David Walser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > david faure has begun to do some work in that area (in kde's cvs)
> > but the road is long before having interactive::qt;
> >
> > and at that moment, we'll have to check either to use
> > interactive::qt or interactive::gtk :-)
> >
> > the real probl
--- Thierry Vignaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> david faure has begun to do some work in that area
> (in kde's cvs) but
> the road is long before having interactive::qt;
>
> and at that moment, we'll have to check either to
> use interactive::qt
> or interactive::gtk :-)
>
> the real problem wi
David Walser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > - we already have a code base providing abstraction in the config
> > tools for implementation into Gtk, Newt and stdio (interactive)
>
> That's really cool. Have you all looked at Stormix's abstraction
> toolkit? I believe it supported ncurses and g
On Sat Aug 17 19:53 +0800, Leon Brooks wrote:
> Having read your reasoning, the idea of replacing Mandrake with RedHat is
> loopy, on a server or elsewhere. RedHat offer you less choices than Mandrake.
> Mandrake and SuSe, for example, _prefer_ KDE and so write most of their tools
> to it. RedH
--- Thierry Vignaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> - we already have a code base providing abstraction
> in the config
> tools for implementation into Gtk, Newt and stdio
> (interactive)
That's really cool. Have you all looked at Stormix's
abstraction toolkit? I believe it supported ncurses
and
Leon Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Having read your reasoning, the idea of replacing Mandrake with
> RedHat is loopy, on a server or elsewhere. RedHat offer you less
> choices than Mandrake. Mandrake and SuSe, for example, _prefer_ KDE
> and so write most of their tools to it. RedHat esse
On Sat, 17 Aug 2002 01:01, Levi Ramsey wrote:
> On Fri Aug 16 10:59 +0100, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> (Interestingly, my spellchecker doesn't appear to pick up the word
>> spellcheck or the word spellchecker. Crazy. It's happy with spell
>> checker, though. That's what it calls itself. Hmm. I think
On Fri, 16 Aug 2002 16:47, Chris Higgins wrote:
> Mandrake Linux is what I use on my desktop, I put redhat or
> debian on servers. I'm considering dropping Mandrake for my
> desktop - and let me take a second to explain why.
Having read your reasoning, the idea of replacing Mandrake with RedHat i
On Fri Aug 16 10:59 +0100, Adam Williamson wrote:
> (Interestingly, my spellchecker doesn't appear to pick up the word
> spellcheck or the word spellchecker. Crazy. It's happy with spell
> checker, though. That's what it calls itself. Hmm. I think i'm going to
> go take a shower.)
Spellcheckers o
On Fri, 2002-08-16 at 11:28, Chris Higgins wrote:
> I'd be a lot happier with just 'X windows' and pick
> whatever KDE apps you want, and whatever Gnome apps you want.
> Rather than at the moment having to install both KDE and Gnome
> and then choose a single environment rather than
> mix and ma
On 16 Aug 2002 11:10:53 +0100
Adam Williamson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
One huge snip later -
> which is fine, but this is different from
> your concept of Mandrake abandoning the (good) Linux design philosophy
> and going to the(bad) Windows one.
You've picked my up wrong on this point, and
On 16 Aug 2002 12:12:41 +0200
Michel Fodje <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2002-08-16 at 10:47, Chris Higgins wrote:
> > Mandrake Linux is what I use on my desktop, I put redhat or
> > debian on servers. I'm considering dropping Mandrake for my
> > desktop - and let me take a second to expla
> I'd be a lot happier with just 'X windows' and pick
> whatever KDE apps you want, and whatever Gnome apps you want.
> Rather than at the moment having to install both KDE and Gnome
> and then choose a single environment rather than
> mix and match the ones that you want.
Ack, that'd be a bad ba
> One of the biggest problems hitting the Linux world is the failure
> of people to understand the different approach taken by Unix systems
> to solving problems.
>
Aye, and different approaches are very good.
> The arguments about Aurora / OSS / ALSA are the same,
> people are trying to restrict
On Fri, 2002-08-16 at 09:17, Michel Fodje wrote:
> should feel natural. It doesn't mean that it should loose functionality,
Does it involve good spelling?
Sorry, cheap shot I know. But this one *really* gets on my nerves.
"Lose" and "Loose" are two different words in English. "Lose" is a verb
Am Freitag, 16. August 2002, 11:10:53 Uhr MET, schrieb Adam Williamson:
> GNOME, well, the GNOME team have taken a design decision that they
> consider Nautilus so central to the functioning of their desktop
> environment that it ought to be there. The line between essential core
> components and
On Fri, 2002-08-16 at 09:47, Chris Higgins wrote:
> > ... there is a much worse kind of arrogance in software design: the
> > arrogant assumption that "my software is so damn cool, people are just
> > going to have to warp their brains around it." This kind of chutzpah
> > is pretty common in the
On 16 Aug 2002 10:17:26 +0200
Michel Fodje <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Let me end by quoting Joelonsoftware:
> "
> http://www.joelonsoftware.com/uibook/chapters/fog64.html
> ... there is a much worse kind of arrogance in software design: the
> arrogant assumption that "my software is so
I think you missed the point. If a user doesn't need to see something,
don't show it to them. Everything should just work. The user should
only see error messages if something fails. Too much explanations in
Software of everything the system is doing implies the developer is
drowned in the code
--- Leon Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Aug 2002 06:47, Igor Izyumin wrote:
> > This is not windows, you don't reboot
> > every 15 minutes, so I don't think it's important
> how it looks.
>
> True story: my wife saw the very screen in question
> last week (I added
> hardware to h
On Thu, 2002-08-15 at 05:11, Leon Brooks wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Aug 2002 03:01, Gary Greene wrote:
> > Personally, I liked it much more than the new bootsplash system. Sure it
> > had some issues (specifically when harddrake and kudzu would find changes
> > in the hardware installed) but over all I f
On Thu, 15 Aug 2002 03:01, Gary Greene wrote:
> Personally, I liked it much more than the new bootsplash system. Sure it
> had some issues (specifically when harddrake and kudzu would find changes
> in the hardware installed) but over all I found it to be more asthetically
> pleasing than a consol
On Thu, 15 Aug 2002 06:47, Igor Izyumin wrote:
> This is not windows, you don't reboot
> every 15 minutes, so I don't think it's important how it looks.
True story: my wife saw the very screen in question last week (I added
hardware to her box), and startled me by asking `what's that?' - she had
On Wednesday 14 August 2002 07:43 pm, Gary Greene wrote:
> I very much disagree with that. The one thing that Aurora did well was
> obfuscating the start scripts from the user.
Trying to hide the system internals is dumb. Besides, Mandrake already boots
in quiet mode. You don't see almost any m
Gary Greene said:
> I very much disagree with that. The one thing that Aurora did well was
> obfuscating the start scripts from the user. MS Windows splash screen
> is simple for a reason: the common joe user doesn't care that a
> certain subsystem is loading or not. all they care is that it wo
On Wednesday 14 August 2002 06:47 pm, Igor Izyumin wrote:
> On Wednesday 14 August 2002 02:01 pm, Gary Greene wrote:
> > Personally, I liked it much more than the new bootsplash system. Sure it
> > had some issues (specifically when harddrake and kudzu would find changes
> > in the hardware instal
On Wednesday 14 August 2002 02:01 pm, Gary Greene wrote:
> Personally, I liked it much more than the new bootsplash system. Sure it
> had some issues (specifically when harddrake and kudzu would find changes
> in the hardware installed) but over all I found it to be more asthetically
> pleasing th
On Wed, 2002-08-14 at 11:01, Jakub Pas wrote:
> >> What's happened to Aurora. I cant' remember it was included in MDK 8.2 but
> >> anyway I can't find it in 9.0. It was quite niece...
>
> >You are a sick, twisted individual. Seek psychiatric help immediately.
>
> It's gone in 9.x (and the crow
On Wednesday 14 August 2002 16:00, Brad Felmey wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-08-14 at 11:01, Jakub Pas wrote:
> > >> What's happened to Aurora. I cant' remember it was included in MDK 8.2
> > >> but anyway I can't find it in 9.0. It was quite niece...
> > >
> > >You are a sick, twisted individual. Seek ps
>> What's happened to Aurora. I cant' remember it was included in MDK 8.2 but
>> anyway I can't find it in 9.0. It was quite niece...
>You are a sick, twisted individual. Seek psychiatric help immediately.
It's gone in 9.x (and the crowd roars approval).
Stressing job? Problems wih girlfirend?
On Tuesday 13 August 2002 11:22 pm, Levi Ramsey wrote:
> On Tue Aug 13 19:02 -0400, Jakub Pas wrote:
> > What's happened to Aurora. I cant' remember it was included in MDK 8.2
> > but anyway I can't find it in 9.0. It was quite niece...
>
> You're the only one, then. Aurora annoyed me to no end w
On Wednesday 14 August 2002 17:01, Igor Izyumin wrote:
> On Tuesday 13 August 2002 10:22 pm, Levi Ramsey wrote:
> > On Tue Aug 13 19:02 -0400, Jakub Pas wrote:
> > > What's happened to Aurora. I cant' remember it was included in MDK 8.2
> > > but anyway I can't find it in 9.0. It was quite niece..
On Tuesday 13 August 2002 10:22 pm, Levi Ramsey wrote:
> On Tue Aug 13 19:02 -0400, Jakub Pas wrote:
> > What's happened to Aurora. I cant' remember it was included in MDK 8.2
> > but anyway I can't find it in 9.0. It was quite niece...
>
> You're the only one, then. Aurora annoyed me to no end w
On Tue, 2002-08-13 at 18:02, Jakub Pas wrote:
> What's happened to Aurora. I cant' remember it was included in MDK 8.2 but
> anyway I can't find it in 9.0. It was quite niece...
You are a sick, twisted individual. Seek psychiatric help immediately.
It's gone in 9.x (and the crowd roars approva
On Tue Aug 13 19:02 -0400, Jakub Pas wrote:
> What's happened to Aurora. I cant' remember it was included in MDK 8.2 but
> anyway I can't find it in 9.0. It was quite niece...
You're the only one, then. Aurora annoyed me to no end when I was using
8.x.
;o)
--
Levi Ramsey
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[E
Hi guys.
What's happened to Aurora. I cant' remember it was included in MDK 8.2 but
anyway I can't find it in 9.0. It was quite niece...
Kuba
Borsenkow Andrej <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Since we dont use Aurora anymore, can you remomove aurora scripts from
>> functions file (~40%) so that all init scrits that require this file
> will
>> parse it faster. Thus we will have faster login.
>
> I sent patch some time ago but it went to W
> Since we dont use Aurora anymore, can you remomove aurora scripts from
> functions file (~40%) so that all init scrits that require this file
will
> parse it faster. Thus we will have faster login.
I sent patch some time ago but it went to Warly (I presumed it has been
maintaining initscripts a
Since we dont use Aurora anymore, can you remomove aurora scripts from
functions file (~40%) so that all init scrits that require this file will
parse it faster. Thus we will have faster login.
Borsenkow Andrej <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> As I understand Aurora has been dropped for good, can someone clean up
> the
>> aurora stuff from the initscripts now?
>>
>
> Please, not before 8.2 is out. Too dangerous.
yes, too dangerous.
--
Warly
>
> Hi,
>
> As I understand Aurora has been dropped for good, can someone clean up
the
> aurora stuff from the initscripts now?
>
Please, not before 8.2 is out. Too dangerous.
Hi,
As I understand Aurora has been dropped for good, can someone clean up the
aurora stuff from the initscripts now?
--
Kindest regards // Oden Eriksson
Deserve-IT Networks/HFE Systems
andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It is gone.
>
> For good??
Except if you want to maintain it...
--
Warly
On Saturday 16 February 2002 22:13, andre wrote:
>It is gone.
>
>For good??
I'm too afraid to hope for so much.
-Chuck
It is gone.
For good??
RV> Hi cookers,
RV> my Aurora booting screen has wrong font for Czech messages. It must be
RV> ISO-8859-2 instead ISO-8859-1.
RV> Booting in non-fb mode is OK.
RV> R.V.
How can it be changed ? It fails for Turkish (iso8859-9) too :(
Onur Kucuk
_
Hi cookers,
my Aurora booting screen has wrong font for Czech messages. It must be
ISO-8859-2 instead ISO-8859-1.
Booting in non-fb mode is OK.
R.V.
On Friday 21 Dec 2001 23:13, Bill Kenworthy wrote:
> How does one get rid of that ugly blue welcome graphic from the text
> boot screen whenever a high res boot mode is specified (vga=792)? I
> uninstalled Aurorer and its still there - missed something maybe? The
> Aurorer package is certainly s
On Fridayen den 21 December 2001 04.28, Quel Qun wrote:
> On Thu, 2001-12-20 at 05:22, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> > Charles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Aurora is unneeded, hides useful boot-time system messages,
> > > and is oft broken. So why not ->CAN-IT<- once and for all?
> >
> > For
On Saturdayen den 22 December 2001 02.13, Han wrote:
> Oden Eriksson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > On Fridayen den 21 December 2001 21.14, Han wrote:
> >> Oden Eriksson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >>> On Fridayen den 21 December 2001 04.28, Quel Qun wrote:
> On Thu, 2001-12-20 at 05:22, Gui
Oden Eriksson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Fridayen den 21 December 2001 21.14, Han wrote:
>> Oden Eriksson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>>> On Fridayen den 21 December 2001 04.28, Quel Qun wrote:
On Thu, 2001-12-20 at 05:22, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> Charles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writ
On Fridayen den 21 December 2001 21.14, Han wrote:
> Oden Eriksson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > On Fridayen den 21 December 2001 04.28, Quel Qun wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2001-12-20 at 05:22, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> >>> Charles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Aurora is unneeded, hides useful
How does one get rid of that ugly blue welcome graphic from the text
boot screen whenever a high res boot mode is specified (vga=792)? I
uninstalled Aurorer and its still there - missed something maybe? The
Aurorer package is certainly something that Mandrake could do without.
BillK
On Fri, 20
Oden Eriksson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Fridayen den 21 December 2001 04.28, Quel Qun wrote:
>> On Thu, 2001-12-20 at 05:22, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
>>> Charles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Aurora is unneeded, hides useful boot-time system messages, and
is oft broken. So why no
On Thu, 2001-12-20 at 21:12, Dave Fluri wrote:
> > Aurora is unneeded, hides useful boot-time system messages,
> > and is oft broken. So why not ->CAN-IT<- once and for all?
>
> I'm so happy to hear that I am not alone in my assessment. I've often
> wondered precisely WHY we have Aurora. What
On Thu, 2001-12-20 at 05:22, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> Charles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Aurora is unneeded, hides useful boot-time system messages,
> > and is oft broken. So why not ->CAN-IT<- once and for all?
>
> For newbies it's good eye candy, and the shitload of startup
> mess
Le mercredi 19 décembre, 2001, Chuck a écrit :
> Indeed.
> Aurora is unneeded, hides useful boot-time system messages,
> and is oft broken. So why not ->CAN-IT<- once and for all?
I'm so happy to hear that I am not alone in my assessment. I've often
wondered precisely WHY we have Aurora. What p
Yves Duret ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Ben V <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I've got the following message at Aurora boot:
>> Fatal server error
>> Could not create log file in /tmp/.TX1-lock
>> How can i fix that, because I can't turn off Aurora at boot
>> : it's not in the menu of Control Pan
On Wednesday 19 December 2001 09:11 pm, you wrote:
-> On Wednesday 19 December 2001 13:22, Charles A Edwards wrote:
-> >Uninstall aurora.
-> >You do not need it.
->
-> Indeed.
-> Aurora is unneeded, hides useful boot-time system messages,
-> and is oft broken. So why not ->CAN-IT<- once and for a
On Thursday 20 December 2001 08:22, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
>For newbies it's good eye candy, and the shitload of startup
>messages are said to frighten them when displayed.
I suppose you're right. Look at the boot screen that Brand-X
gives on their latest offering: Their unmistakable logo
Charles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Aurora is unneeded, hides useful boot-time system messages,
> and is oft broken. So why not ->CAN-IT<- once and for all?
For newbies it's good eye candy, and the shitload of startup
messages are said to frighten them when displayed.
--
Guillaume Cottence
Ben V <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi
>
> I've got the following message at Aurora boot:
> Fatal server error
> Could not create log file in /tmp/.TX1-lock
>
> How can i fix that, because I can't turn off Aurora at boot
> : it's not in the menu of Control Panel.
> I download the last update of
On Wednesday 19 December 2001 13:22, Charles A Edwards wrote:
>Uninstall aurora.
>You do not need it.
Indeed.
Aurora is unneeded, hides useful boot-time system messages,
and is oft broken. So why not ->CAN-IT<- once and for all?
--
*Chuck*
On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 19:11:26 GMT+1
Ben V <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi
>
> I've got the following message at Aurora boot:
> Fatal server error
> Could not create log file in /tmp/.TX1-lock
>
> How can i fix that, because I can't turn off Aurora at boot
> : it's not in the menu of Control Pane
Hi
I've got the following message at Aurora boot:
Fatal server error
Could not create log file in /tmp/.TX1-lock
How can i fix that, because I can't turn off Aurora at boot
: it's not in the menu of Control Panel.
I download the last update of initscript
Mandrake 8.1
___
le ven 14-12-2001 à 00:21, George Mitchell a écrit :
> >No it's Aurora the problem. It's incomplete and need more features
> >
> So the plan then is to enable interactive capability in Aurora?
that's it
--
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/linux_wizard/index.html
-
Russell Hammond: If I die, tell Rolli
Fabrice FACORAT wrote:
>le jeu 13-12-2001 à 17:07, George Mitchell a écrit :
>
>>The problem in my mind is not with Aurora, but with initscripts. This
>>in not a new problem. Aurora has been choking on kudzu for as long as
>>Aurora has been around. The solution is for initscripts to be 'Auro
le jeu 13-12-2001 à 17:07, George Mitchell a écrit :
> The problem in my mind is not with Aurora, but with initscripts. This
> in not a new problem. Aurora has been choking on kudzu for as long as
> Aurora has been around. The solution is for initscripts to be 'Aurora
> aware'. Initscripts
OS wrote:
>Hello,
>
>I have mentioned before that Aurora is the wrong way around, but here is
>another example:
>
>initscripts now asks if you wish to scan the disks if the system is not shut
>down correctly (incidently, when I said NO to this the disks were still
>scanned !). However, because
>
> initscripts now asks if you wish to scan the disks if the system is
not shut
> down correctly (incidently, when I said NO to this the disks were
still
> scanned !). However, because Aurora only displays things AFTER the
event
> this
> prompt sits there hidden until it times out and the scan i
Hello,
I have mentioned before that Aurora is the wrong way around, but here is
another example:
initscripts now asks if you wish to scan the disks if the system is not shut
down correctly (incidently, when I said NO to this the disks were still
scanned !). However, because Aurora only displa
I repost...
What about swapping the screens :
- the internationalized "welcome" message goes to lilo screen
- a Mandrakesoft logo goes into the kernel "framebuffer" picture (the
one with the "welcomes").
Thus, you just say "Welcome", yet in many languages, you don't say "to
Linux-Mandrake" in li
Dominik Bittl wrote:
>
> Frederic Bastok wrote:
>
>>On Wednesday 05 September 2001 10:12, François Pons wrote:
>>
>>>Pixel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>
Grégoire Colbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>The question was more "Why is there something *written* on that screen
>at all
François Pons wrote:
>
> Dominik Bittl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Sorry, but what is it in english (fpitoun,fbastok )??
>
> Because cooker is in english :-)
>
> François.
That's it ! *g*
mfg dominik
--
"Backups are for wimps. Real men upload their data to an FTP site and have
ev
Dominik Bittl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Sorry, but what is it in english (fpitoun,fbastok )??
Because cooker is in english :-)
François.
Frederic Bastok wrote:
>
> On Wednesday 05 September 2001 10:12, François Pons wrote:
> > Pixel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Grégoire Colbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > The question was more "Why is there something *written* on that screen
> > > > at all?". I think we could put a
On Wednesday 05 September 2001 10:12, François Pons wrote:
> Pixel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Grégoire Colbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > The question was more "Why is there something *written* on that screen
> > > at all?". I think we could put a stylized MandrakeSoft logo? And after
Pixel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Grégoire Colbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The question was more "Why is there something *written* on that screen at
> > all?". I think we could put a stylized MandrakeSoft logo? And after all,
> > that's quite stupid to write "Welcome to Linux-Mandrak
Pixel wrote:
>
> Grégoire Colbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The question was more "Why is there something *written* on that screen at
> > all?". I think we could put a stylized MandrakeSoft logo? And after all,
> > that's quite stupid to write "Welcome to Linux-Mandrake" if you use lil
Grégoire Colbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The question was more "Why is there something *written* on that screen at
> all?". I think we could put a stylized MandrakeSoft logo? And after all,
> that's quite stupid to write "Welcome to Linux-Mandrake" if you use lilo to
> boot Windows...
i ag
Vox wrote:
> During the bombing raid on Tue, 04 Sep 2001 13:38:45 +0200, Grégoire Colbert
> was heard mumbling in fear:
>
>> What is criticizable is the "Welcome to Linux-Mandrake" in lilo screen,
>> which is untranslated. Sorry for english people out there, but why
>> should it be spelled in en
On Tuesday 04 Sep 2001 02:56, Warly wrote:
> Peter Ruskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Monday 03 Sep 2001 17:35, andre wrote:
> > > Op 03 Sep 2001 22:59:44 +0200, Grégoire Colbert schreef:
> >> > andre wrote:
> >> > >> solved, then Aurora will be the first thing I will delete after
> >> > >>
During the bombing raid on Tue, 04 Sep 2001 13:38:45 +0200, Grégoire Colbert
was heard mumbling in fear:
> Dominik Bittl wrote:
> > After deactivation of Aurora, the ugly Welcome-Bootup-Screen with all the
>different languages is still coming !!
>
> It is not ugly : it is called internation
> After deactivation of Aurora, the ugly Welcome-Bootup-Screen with all
the
> different languages is still coming !!
>
> Or isn't that a part of Aurora ?
>
It is not part of Aurora and it is not ugly.
Add nologo to kernel boot string.
-andrej
Dominik Bittl wrote:
> After deactivation of Aurora, the ugly Welcome-Bootup-Screen with all the different
>languages is still coming !!
It is not ugly : it is called internationalization.
What is criticizable is the "Welcome to Linux-Mandrake" in lilo screen,
which is untranslated. Sorry for
After deactivation of Aurora, the ugly Welcome-Bootup-Screen with all the different
languages is still coming !!
Or isn't that a part of Aurora ?
mfg dominik
Borsenkow Andrej wrote:
>
> >
> > Unfortunately Egil has gone back to his studies and does not weems to
> take
> > care anymore af A
>
> Unfortunately Egil has gone back to his studies and does not weems to
take
> care anymore af Aurora, at least for the moment, so I am the unlucky
guys
> who
> take it as maintainer.
>
Good.
> However, I'll try to fix most of the annoying stuff, so if you could
> enumerate
> all the Bad T
Peter Ruskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Monday 03 Sep 2001 17:35, andre wrote:
> > Op 03 Sep 2001 22:59:44 +0200, Grégoire Colbert schreef:
>> > andre wrote:
>> > >> solved, then Aurora will be the first thing I will delete after
>> > >> upgrade to 8.1. ;)
>> > >
>> > > I see you are not th
On Monday 03 Sep 2001 17:35, andre wrote:
> Op 03 Sep 2001 22:59:44 +0200, Grégoire Colbert schreef:
> > andre wrote:
> > >> solved, then Aurora will be the first thing I will delete after
> > >> upgrade to 8.1. ;)
> > >
> > > I see you are not the average cooker user. They don't delete it
> > > *
Op 03 Sep 2001 22:59:44 +0200, Grégoire Colbert schreef:
> andre wrote:
>
> >> solved, then Aurora will be the first thing I will delete after
> >> upgrade to 8.1. ;)
>
> > I see you are not the average cooker user. They don't delete it
> > *after* an upgrade.
>
> I'm not running Cooker. :)
>
Le Lundi 3 Septembre 2001 22:50, andre scribit :
> I see you are not the average cooker user. They don't delete it *after*
> an upgrade.
true. they don't install it or deinstall it before (first reflexe with the
install of kdebase-nsplugins).
--
Copyleft Faber's prod. 2001
http://perso.wanadoo.
andre wrote:
>> solved, then Aurora will be the first thing I will delete after
>> upgrade to 8.1. ;)
> I see you are not the average cooker user. They don't delete it
> *after* an upgrade.
I'm not running Cooker. :)
I wrote this because chances are Aurora be installed by default in
8.1...
>
> Hello,
>
> I experienced hardware problem with Mandrake 8.0, and when restarting
> Linux, after HardDrake appeared, Aurora printed something like it could
> not "open terminal" and garbage looking like "ANSI" codes in old MS-DOS
> for colours. To see if this bug is solved in Cooker, just
Hello,
I experienced hardware problem with Mandrake 8.0, and when restarting
Linux, after HardDrake appeared, Aurora printed something like it could
not "open terminal" and garbage looking like "ANSI" codes in old MS-DOS
for colours. To see if this bug is solved in Cooker, just unplug your
mo
On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, Andrej Borsenkow wrote:
> One more example of maintained and useful package (sorry, could not
> resist).
>
> -andrej
I have been very busy lately because I am without high speed Internet
access and University has started again, but I also can't resist. This bug
in Aurora has
Aurora #warning: /etc/aurora/Monitor created as
/etc/aurora/Monitor.rpmnew
#
Aurora-Monitor-NewStyle-Categorizing-WsLib##
[root@cooker gtk]# ll /etc/aurora
total 8
-rw-r--r--
Andrej, I'm one of those who doesn't like Aurora (hate it actually), but
I do see it as having a place. It does put a nice friendly face on the
boot routine of Linux. At least it's more informative than a Windows
logo with a cycling color bar.
If it's unmaintained, perhaps someone should pick up
Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
>
> I know that guys on Cooker really don't like Aurora (and me also) but you
> already have two ways of not using Aurora (unselecting during install,
> booting a non-fb kernel).
>
The guys on Cooker like Aurora. The guys on Cooker do not like buggy
software. And th
Guillaume Cottenceau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The third is of course to issue "urpme Aurora" after first boot. That's
> not really bigtime: you do first boot in non-fb mode to verify the boot
> goes smoothly, you type "urpme Aurora" in the console, and then, you
> forget about it.
or rm -
You just had to go and spoil all my fun, Guillaume. I guess most people
here just deal with it. That, or there are fewer Cooker testers than I
thought.
Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> Digital Wokan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [...]
> > > in expert mode, boot configuration(lilo/grub), choose a n
1 - 100 of 193 matches
Mail list logo
