>> Everyone talking about end-users and desktop all the time. You seem to
>> forget that Linux is also strong in the server room, where we have to keep
>> on working on its adoption for mission-critical tasks. For things like
>> those, having a very strict and powerful package management system is
>> *crucial*.
> 
> No-one is forgetting this either. I'm well aware that most of 
> the money Linux is making comes from the server room. What you're 

I didn't mention "money". I meant *users*.
You seem to discard people using Linux in the server room and who want features 
that are in direct
opposition with what you're asking for.

> really saying there is circular reasoning; Linux will stay away 
> from the desktop as long as the software installation and 3rd
> party development is as bad as it is. So this is contributing 
> significantly to the fact that 3rd party commercial SW vendors 
> are avoiding Linux.

Oh, I never said that, I didn't even imply that.
Linux won't stay away from the desktop. Actually, Linux is already very usable 
on the desktop.
I, and many others, do that every single day. Actually, it's even far superior 
as a "des

Re: [opensuse] RPM dependency hell: back to the drawing board?

[Anders Johansson]

On Sunday 30 October 2005 13:16, Ken Schneider wrote:
> Precisely why it is the packagers responsibility to provide all of the
> required packages. If it cannot be done legally then the package should
> not be provided at all. CYA

There is also a difference between hard and soft requirements. A hard 
requirement is one that is needed for the software to work at all. A soft 
requirement is one that can be used if present, but isn't strictly needed. 
libmad is clearly a soft requirement, so it shouldn't be listed as a hard 
one.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] RPM dependency hell: back to the drawing board?

[Pascal Bleser]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Ken Schneider wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-10-30 at 10:45 +0100, Pascal Bleser wrote:
> 
>>> If we transfer this kind of thinking to dependency issues, it would
>>> probably start solving itself in a short manner of time.
>> Not really. Package dependencies are related to packaging.
>> It's none of the amarok developers' business if when installing my amarok 
>> 1.3.5 RPMs, you get a
>> missing dependency on e.g. libmad.so.X
> 
> Maybe not the developers but certainly the packagers business. If the
> RPM is being put together for a specific distro, which in the case of
> suse they are, then it -is- the packagers business that missing programs
> are also provided in the repos they use thus reducing some of the
> dependency hell. If users what to go outside of suse repos, whether

That's precisely what I meant ;)
It's the packagers' job, not the developers'.

> provided by suse or suse contributers, then they need to understand
> -they- (the users) are responsible for obtaining other required
> packages. I stopped using apt-rpm for this very reason, the packager put
> together an RPM (for some suse version) that required a newer version of
> some library and did not also provide that package.
> 
>>> "You are missing package x. We can't find this package in your repos.
>>> But this package [package name X], found at www.example.org seems to be
>>> what you are missing. Should YAST download this package and install it
>>> for you? YES / NO
>> ...
>> That's a valid point. The only issue I see nowadays with not finding 
>> dependencies is when you
>> install packages from a 3rd party repository that depends on another package 
>> that's in another 3rd
>> party repository.
>> e.g. you install some package from my (suser-guru) repository that requires 
>> another package from
>> packman, and you don't have the packman repository in your installation 
>> sources
> 
> Precisely why it is the packagers responsibility to provide all of the
> required packages. If it cannot be done legally then the package should
> not be provided at all. CYA

That's mostly correct. Tell that to the many users who whine about DeCSS, 
proprietary codec and MP3
support ;)

But on the other hand, we packagers definately want to get together and avoid 
having to package
something a dozen times, because
a) it's redundant work, and it's our unpaid spare time
b) it's only causing issues for the end-users, package conflicts, etc..

That's why a single repository is not necessarely consistent when used alone, 
without some other
repositories. At Packman we do have that rule: don't have dependencies towards 
packagers that are
not provided in Packman or in the base SUSE distribution.
But Packman is by far the largest community package repository for SUSE Linux 
and it's feasible
there. It is not necessarely doable for other, smaller repositories.

>> That's really the only situation where we have to improve things. Everything 
>> else is working really
>> fine, given you're using a capable package management frontend (such as 
>> YaST2, y2pmsh, smart, yum,
>> apt-rpm, aptitude, yumex, ...).
>> Actually the packman folks and I started discussing that idea with the SUSE 
>> staff, to have YaST2
>> fetch a list of available 3rd party repositories regularely and propose a 
>> checklist to the user, so
>> she can easily add another repository.
>> That could also make it possible to say "you're trying to install xxx that 
>> requires yyy. but yyy is
>> available from installation source (repository) zzz. do you want to add zzz 
>> to your list of
>> installation sources ?"
> 
> This would be absolutely fantastic.

Yes, and I think it would solve the remaining "dependency hell" issues.

cheers
- --
  -o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/
  /\\ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 _\_v The more things change, the more they stay insane.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDZMjSr3NMWliFcXcRAjXlAJ9+DCiYtiJ7nxCnmATMvlYgI1mKowCguYSq
d/QAhtpOPs1VuWI+yLhrxpg=
=BaAj
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] RPM dependency hell: back to the drawing board?

[Ken Schneider]

On Sun, 2005-10-30 at 10:45 +0100, Pascal Bleser wrote:

> > If we transfer this kind of thinking to dependency issues, it would
> > probably start solving itself in a short manner of time.
> 
> Not really. Package dependencies are related to packaging.
> It's none of the amarok developers' business if when installing my amarok 
> 1.3.5 RPMs, you get a
> missing dependency on e.g. libmad.so.X

Maybe not the developers but certainly the packagers business. If the
RPM is being put together for a specific distro, which in the case of
suse they are, then it -is- the packagers business that missing programs
are also provided in the repos they use thus reducing some of the
dependency hell. If users what to go outside of suse repos, whether
provided by suse or suse contributers, then they need to understand
-they- (the users) are responsible for obtaining other required
packages. I stopped using apt-rpm for this very reason, the packager put
together an RPM (for some suse version) that required a newer version of
some library and did not also provide that package.

> > "You are missing package x. We can't find this package in your repos.
> > But this package [package name X], found at www.example.org seems to be
> > what you are missing. Should YAST download this package and install it
> > for you? YES / NO
> ...
> That's a valid point. The only issue I see nowadays with not finding 
> dependencies is when you
> install packages from a 3rd party repository that depends on another package 
> that's in another 3rd
> party repository.
> e.g. you install some package from my (suser-guru) repository that requires 
> another package from
> packman, and you don't have the packman repository in your installation 
> sources

Precisely why it is the packagers responsibility to provide all of the
required packages. If it cannot be done legally then the package should
not be provided at all. CYA

> 
> That's really the only situation where we have to improve things. Everything 
> else is working really
> fine, given you're using a capable package management frontend (such as 
> YaST2, y2pmsh, smart, yum,
> apt-rpm, aptitude, yumex, ...).
> 
> Actually the packman folks and I started discussing that idea with the SUSE 
> staff, to have YaST2
> fetch a list of available 3rd party repositories regularely and propose a 
> checklist to the user, so
> she can easily add another repository.
> That could also make it possible to say "you're trying to install xxx that 
> requires yyy. but yyy is
> available from installation source (repository) zzz. do you want to add zzz 
> to your list of
> installation sources ?"

This would be absolutely fantastic.

> 
> But actually that involves a number of issues, especially from the legal 
> point of view.
> Packman and my repository include a number of packages that are .. well... 
> "touchy" for patent
> licenses in some countries (mostly the USA), like mad, lame, mplayer, ...
> AFAIK Novell's legal department is currently checking whether something like 
> that is feasible or not.
> 

-- 
Ken Schneider
UNIX  since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE  since 1998


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] RPM dependency hell: back to the drawing board?

[Paul Hewlett]

On Sunday 30 October 2005 11:24, Kenneth Aar wrote:
> Janne Karhunen wrote:
> > RPM is a powerful tool for system administrator, but as ironic as
> > it is, end user is much happier with windows installer :/.
>
> Or CNR in Linspire... ;p
>
> I really think dependency hell could be avoided if the Open source
> community could begin to consolidate a few things.
>
> Take bugzilla for instance. Why hasn't anyone come up with the idea of
> making bugs easily available across distros and up and downstream
> searchable/redirectable? This way if a bug is filed in the wrong place
> we could redirect the bug to the right place without need for filing the
> bug again. Also if the bug is reported in different places or indeed is
> filed in several distros by different users we could more easily see
> where we should put our focus. Or if this is a up or downstream issue.

   See article on Mark Shuttleworth in Linux Format Magazine October 2005 
where he talks about not only this issue of distributing patches between 
distros but also the more general one of truly collaborative computing.

Paul

-- 
Paul Hewlett - CottonPickinMinds - www.cottonpickinminds.co.za
Tel: +27 21 852 8812  Cel: +27 84 420 9282  Fax: +27 86 672 0563
-- 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] Will fuse be part of suse-10.1?

[Pascal Bleser]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Richard Bos wrote:
> Short question: Will fuse be part of suse-10.1?  I noticed that Pascal 
> already 
> provides an rpm, but it would be nice to have fuse be part of suse10.1

It's just the userspace tools. FUSE kernel support is included from 10.0 on.

Obviously, SUSE Linux should also include the userspace tools ;)

cheers
- --
  -o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/
  /\\ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 _\_v The more things change, the more they stay insane.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDZMQjr3NMWliFcXcRAoSoAJ9wkKNh9+nH6GB6mp9MEQFwHAjTtgCfdvY6
p9a3aTV4C1G5LxZSZn67KC0=
=j7N2
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] RPM dependency hell: back to the drawing board?

[Janne Karhunen]

On Sunday 30 October 2005 11:45, Pascal Bleser wrote:

> >> RPM is a powerful tool for system administrator, but as ironic as it
> >> is, end user is much happier with windows installer :/.
>
> Maybe. *Some* end-users prefer a windows installer.

Let's be fair here - i would say 95% of them do. That's pretty
drastic figure. We definitely need to be asking why the case 
is such. Tools built on top of RPM are not really helping much.


> But it's not because they prefer to shoot themselves into the foot with an
> inferior software management concept that we should actually give them the
> gun.

Let's not move the target now. Nobody is really taking anything
away.


> Everyone talking about end-users and desktop all the time. You seem to
> forget that Linux is also strong in the server room, where we have to keep
> on working on its adoption for mission-critical tasks. For things like
> those, having a very strict and powerful package management system is
> *crucial*.

No-one is forgetting this either. I'm well aware that most of 
the money Linux is making comes from the server room. What you're 
really saying there is circular reasoning; Linux will stay away 
from the desktop as long as the software installation and 3rd
party development is as bad as it is. So this is contributing 
significantly to the fact that 3rd party commercial SW vendors 
are avoiding Linux.

Due to the dependency hassle it's almost impossible to support 
anything else than some very specific distribution and it's 
version. And I'm not saying what ever i proposed will solve this,
it doesn't. It would just be the first step.


> What you describe as "dependency hell" is a *feature* that's miles ahead of
> what Windows provides as software management facilities.

Depends on the point of view. Windows does not allow creating 
broken installations - basic elements to be expected from modern
desktop are always in place. Example: 3rd party SW vendor can 
safely expect the MSIE html rendering component to be there. He
can build on it. This is not the case with Linux. There is no 
common base, and there definitely should be.

That said, let's take an example of RH Enterprise Linux. It's 
minimal installation is roughly 550 megabytes. RH does not really
support systems stripped to be smaller than this as things will 
start to break. So what good does it do for the user to have the 
system split into 1000 small packages instead of just 10-20?


> You're asking for having bigger base packages, but many more people are
> asking to have *smaller* packages, better split into subpackages, because
> a) embedded systems: only run the bare minimum because of hardware
> constraints 

Actually, once again smaller packages are actually hurting instead
of helping here, if it's a system that customer can install software 
to. One of the most successful embedded systems currently available, 
Nokia Series 60 platform, consists of just half a dozen packages. 
And that's exactly why commercial companies are able to create and 
successfully deploy applications on it.

Then again, if it's a system you can't install applications to, user 
does not care a jack shit what kind of a mess it is internally. 

If (as I suspect) you were talking about stripping the system during
fixed embedded system development, i don't think anyone really cares
how this is done. Why would you have RPM repository in such system
anyway?


> b) security: only run the bare minimum because any unused
> application that's installed is an additional potential security risk

This is true, but i wasn't talking about applications. I was talking
about the base system - components you need to have in place anyway.


> Don't just discard those very important aspects that are a key element of
> the stability of most Linux systems, just because you think Linux should be
> like Windows.

Now that HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO with anything i proposed. How
do people always find this 'argument'?


> Pushing Linux onto the desktop and for everyone's use should never, ever
> compromise the stability, consistency and technical superiority of Linux
> compared to Windows (and even to some Unix derivates).

And that is not done here either..


> ..
> That's a valid point. The only issue I see nowadays with not finding
> dependencies is when you install packages from a 3rd party repository that
> depends on another package that's in another 3rd party repository.
> e.g. you install some package from my (suser-guru) repository that requires
> another package from packman, and you don't have the packman repository in
> your installation sources
>
> That's really the only situation where we have to improve things.

Uh-oh. Take some time to think this over, please.


-- 
// Janne

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] Will fuse be part of suse-10.1?

[Anders Johansson]

On Sunday 30 October 2005 12:46, Richard Bos wrote:
> Short question: Will fuse be part of suse-10.1?  I noticed that Pascal
> already provides an rpm, but it would be nice to have fuse be part of
> suse10.1

The kernel module is already a part of 10.0. Why not get the alpha version of 
10.1 and see for yourself if the tools are in 10.1. That's what the alpha 
versions are there for - audience participation


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] Will fuse be part of suse-10.1?

[Marcus Meissner]

On Sun, Oct 30, 2005 at 12:46:26PM +0100, Richard Bos wrote:
> Short question: Will fuse be part of suse-10.1?  I noticed that Pascal 
> already 
> provides an rpm, but it would be nice to have fuse be part of suse10.1

Since it is in the mainline kernel now, likely.

Ciao, Marcus

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[opensuse] Will fuse be part of suse-10.1?

[Richard Bos]

Short question: Will fuse be part of suse-10.1?  I noticed that Pascal already 
provides an rpm, but it would be nice to have fuse be part of suse10.1

-- 
Richard Bos
Without a home the journey is endless

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[opensuse] Network Problems after Xen Installation

[Andreas Ehmich]

Hello,

I installed Xen with this manual
http://www.opensuse.org/Installing_Xen3

After reboot my network interfaces doesn't work.
Is there a manual available howto configurate the xen bridge?
Can this be done by YaST?

Regards, Andi




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] Wlan doesn't start at boot time

['o-Dzin Tridral]

On 30/10/05, Ilker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> I just installed OpenSUSE 10.0 on my desktop PC.I almost solved everything
> and it installed my printer and scanner (wow, it made it automatically).I
> also managed to show my Linksys WMP54G wireless lan card.The operating
> system sees the card but everytime i boot into system, i have to type
> "dhcpcd -G http://192.168.1.1 wlan0" as root.On my last distro, i just
> changed the permissions as 755 and put a "script" includes that command
> into
> init.d and worked fine, but on SUSE i couldn't get it working.I even tried
> it with a suid bit but no luck.Is there any way to get it connected
> automatically at boot ? I don't want to use NetGO.
>
>
Dear Ilker,

In case it is of use to you, I've had this problem (or one that sounds
similar). The workaround that works for me has been to disable WEP and then
the wireless network comes up on boot. I'd like to go back to using WEP at
some point but it's ok for now.

I hope this is helpful!

'ö-Dzin

--
'ö-Dzin Tridral
Caerdydd, Cymru
www.spacious-passion.org 

[opensuse] Wlan doesn't start at boot time

[Ilker]

Hi all,
I just installed OpenSUSE 10.0 on my desktop PC.I almost solved everything
and it installed my printer and scanner (wow, it made it automatically).I
also managed to show my Linksys WMP54G wireless lan card.The operating
system sees the card but everytime i boot into system, i have to type
"dhcpcd -G http://192.168.1.1 wlan0" as root.On my last distro, i just
changed the permissions as 755 and put a "script" includes that command into
init.d and worked fine, but on SUSE i couldn't get it working.I even tried
it with a suid bit but no luck.Is there any way to get it connected
automatically at boot ? I don't want to use NetGO.

[opensuse] Configuring Touchscreen

[Kenneth Aar]

Hi

I need some help setting up a touchscreen in suse. A LG L1510SF which
uses the ITM Touch USB Touchscreen Driver. I think I have found the code
I need, but I have no Idea of where to put it. Is this something I will
have to patch in the kernel?

The code I think I can use resides her:
http://seclists.org/lists/linux-kernel/2005/Mar/3955.html
It is signed by Vojtech Pavlik at SuSE Labs, SuSE CR. So it should be a
fair chances to get this working. Right?

--
Regards
Kenneth Aar



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] RPM dependency hell: back to the drawing board?

[Pascal Bleser]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Kenneth Aar wrote:
> Janne Karhunen wrote:
>> RPM is a powerful tool for system administrator, but as ironic as it
>> is, end user is much happier with windows installer :/. 

Maybe. *Some* end-users prefer a windows installer.
But it's not because they prefer to shoot themselves into the foot with an 
inferior software
management concept that we should actually give them the gun.

Everyone talking about end-users and desktop all the time. You seem to forget 
that Linux is also
strong in the server room, where we have to keep on working on its adoption for 
mission-critical
tasks. For things like those, having a very strict and powerful package 
management system is *crucial*.

What you describe as "dependency hell" is a *feature* that's miles ahead of 
what Windows provides as
software management facilities.

You're asking for having bigger base packages, but many more people are asking 
to have *smaller*
packages, better split into subpackages, because
a) embedded systems: only run the bare minimum because of hardware constraints
b) security: only run the bare minimum because any unused application that's 
installed is an
additional potential security risk

Don't just discard those very important aspects that are a key element of the 
stability of most
Linux systems, just because you think Linux should be like Windows.

Pushing Linux onto the desktop and for everyone's use should never, ever 
compromise the stability,
consistency and technical superiority of Linux compared to Windows (and even to 
some Unix derivates).

> I really think dependency hell could be avoided if the Open source
> community could begin to consolidate a few things.
> Take bugzilla for instance. Why hasn't anyone come up with the idea of
> making bugs easily available across distros and up and downstream
> searchable/redirectable? This way if a bug is filed in the wrong place

Amongst others, KDE and GNOME have a bugzilla. Whenever someone working for a 
distribution (SUSE,
Redhat, Fedora, Debian, ...) notices a bug or an improvement, he reports it 
upstream.
It's true for many other projects as well.

> we could redirect the bug to the right place without need for filing the
> bug again. Also if the bug is reported in different places or indeed is
> filed in several distros by different users we could more easily see
> where we should put our focus. Or if this is a up or downstream issue.

Why do you get the impression that's not already happening ? :)

> If we transfer this kind of thinking to dependency issues, it would
> probably start solving itself in a short manner of time.

Not really. Package dependencies are related to packaging.
It's none of the amarok developers' business if when installing my amarok 1.3.5 
RPMs, you get a
missing dependency on e.g. libmad.so.X

> Another Idea I'm thinking of is making the package managers do the
> dependency searches for you. Instead of letting a newbie search the web
> for a package he is missing. download it, install it and find that he is
> missing yet another package. The RPM could search the web for the user
> and come back with a dialog like this:

Err... I wonder how you're managing your Linux system.
Ever heard of YaST2, y2pmsh, yum, yumex, apt-rpm, aptitude, smart, ... ?

> "You are missing package x. We can't find this package in your repos.
> But this package [package name X], found at www.example.org seems to be
> what you are missing. Should YAST download this package and install it
> for you? YES / NO
...
That's a valid point. The only issue I see nowadays with not finding 
dependencies is when you
install packages from a 3rd party repository that depends on another package 
that's in another 3rd
party repository.
e.g. you install some package from my (suser-guru) repository that requires 
another package from
packman, and you don't have the packman repository in your installation sources

That's really the only situation where we have to improve things. Everything 
else is working really
fine, given you're using a capable package management frontend (such as YaST2, 
y2pmsh, smart, yum,
apt-rpm, aptitude, yumex, ...).

Actually the packman folks and I started discussing that idea with the SUSE 
staff, to have YaST2
fetch a list of available 3rd party repositories regularely and propose a 
checklist to the user, so
she can easily add another repository.
That could also make it possible to say "you're trying to install xxx that 
requires yyy. but yyy is
available from installation source (repository) zzz. do you want to add zzz to 
your list of
installation sources ?"

But actually that involves a number of issues, especially from the legal point 
of view.
Packman and my repository include a number of packages that are .. well... 
"touchy" for patent
licenses in some countries (mostly the USA), like mad, lame, mplayer, ...
AFAIK Novell's legal department is currently checking whether something like 
that is feasible or not.

c

Re: [opensuse] Exporting Evolution address book, mail, to another machine.

[Kenneth Aar]

Pete Connolly wrote:
I can see why there's no import facility for Evolution to Evolution transfer - 
you don't need it.


I adamantly disagree. This is just the sort of thing that is dead easy 
to implement but is very obscure for newcomers to linux to find their 
way around. I would submit this as a usability bug to the evolution team.


--
Regards
Kenneth Aar

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] RPM dependency hell: back to the drawing board?

[Kenneth Aar]

Janne Karhunen wrote:
RPM is a powerful tool for system administrator, but as ironic as 
it is, end user is much happier with windows installer :/. 


Or CNR in Linspire... ;p

I really think dependency hell could be avoided if the Open source
community could begin to consolidate a few things.

Take bugzilla for instance. Why hasn't anyone come up with the idea of
making bugs easily available across distros and up and downstream
searchable/redirectable? This way if a bug is filed in the wrong place
we could redirect the bug to the right place without need for filing the
bug again. Also if the bug is reported in different places or indeed is
filed in several distros by different users we could more easily see
where we should put our focus. Or if this is a up or downstream issue.

If we transfer this kind of thinking to dependency issues, it would
probably start solving itself in a short manner of time.

Another Idea I'm thinking of is making the package managers do the
dependency searches for you. Instead of letting a newbie search the web
for a package he is missing. download it, install it and find that he is
missing yet another package. The RPM could search the web for the user
and come back with a dialog like this:

"You are missing package x. We can't find this package in your repos.
But this package [package name X], found at www.example.org seems to be
what you are missing. Should YAST download this package and install it
for you? YES / NO
NOTE: This may not be safe to do... blah blah blah. But if you have
configured Apparmor correctly you should be reasonably protected against
system failure."

Just my 2 cents.

--
Regards
Kenneth Aar


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] RPM dependency hell: back to the drawing board?

[Janne Karhunen]

On Saturday 29 October 2005 23:20, Anders Johansson wrote:

> > All of the examples you gave are self-sufficient, multi-platform
> > applications that don't really depend on anything. So yes, doing
> > everything yourself is clearly an option, but not everyone has
> > the money to do it.
>
> I have no idea what you mean by dependencies then. Opera uses qt, mozilla
> uses gtk, openoffice uses all sorts of things, and of course they all use X

Opera uses Qt, but more than once has problems with platform version
(you have to use static version). IMHO Mozilla does not use gtk, but 
FF does. However, gtk is relatively small library with C API, so it
is relatively easy to get things right with it. AFAIK OO.org doesn't
depend on much more than Java. X is ancient technology with complete
consortium behind it. Not everyone has that either.


> > Software installation on Linux IS very much a problem. YaST, APT,
> > smart, etc would not exist otherwise.
>
> I beg your pardon? What is the alternative? Windows Installer?

RPM is a powerful tool for system administrator, but as ironic as 
it is, end user is much happier with windows installer :/. Rest 
assured, RPM is not a final word on software installation front. 
It will be sooner or later be redesigned by someone ( Red Hat? ).

As a temporary ease-up, i was proposing defining way bigger base
packages. It is almost completely unnecessary to package all the
little base tools in separate packages causing enormous dependency
jungle. Due to messed dependencies it is impossible to set up a
system without them anyway. And this IS year 2005, you can expect
the system to have some common elements in place.

How would this help? Easiest way to understand it might be to look
at the dependency graph. It's size would just collapse. 3rd party 
SW vendors and packagers would have a lot less configurations to 
test against. Heck, we could even use current 'package groups' as
the baseline. If there would be just a few dependencies to fulfill
during software installation, even the user might be able to get 
it right *without* additional tools.

It's just a thought. Give it some time,


-- 
// Janne

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]