Re: [Cooker] Aurora - the devil's in the details
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 problem will be that some tools directly use my_gtk...
Is that part of perl-MDK-Common?
urpmf is your friend, little jedi :-) :
tv@vador ~ $ urpmf my_gtk.pm
drakxtools:/usr/lib/libDrakX/my_gtk.pm
Guess you'll have to abstract my_gtk too. I'm assuming they use
my_gtk for things that appear only in the gtk version(s) and not the
newt version(s) :o)
yes, there's a few gtk only tools (logdrake, ...); and there's the mcc
which provides a short interactive ui and the full blessed my_gtk/ugtk
ui.
ugtk offers nice wrapper on top of perl_gtk, thus enabling powerful
creation of ui. mcc example:
my $window = new Gtk::Window -toplevel,
$window-add(
gtkpack_(new Gtk::VBox(0, 0),
0, my $title_w = get_main_menu($window),
0, my $fixed_title = gtkset_usize(new Gtk::Fixed, 400, 55),
0, new Gtk::HSeparator,
1, gtkpack_(new Gtk::HBox(0, 0),
0, my $fixed_left = new Gtk::Fixed,
1, gtkpack_(my $right_box = new Gtk::VBox(0, 0),
1, gtkpack_($emb_box = new Gtk::VBox(0, 0),
1, $emb_wait = gtkpack_(new Gtk::VBox(0, 0),
1, new Gtk::HBox(0, 0),
0, gtkpack_(new Gtk::HBox(0, 0),
1, new Gtk::VBox(0, 0),
0,
gtkadd(gtkset_shadow_type(new Gtk::Frame, 'etched_out'),
gtkpng_('hourglass'),
),
1, new Gtk::VBox(0, 0),
),
0, new Gtk::Label(_(Please
wait...)),
1, new Gtk::HBox(0, 0),
0,
gtkadd(gtkset_layout(gtkset_border_width(new Gtk::HButtonBox, 10), 'end'),
gtksignal_connect(new
Gtk::Button(_(Cancel)), clicked = sub { kill('USR1', $$) }),
)
)
),
1, new Gtk::Widget ('Gtk::Notebook',show_border = 0,
show_tabs = 0),
)
)
)
);
my_gtk offer high level functions (windows, ...) mainly used by interactive::gtk
Re: [Cooker] Aurora - the devil's in the details
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 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 essentially *requires* GNOME, militantly markets GNOME-alone. RedHat's dependency checking is also sloppier than Mandrake's. If I chose Debian over Mandrake on a server, I would do so because Debian's packaging is much more careful, and their update system more reliable to a more or less unbeatable degree. In point of fact, I do have a Debian gateway for my home (I replaced a Mandrake 6.0 (!) server with it) specifically to become more adept at using these tools. I have apt-get dist-upgraded Debian servers and had 100% of the services survive the experience - in part because the package scripting stops and asks if it's not sure - but with Mandrake something inevitably breaks. With RedHat, several things inevitably break. Having said that, Mandrake is (oh-so-)slowly becoming more proficient at sorting out dependency issues and the like in its RPMs, and the semi-automated RPM handling tools have caught up to Debian considerably and should - post 9.0 - stabilise rapidly. Mandrake seems to have a genius for picking good versions and variants of things. Very rarely do they release a distro and then immediately afterwards have a security issue to patch, and they were early adopters of successful systems and services such as postfix. Counterbalancing this, their system for netting all bug reports seems to have leaks - at least from a user's perspective - or perhaps there simply aren't enough people on the incoming end to deal with them all. I can't stand Aurora (personally) but I can quite happily accept that it is probably useful for some people out there. It should be fairly simple to dress up the current system to look more GUI-ish without detracting from its usefulness. What they have now is a better compromise than Aurora in that it is much more useful and understandable. What I would appreciate is the ability to start the system in three wise monkeys mode (progress bar only all the way, which is more than Windows gives you (some variants give you progress for a short leg of the boot) but not overwhelming or confusing for a newbie), and have a simple keystroke (maybe +/-) to turn on/off detail as required. A regularly updated set of advertising images would be a useful filler for the box in the middle. Later, a tool to allow the user to add their own image(s) and/or replace the existing set would be good. If progress-bar-only is regarded as detail level 0, and the current system is regarded as detail level 2, at a lower priority (maybe for 9.1) I'd like a `detail level 1' that consisted of packing the current `text' window with icons drawn early in the piece and overlaid with tick-questionmark-cross as each started, staggered (e.g. successful fdisk of a damaged partition) or failed. Given that functionality, I can't think of any reason to miss Aurora. Cheers; Leon
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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 i'm going to go take a shower.) Spellcheckers often have problems with agglutinative words... almost makes me wonder how a German spellchecker would work... ;o) Google and Babelfish both choke. Cheers; Leon
Re: [Cooker] Aurora - the devil's in the details
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 essentially *requires* GNOME, militantly markets GNOME-alone. err, we don't prefer kde or gnome, all our stuff are made to works with both (unified menu through wm methods, common desktop icons, ...) as for our toos, they're not written for kde; in fact, they use gtk+ since: - libgtk+ is small (1.5Mb) while libqt is 6.6Mb - libgtk+ doesn't means have gnome libs installed which is not true for libqt - there's still no decent perl-Qt binding (but david faure is working on it) - we (mandrake developers) have better knowledge of gtk+ than qt - we already have a code base extending perl-Gtk to get a usable toolkit (my_gtk/ugtk) - we already have a code base providing abstraction in the config tools for implementation into Gtk, Newt and stdio (interactive) the rest of your post had have bad side effects on our ego :-)
Re: [Cooker] Aurora - the devil's in the details
--- 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 gtk+, and they were planning Qt. I suppose yours could also extend to Qt (if there was a good Perl binding like you said). __ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com
Re: [Cooker] Aurora - the devil's in the details
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. RedHat essentially *requires* GNOME, militantly markets GNOME-alone. Thierry has covered that. But I do agree that since 8.x, Mandrake has definitely been a better Red Hat than Red Hat. [quality stuff snipped] Mandrake seems to have a genius for picking good versions and variants of things. Very rarely do they release a distro and then immediately afterwards have a security issue to patch, and they were early adopters of successful systems and services such as postfix. Counterbalancing this, their system for netting all bug reports seems to have leaks - at least from a user's perspective - or perhaps there simply aren't enough people on the incoming end to deal with them all. I think I've come up with the best way of describing Mandrake: an amalgam of good ideas from Red Hat, Debian, and MandrakeSoft. All in all, imho, an unbeatable combination. -- Levi Ramsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Was it something I said? And the stars look down. Linux 2.4.18-21mdk 4:45pm up 3 days, 16:49, 7 users, load average: 0.28, 0.28, 0.25
Re: [Cooker] Aurora - the devil's in the details
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 gtk+, and they were planning Qt. I suppose yours could also extend to Qt (if there was a good Perl binding like you said). 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 will be that some tools directly use my_gtk...
Re: [Cooker] Aurora - the devil's in the details
--- 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 will be that some tools directly use my_gtk... Is that part of perl-MDK-Common? Guess you'll have to abstract my_gtk too. I'm assuming they use my_gtk for things that appear only in the gtk version(s) and not the newt version(s) :o) __ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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 rather than thinking more about the interface to the user. Professionalism doesn't have to do only with how beautiful it looks. It has more to do with how obvious the interface looks and how it doesn't get into the way of the user. The interface has to show that some thought has gone into the placement of almost every pixel on screen. It should feel natural. It doesn't mean that it should loose functionality, but that it shouldn't ask the user to make too many choices. Designing for newbies does not mean that the interface is meant for newbies. It means that newbies are the bottom line. It means that the interface should behave like what a reasonable person should expect it to behave if using it for the first time. Newbie != idiot Newbie != anti-geek Your last statement may have been meant as a joke but if you give a little bit of thought to it you realize it makes some sense, although you incorrectly implied that a newbie will not need a compiler. Just because somebody never used Linux before doesn't mean he doesn't need a compiler. Besides, why is Mandrake so poplular? Because they have a lower bottom line that most other distributions. 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 damn cool, people are just going to have to warp their brains around it. This kind of chutzpah is pretty common in the free software world. Hey, Linux is free! If you're not smart enough to decipher it, you don't deserve to be using it! On Thu, 2002-08-15 at 05:06, Yura Gusev wrote: I dont think that those messages make linux unprofessional or difficult for newbies. They simply have to wait 10 sec for the GDM login screen (or even autologin) and then login in their KDE and open StarOffice XMMS and Mozilla. Remember: a) Build a system that any idiot can use and they will make a better idiot. b) Build a system that any idiot can use and only idiots will use it. Just a joke ;-) For the complete newbies i think we should make a new Mandrake distribution: one CD, no compilers and development packages, no emacs ;-), pre-configured programs and only one package for a task.
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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 damn cool, people are just going to have to warp their brains around it. This kind of chutzpah is pretty common in the free software world. Hey, Linux is free! If you're not smart enough to decipher it, you don't deserve to be using it! 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. 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. Unix style operating systems are based on a very different OS architecture to Windows style systems. This is seen clearly in the component model for applications. Loads of little applications that do a specific job well. Loads of lightweight processes that can communicate with each other to deliver an overall solution. The 'power' of the Unix approach is that you are not forced to take any single path to solve your problem, you choose the path that means most to you - the one that best fits your needs. The Windows approach is clearly different, it says there shall be only one way, and you will use it. The windows approach makes it easier for beginners to get a handle on - simply because they have no choice, and no-one else has any choice in how things are done.. So beginners and experts alike have to do things the same way. Unix is *different*, that doesn't mean that it must be harder, but it's strengths are in being different. The recent push of Linux to the Desktop taken the windows approach, and we're trying to build a huge single monolith of an operating system without all the flexibility of the back-end.. Gnome is a classic example , if you install gnome then to hell with you if you don't want Nautilus. Choice is being lost.. The arguments about Aurora / OSS / ALSA are the same, people are trying to restrict choice. I can't stand Aurora (personally) but I can quite happily accept that it is probably useful for some people out there. I fully accept that the 'beginner' install needs to make most of the choices for the end user, and that the expert install needs to allow people to thrash the hell out of their machine - but maybe it's time for an 'intermediate' install. Linux has taken on the world because it offered choices... Let's not kill Mandrake because we fail to continue offering choices. Just my 0.02 Euro -- Chris Higgins Horizon e: chris.higgins at hts.horizon.ie tel: +353-1-6204900 fax: +353-1-6204901
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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 free software world. Hey, Linux is free! If you're not smart enough to decipher it, you don't deserve to be using it! 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. 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. Unix style operating systems are based on a very different OS architecture to Windows style systems. This is seen clearly in the component model for applications. Loads of little applications that do a specific job well. Loads of lightweight processes that can communicate with each other to deliver an overall solution. The 'power' of the Unix approach is that you are not forced to take any single path to solve your problem, you choose the path that means most to you - the one that best fits your needs. The Windows approach is clearly different, it says there shall be only one way, and you will use it. The windows approach makes it easier for beginners to get a handle on - simply because they have no choice, and no-one else has any choice in how things are done.. So beginners and experts alike have to do things the same way. Unix is *different*, that doesn't mean that it must be harder, but it's strengths are in being different. The recent push of Linux to the Desktop taken the windows approach, and we're trying to build a huge single monolith of an operating system without all the flexibility of the back-end.. Gnome is a classic example , if you install gnome then to hell with you if you don't want Nautilus. Choice is being lost.. The arguments about Aurora / OSS / ALSA are the same, people are trying to restrict choice. I can't stand Aurora (personally) but I can quite happily accept that it is probably useful for some people out there. I fully accept that the 'beginner' install needs to make most of the choices for the end user, and that the expert install needs to allow people to thrash the hell out of their machine - but maybe it's time for an 'intermediate' install. Linux has taken on the world because it offered choices... Let's not kill Mandrake because we fail to continue offering choices. Just my 0.02 Euro Sorry for quoting in full, but couldn't find anywhere to snip. I think you make useful points, but you're sounding the alarm too early. Go through your examples... 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 stuff that's optional and can be replaced with something else must be drawn somewhere; GNOME draw it behind Nautilus. Nautilus to GNOME developers isn't exactly a file manager, it's a core component of how GNOME deals with some things (file management, desktop). If you want to use GNOME, you're probably lumbered with installing it. But this doesn't exactly restrict choice; GNOME and KDE are your desktop / WM choices for large, bells-and-whistles imbued, monolithic desktop environments. Don't like GNOME, because of Nautilus or for whatever other reason? You still have choice. Use KDE, or - which would probably be more suited to your adherence to the small, interchangeable, directed parts philosophy - a smaller WM like Enlightenment, FluxBox or whatever. OSS / Alsa - no. Mandrake provides a full set of *both* ALSA and OSS drivers; everyone has the choice to use either, and I believe someone's working on coding the option to switch into HardDrake. The arguments are merely over which type of driver should be selected by default by DrakX for which type of card. Aurora, well, this is admittedly a limited example of removing choice, but again there's a line to be drawn here. Mandrake *could* include every tool they've ever used for any distro-specific part of using Linux - both versions of rpmdrake, every configuration tool, every bootup idea, etc etc, and end up with a huge, unwieldy, hard to maintain Mandrake part of the distribution. This clearly isn't a good solution. So there has to be a line drawn beyond which old stuff is thrown out. You might not agree with where it's being drawn, 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. Very good and interesting post, though. Oh, please fix your reply-to header; it should point at [EMAIL PROTECTED] when posting to this list, I nearly just posted this to you and
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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 stuff that's optional and can be replaced with something else must be drawn somewhere; GNOME draw it behind Nautilus. Nautilus to GNOME developers isn't exactly a file manager, it's a core component of how GNOME deals with some things (file management, desktop). If you want to use GNOME, you're probably lumbered with installing it. Hi, this is a bad example, because on my desktop rox has replaced nautilus. I can work well with it, there are only few features missing from the default GNOME installation. So you do have a choice. -- Götz Waschk master of computer science University of Rostock http://wwwtec.informatik.uni-rostock.de/~waschk/waschk.asc for PGP key -- Logout Fascism! --
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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? G 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 meaning mislay or (in the above usage) get rid of. Loose is either an adjective, the opposite of tight, or (less commonly) a verb meaning set free or discharge (you can loose a horse that's been penned up, though more common usage here would be turn loose, or loose a shot from a gun). Some spelling mistakes are harmless, but this really isn't; both spellings ought to be usable as verbs, but this increasingly widespread incorrect usage of loose to mean lose is threatening that. Sorry. Rant over. But i'd appreciate it if doc writers looked out for this one in their docs - your spellchecker won't pick it up. :) (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.) -- adamw
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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 choice. I can't stand Aurora (personally) but I can quite happily accept that it is probably useful for some people out there. I fully accept that the 'beginner' install needs to make most of the choices for the end user, and that the expert install needs to allow people to thrash the hell out of their machine - but maybe it's time for an 'intermediate' install. From my perspective (and only mine, mind you), it's a matter of what works, and what doesn't.. Sure, I love being able to tweak my settings (who doesn't), but I don't like having to go through everywhere to do so. As a side note, the recent problems I'd been having appear to be with an old driver (OSS), which I'd never seen give me any problem until recently. Why the sudden change? I don't know. I just know that at setup it did NOT work, and it was quite annoying. As far as the rest, sound choices and all. Perhaps, adding something to the sound card section in harddrake: What sound driver do you wish to use? (if driver is available to card, then list drivers and a minor text blob). This way, EVERYONE can be happy, and use their drivers rather easily. Personally, I'm still boggled as to WHY oss works perfectly with artsd and Alsa doesn't, but hell, as long as it works, then all's well in that matter. I agree that the install should choose the best choice (as long as the install is regular/newbie, and not advanced), but sometimes, the best choice doesn't exactly work (again, take my case for example.. Somehow, the drivers were shot). Just my 0.02 however
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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 bad bad thing. Then who's to say what's the default? Not to mention the fact that it'd be a big ol mess to figure out. The Windows approach is clearly different, it says there shall be only one way, and you will use it. Again despite my distaste for M$, I don't see any truth in this statement -- could you provide some evidence to support this? There shall be only 1 window manager (ours) and you shall use it. There shall be only 1 operating system (ours) and you shall use it. Walk into a school, do you see Linux servers running? For the most part no (though there ARE a few exceptions). Children are taught at an early age to use Micro$oft apps. Look at the application database being built for Micro$oft apps, vs Linux apps. Look at the fact that MOST drivers are built for Micro$oft OS'es first, Linux (if we're lucky) second. Just my thoughts, as usual.
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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 explain why. Unix style operating systems are based on a very different OS architecture to Windows style systems. This is seen clearly in the component model for applications. Loads of little applications that do a specific job well. Loads of lightweight processes that can communicate with each other to deliver an overall solution. I agree that the underlying systems are very different but the overall solution is what we are concerned about. A component model does not mean that we should have two programs, one for receiving mail and one for sending mail, or separate a word processor in to a text editor, and all what not, to get the same thing done. People expect all word processors to work in a similar manner. I agree completely . There is very little room for innovation here. I disagree (gently) The 'power' of the Unix approach is that you are not forced to take any single path to solve your problem, you choose the path that means most to you - the one that best fits your needs. How is this different from choosing to use KDE rather than GNOME or a text console? Or Choosing to use Mozilla instead of IE or Eudora instead of Outlook under windows? It's not, but you highlight my point in your reponse KDE rather than GNOME... Why pick one or the other ? Why have to make that choice ? 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. The Windows approach is clearly different, it says there shall be only one way, and you will use it. Again despite my distaste for M$, I don't see any truth in this statement -- could you provide some evidence to support this? Microsoft are designing / developing and pushing a single environment for end users. This is typified by the recent marketing push for the Windows 'Experience'. They don't want anything other than their own software on their operating system. They want everything then to look / act and feel exactly the same way. I'm not saying that this is wrong, just different to the traditional Unix way - where choice is a major component (with all the issues that brings) The windows approach makes it easier for beginners to get a handle on - simply because they have no choice, and no-one else has any choice in how things are done.. So beginners and experts alike have to do things the same way. I think you, as well as many others are incorrectly comparing windows (The OS) with a Linux distribution which is more than just an OS. We're talking about new users here, the distinction is too subtle to be understood. I've been in computing for over 20 years, I know that a linux distribution is vastly more than just an operating system. However the distributions are being marketed and promoted as just that - a replacement operating system for your computer. Think of a barebones Linux OS and you may realize that there not as much choice as you think. The problem is, there is no choice available for beginners in Linux (OS) and that is what Mandrake is trying to create IMHO. There is loads of choice with a bare-bones linux os... I pick my kernel version , BSD or SysV init scripts, I pick my shell (tcsh/csh/bash/sh/ksh...), I choose a filesystem layout that fits my needs... I choose my servers - email - sendmail / postfix / exim / etc... The recent push of Linux to the Desktop taken the windows approach, and we're trying to build a huge single monolith of an operating system without all the flexibility of the back-end.. Again confusing the OS with the distribution Doesn't invalidate the point though :-) Gnome is a classic example , if you install gnome then to hell with you if you don't want Nautilus. Choice is being lost.. Gnome is a desktop environment, if you don't want a DE don't install GNOME or KDE or XFE. just install a window manager and run what ever apps you want. If you think you should be able to disable the file manager in a DE just file a bug report with that project. I don't ... I just have a window manager running on X. I can't stand Aurora (personally) but I can quite happily accept that it is probably useful for some people out there. I can't stand it either but I don't want to see [ok] messages unless I have to. The only use for those messages is for feedback, which can be replaced like mandrake did already with bootsplash. However I think there is more room for improvement there. It's not a matter of choice. It is a matter of
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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 re-reading my mail I see why - my fault. I'm not for a second suggesting that 'Mandrake' are abandoning the Unix design philosophy... apologies to any Mandrake ppl who picked me up that way. I do however see a lot more moves recently by people putting together packages who are restricting choices because they believe that a single choice is the best one for all. People who are fighting to copy Windows because that's what users want and expect. I like the idea of the new rpmdrake breaking the tasks out into clearly distinct functions, I hate the idea of having to get to it via a desktop environment menu system (given that my window manager has it's own hand carved menus :-( More of the packages are making assumptions about my environment that are wrong, the assumptions apply to the 'default mandrake install' and work will for beginners - but they break on my highly tuned system. People assume that if I want to run one package that I also have a whole lot more installed.. Even if those additional packages are only needed for a tiny portion of the functionality provided in the first package. Very good and interesting post, though. Oh, please fix your reply-to header; it should point at [EMAIL PROTECTED] when posting to this list, I nearly just posted this to you and thus broke the list's flow. (/me suddenly realises he's never checked he follows this rule, and madly hopes that he's practicing what he preaches...) Fixed ( I hope :-) -- adamw -- Chris Higgins Horizon e: chris.higgins at hts.horizon.ie tel: +353-1-6204900 fax: +353-1-6204901
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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 match the ones that you want. Um? This makes no sense. KDE and GNOME aren't just collections of apps. You can run most GNOME apps quite happily under KDE, vice versa, and run apps from either on any other WM, so long as you have the necessary libraries and stuff installed. To get the benefits of KDE or GNOME *as desktop environments*, though, you have to run the whole bundle. The apps don't define the environments. (btw, your reply-to is broken again.) -- adamw
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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 often have problems with agglutinative words... almost makes me wonder how a German spellchecker would work... ;o) -- Levi Ramsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Was it something I said? And the stars look down. Linux 2.4.18-21mdk 1:00pm up 2 days, 13:04, 7 users, load average: 0.25, 0.17, 0.13
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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 found it to be more asthetically pleasing than a console window in a box-window. Oh, well, perhaps we can make the bootsplash console window a bit smarter, so it tags left-hand text with service icons and the [ OK ] etc with tick/cross/question icons. Dunno about everyone else, I prefer soemthing that works first, is pretty second. Ooh! If we're going for pretty, I *like* that idea. A small icon and optionally the service name in some kind of pretty font on the left, cartoony tick / cross on the right. Personally i'd turn it off straight away, but I can see it'd look cool for a reviewer / newbie on a first boot at least... -- adamw
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
--- 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 her box), and startled me by asking `what's that?' - she had *never* seen her machine rebooting before! Another true story: our new modem gets lost by the computer every now and then and you have to reboot, I told my mom this, and she asked How do you do that? She had forgotten :o) __ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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 approval). -- Brad Felmey
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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 when I was using 8.x. I agree. The first thing I did when I booted into 8.2 was rpm -e Aurora. Not to mention that it didn't work or crashed on many systems. -- -- Igor
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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... You're the only one, then. Aurora annoyed me to no end when I was using 8.x. I agree. The first thing I did when I booted into 8.2 was rpm -e Aurora. Not to mention that it didn't work or crashed on many systems. Aurora wasn't in 8.2 IIRC
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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 when I was using 8.x. ;o) 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 console window in a box-window. -- Gary Sent from seele.gvsu.edu 2:57pm up 9:52, 2 users, load average: 2.02, 1.45, 0.92 = Founder GVLUG. Chief Systems Architect, S4, Inc. - OS Department. -=http://s4llc.tabris.net/linux/=- Project Lead for the Sentinel Linux OS Project (KOMODO) Chairman and Project Lead of the E-media Committee of AltReal. PHONE : 331-0542 EMAIL : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] --changing the code of the Virtual Human Brain FS Driver... Mounting /dev/brain0 is still causing problems... Here's the error: #mounting local filesystems[ OK ] #Virtual Human Brain Driver v0.0.5 (EXPERIMENTAL) R/W fs module #Virtual Nerve Node Driver v0.4.1 (EXPERIMENTAL) R/W FS module #Insmod Adaptive Technology Device module..[ OK ] #Writing Sync state to Journalled VHBFS[ OK ] Kernel Sys Oops.. Flushing registers.. Back-trace follows.. =
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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? You are not so polite. I think help may be more ussefull for you then me... Best Regards Jakub
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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 psychiatric help immediately. It's gone in 9.x (and the crowd roars approval). Stressing job? Problems wih girlfirend? You are not so polite. I think help may be more ussefull for you then me... Text is such a limiting medium at times. It cannot carry inflection, for instance. In this case, I guess I could have followed the first sentence with the obligatory 'g' so you'd know I was making a joke, not being an ass. :) Sorry then - let's finish this stupid disscussion anyway... Anyway I liked Aurora ;-) Kuba
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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 crowd roars approval). Stressing job? Problems wih girlfirend? You are not so polite. I think help may be more ussefull for you then me... Text is such a limiting medium at times. It cannot carry inflection, for instance. In this case, I guess I could have followed the first sentence with the obligatory 'g' so you'd know I was making a joke, not being an ass. :) -- Brad Felmey
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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 than a console window in a box-window. The console-in-a-box window is fine. This is not windows, you don't reboot every 15 minutes, so I don't think it's important how it looks. It also causes much fewer problems than Aurora does: fsck, kudzu, and other unforseen problems don't cause it to crash. -- -- Igor
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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 installed) but over all I found it to be more asthetically pleasing than a console window in a box-window. The console-in-a-box window is fine. This is not windows, you don't reboot every 15 minutes, so I don't think it's important how it looks. It also causes much fewer problems than Aurora does: fsck, kudzu, and other unforseen problems don't cause it to crash. 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 works. If fsck, kudzu, and harddrake don't know how to behave with the it, find a workaround for them. And saying that we shouldn't care about the startup's appearance, then we've religated Linux only to the technological geeks. We should always make sure that the first thing that they see will inspire confidence that this is a polished and professional product. -- Gary Sent from seele.gvsu.edu 8:33pm up 15:29, 3 users, load average: 0.59, 0.47, 0.43 = Founder GVLUG. Chief Systems Architect, S4, Inc. - OS Department. -=http://s4llc.tabris.net/linux/=- Project Lead for the Sentinel Linux OS Project (KOMODO) Chairman and Project Lead of the E-media Committee of AltReal. PHONE : 331-0542 EMAIL : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] --changing the code of the Virtual Human Brain FS Driver... Mounting /dev/brain0 is still causing problems... Here's the error: #mounting local filesystems[ OK ] #Virtual Human Brain Driver v0.0.5 (EXPERIMENTAL) R/W fs module #Virtual Nerve Node Driver v0.4.1 (EXPERIMENTAL) R/W FS module #Insmod Adaptive Technology Device module..[ OK ] #Writing Sync state to Journalled VHBFS[ OK ] Kernel Sys Oops.. Flushing registers.. Back-trace follows.. =
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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 works. If fsck, kudzu, and harddrake don't know how to behave with the it, find a workaround for them. And saying that we shouldn't care about the startup's appearance, then we've religated Linux only to the technological geeks. We should always make sure that the first thing that they see will inspire confidence that this is a polished and professional product. I dont think that those messages make linux unprofessional or difficult for newbies. They simply have to wait 10 sec for the GDM login screen (or even autologin) and then login in their KDE and open StarOffice XMMS and Mozilla. Remember: a) Build a system that any idiot can use and they will make a better idiot. b) Build a system that any idiot can use and only idiots will use it. Just a joke ;-) For the complete newbies i think we should make a new Mandrake distribution: one CD, no compilers and development packages, no emacs ;-), pre-configured programs and only one package for a task.
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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 messages. Aurora is far more cluttered and doesn't look as clean. 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 works. Windows doesn't try to hide scandisk or error messages, most of the time. Aurora does. The quiet-mode bootup outputs about as much as Windows. Besides, aren't we trying to make a better system than windows? If fsck, kudzu, and harddrake don't know how to behave with the it, find a workaround for them. There is a workaround. Don't use aurora. And saying that we shouldn't care about the startup's appearance, then we've religated Linux only to the technological geeks. We should, but making it look nice doesn't mean making it as dumb as possible. Most people using Mandrake are usually familiar with their computers, and don't mind seeing bootup messages. Showing the user what service is starting up is necessary, because it shows where slowdowns are and tells them the system didn't crash. We should always make sure that the first thing that they see will inspire confidence that this is a polished and professional product. Having a clean _and_ informative bootup screen is a part of that. Having a dumbed-down boot screen only shows that the developers didn't want to bother with making it look nice, and chose to turn off the messages anyway. -- -- Igor
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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 *never* seen her machine rebooting before! Cheers; Leon
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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 console window in a box-window. Oh, well, perhaps we can make the bootsplash console window a bit smarter, so it tags left-hand text with service icons and the [ OK ] etc with tick/cross/question icons. Dunno about everyone else, I prefer soemthing that works first, is pretty second. Cheers; Leon
[Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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
Re: [Cooker] Aurora + Mandrake 9.0
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] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Was it something I said? And the stars look down. Linux 2.4.18-21mdk 11:15pm up 6 min, 2 users, load average: 0.10, 0.46, 0.26
Re: [Cooker] Aurora /etc/rc.d/init.d/functions
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 Warly (I presumed it has been maintaining initscripts after Chmouel). Fred, should I resend it to you? Yes I have your patch, it is in my todo list... -- Warly
[Cooker] Aurora /etc/rc.d/init.d/functions
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.
RE: [Cooker] Aurora /etc/rc.d/init.d/functions
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 after Chmouel). Fred, should I resend it to you? -andrej
[Cooker] Aurora?
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
RE: [Cooker] Aurora?
Hi, As I understand Aurora has been dropped for good, can someone clean up the aurora stuff from the initscripts now? Please, not before 82 is out Too dangerous
Re: [Cooker] Aurora?
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
Re: [Cooker] Aurora
andre [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It is gone. For good?? Except if you want to maintain it... -- Warly
[Cooker] Aurora
It is gone. For good??
Re: [Cooker] Aurora
On Saturday 16 February 2002 22:13, andre wrote: It is gone. For good?? I'm too afraid to hope for so much. -Chuck
[Cooker] Aurora ISO-8859-2 text
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.
Re: [Cooker] Aurora ISO-8859-2 text
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 _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [Cooker] Aurora crash at boot
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 something that Mandrake could do without. Build your own kernel? I agree, it's ugly - I use vga=791 (1024x768) and that welcome thing takes nearly half the screen (that I _do_ want to see) and stays too long. Build your own kernel and it's replaced with a nice little penguin top left. Caldera and Redmond Linux are even worse - you only get an Aurora-like option. -- Peter Ruskin, Wrexham, Wales. Registered Linux User No. 219434 ( see http://counter.li.org/ ). Mandrake Linux release 8.1 (Vitamin) for i586 Kernel 2.4.8-34.1mdk-win4lin, XFree86 4.1.0, patch level 21mdk. KDE: 2.2.2. Qt: 2.3.2. Uptime 12 hours 26 minutes. --
Re: [Cooker] Aurora crash at boot
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 purpose does it serve? I, certainly, can find none. cuz it looks pretty? Disabling Aurora is one of the FIRST items on my post install list of things to do. Drew
Re: [Cooker] Aurora crash at boot
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 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. Just remove it from the expert install, then. (I hate that word, why not advanced?). Yeah, I'd like that... Instead of it, there can be a warning saying the following kernel loading information can be scary, please close your eyes now... he he he he he... Someone I know from usenet was installing linux with a friend of his, who was a totolinux newbie but quite expirience with windos. The install went fine and during the first boot the newb smashed alt-ctrl-del all off the sudden and started hitting all sorts off keys. So the linux guy ask his friend why he pannicked. Well he thought something went seriously wrong because of all the messages... :) Cya, Han.
Re: [Cooker] Aurora crash at boot
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, 2001-12-21 at 17:38, Drew wrote: 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 purpose does it serve? I, certainly, can find none. cuz it looks pretty? Disabling Aurora is one of the FIRST items on my post install list of things to do. Drew
Re: [Cooker] Aurora crash at boot
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 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. Just remove it from the expert install, then. (I hate that word, why not advanced?). Yeah, I'd like that... Instead of it, there can be a warning saying the following kernel loading information can be scary, please close your eyes now... he he he he he... Someone I know from usenet was installing linux with a friend of his, who was a totolinux newbie but quite expirience with windos. The install went fine and during the first boot the newb smashed alt-ctrl-del all off the sudden and started hitting all sorts off keys. So the linux guy ask his friend why he pannicked. Well he thought something went seriously wrong because of all the messages... :) Cya, Han. giggle I can really imagine this. I think my solution is quite funny, instead of the aurora bloat. -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- | Oden Eriksson, Deserve-IT Networks, Jokkmokk, Sweden. | Mandrake Linux release 8.2 (Cooker) for i586 | Current uptime with kernel 2.4.16-10mdksmp: 16 hours 54 minutes | cpu0 @ 799.53 bm, fan 4245 rpm, temp +26°C | cpu1 @ 801.17 bm, fan 4560 rpm, temp +27.0°C
Re: [Cooker] Aurora crash at boot
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] 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. Just remove it from the expert install, then. (I hate that word, why not advanced?). Yeah, I'd like that... Instead of it, there can be a warning saying the following kernel loading information can be scary, please close your eyes now... he he he he he... Someone I know from usenet was installing linux with a friend of his, who was a totolinux newbie but quite expirience with windos. The install went fine and during the first boot the newb smashed alt-ctrl-del all off the sudden and started hitting all sorts off keys. So the linux guy ask his friend why he pannicked. Well he thought something went seriously wrong because of all the messages... :) giggle I can really imagine this. I think my solution is quite funny, instead of the aurora bloat. Well ehm yes, Maybe something for in the lilo-boot menu? :) Off course It would be the first thing I would remove after the first boot. Cya, Han.
Re: [Cooker] Aurora crash at boot
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, 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 messages are said to frighten them when displayed. Just remove it from the expert install, then. (I hate that word, why not advanced?). Yeah, I'd like that... Instead of it, there can be a warning saying the following kernel loading information can be scary, please close your eyes now... he he he he he... Someone I know from usenet was installing linux with a friend of his, who was a totolinux newbie but quite expirience with windos. The install went fine and during the first boot the newb smashed alt-ctrl-del all off the sudden and started hitting all sorts off keys. So the linux guy ask his friend why he pannicked. Well he thought something went seriously wrong because of all the messages... :) giggle I can really imagine this. I think my solution is quite funny, instead of the aurora bloat. Well ehm yes, Maybe something for in the lilo-boot menu? :) Off course It would be the first thing I would remove after the first boot. Cya, Han. he he he, yeah, mee too :) -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- | Oden Eriksson, Deserve-IT Networks, Jokkmokk, Sweden. | Mandrake Linux release 8.2 (Cooker) for i586 | Current uptime with kernel 2.4.16-10mdksmp: 17 hours 30 minutes | cpu0 @ 799.53 bm, fan 4218 rpm, temp +26°C | cpu1 @ 801.17 bm, fan 4560 rpm, temp +27.5°C
Re: [Cooker] Aurora crash at boot
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 newbies it's good eye candy, and the shitload of startup messages are said to frighten them when displayed. Just remove it from the expert install, then. (I hate that word, why not advanced?). Yeah, I'd like that... Instead of it, there can be a warning saying the following kernel loading information can be scary, please close your eyes now... he he he he he... -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- | Oden Eriksson, Deserve-IT Networks, Jokkmokk, Sweden. | Mandrake Linux release 8.2 (Cooker) for i586 | Current uptime with kernel 2.4.16-10mdksmp: 19 minutes | cpu0 @ 799.53 bm, fan 4218 rpm, temp +26°C | cpu1 @ 801.17 bm, fan 4530 rpm, temp +26.5°C
Re: [Cooker] Aurora crash at boot
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 initscript Mandrake 8.1 in Mandrake Control Center, under Boot configuration, unchoose the box use aurora at boot time. -- Yves Duret [EMAIL PROTECTED] piouk toujours et meme apres !
Re: [Cooker] Aurora crash at boot
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 Cottenceau - http://people.mandrakesoft.com/~gc/
Re: [Cooker] Aurora crash at boot
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 with a blue Cylon-Eye wagging slowly forth-and-back. Could it be that I'm simply getting old and cantankerous, Guillaume? -- *Charles
Re: [Cooker] Aurora crash at boot
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 all? - agreed... But on the other hand, some 'newbies' might like the graphical display while they boot Linux. A solution would be to have Aurora (off) by default, and 'IF' someone wants it, allow them to turn it back on. Not totally 'removed' from the distro. I don't like it, you the same, but some may do... my .02c -- SK --=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- http://www.sedecomp.linux-site.net | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] We use and support Linux Mandrake | http://www.linux-mandrake.com Current Linux kernel 2.4.8-34.1mdk uptime: 0 hours 14 minutes.
Re: [Cooker] Aurora crash at boot
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 Panel. I download the last update of initscript Mandrake 8.1 in Mandrake Control Center, under Boot configuration, unchoose the box use aurora at boot time. At the beginning of the install. next to the beginner/advanced/expert menu there now is a new menu-option: BellsWhistles/SolidAsCanBe Cya, Han.
Re: [Cooker] Aurora crash at boot
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 purpose does it serve? I, certainly, can find none. Dave
Re: [Cooker] Aurora crash at boot
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 messages are said to frighten them when displayed. Just remove it from the expert install, then. (I hate that word, why not advanced?). =-= kk1
[Cooker] Aurora crash at boot
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 journal des abonnés Caramail - http://www.carazine.com
Re: [Cooker] Aurora crash at boot
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 Panel. I download the last update of initscript Mandrake 8.1 _ This type of question should be addressed to the Newbie list, not to Cooker. I am feeling pragmatic so I will answer. Uninstall aurora. You do not need it. Charles
Re: [Cooker] Aurora crash at boot
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*
Re: [Cooker] Aurora - lets scrap it ! ;-)
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 Rolling Stone that my last words were I'm on drugs! -- Almost Famous
[Cooker] Aurora - lets scrap it ! ;-)
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 displays things AFTER the event this prompt sits there hidden until it times out and the scan is performed. After doing this the message Do you want to ... flashes extremely fast before you. I think asking questions at boot time and Aurora just don't sit well together ! Owen
RE: [Cooker] Aurora - lets scrap it ! ;-)
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 is performed. After doing this the message Do you want to ... flashes extremely fast before you. I think asking questions at boot time and Aurora just don't sit well together ! Select Russian locale during installation and Aurora won't be installed :-) Seriously, Aurora needs total rewrite, it has to provide dialog box API to use in initscripts. It looks like nobody in Mandrake is interested in it in which case it is better removed. -andrej
Re: [Cooker] Aurora - lets scrap it ! ;-)
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 Aurora only displays things AFTER the event this prompt sits there hidden until it times out and the scan is performed. After doing this the message Do you want to ... flashes extremely fast before you. I think asking questions at boot time and Aurora just don't sit well together ! Owen 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 needs to check if Aurora has been selected, and if it has select the appropriate switches which either skip the step (exercises like kudzu are rather meaningless under Aurora), or default the step (if a disk is not clean and Aurora is running, the disk should be audited, users who typically use Aurora won't be able to make an intelligent choice on this anyway, and could easily get themselves in trouble, audit the disk, OK?). On the other hand, when booting in raw mode, all of the granularity should function with preciseness. If I answer 'no' to a disk audit, the system should not insult me in typical Windows fashion and go ahead and perform the audit. - George Mitchell
Re: [Cooker] Aurora - lets scrap it ! ;-)
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 needs to check if Aurora has been selected, and if it has select the appropriate switches which either skip the step (exercises like kudzu are rather meaningless under Aurora), or default the step (if a disk is not clean and Aurora is running, the disk should be audited, users who typically use Aurora won't be able to make an intelligent choice on this anyway, and could easily get themselves in trouble, audit the disk, OK?). On the other hand, when booting in raw mode, all of the granularity should function with preciseness. If I answer 'no' to a disk audit, the system should not insult me in typical Windows fashion and go ahead and perform the audit. No it's Aurora the problem. It's incomplete and need more features -- http://perso.wanadoo.fr/linux_wizard/index.html - The great Morpheus. We meet at last. And you are. A Smith. Agent Smith. You all look the same to me. -- Agent Smith and Morpheus, The Matrix
Re: [Cooker] Aurora - lets scrap it ! ;-)
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 'Aurora aware'. Initscripts needs to check if Aurora has been selected, and if it has select the appropriate switches which either skip the step (exercises like kudzu are rather meaningless under Aurora), or default the step (if a disk is not clean and Aurora is running, the disk should be audited, users who typically use Aurora won't be able to make an intelligent choice on this anyway, and could easily get themselves in trouble, audit the disk, OK?). On the other hand, when booting in raw mode, all of the granularity should function with preciseness. If I answer 'no' to a disk audit, the system should not insult me in typical Windows fashion and go ahead and perform the audit. No it's Aurora the problem. It's incomplete and need more features So the plan then is to enable interactive capability in Aurora?
Re: lilo graphical screen (was Re: [Cooker] Aurora bug)
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 lilo to boot Windows... i agree. françois ? That would be nice ! mfg dominik -- Backups are for wimps. Real men upload their data to an FTP site and have everyone else mirror it.- Linus Torvalds
Re: lilo graphical screen (was Re: [Cooker] Aurora bug)
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 stylized MandrakeSoft logo? And after all, that's quite stupid to write Welcome to Linux-Mandrake if you use lilo to boot Windows... i agree. françois ? Yes, why not, fpitoun or fbastok ? François. why not ? -- Frederic Bastok Co-Founder Sorry, but what is it in english (fpitoun,fbastok )?? dominik -- Backups are for wimps. Real men upload their data to an FTP site and have everyone else mirror it.- Linus Torvalds
Re: lilo graphical screen (was Re: [Cooker] Aurora bug)
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 everyone else mirror it.- Linus Torvalds
Re: lilo graphical screen (was Re: [Cooker] Aurora bug)
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?. 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 agree. françois ? Yes, why not, fpitoun or fbastok ? François. why not ? -- Frederic Bastok Co-Founder Sorry, but what is it in english (fpitoun,fbastok )?? dominik 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 lilo, and another great advantage is that you don't even need to make another drawing! Isn't life beautiful? :-) Grégoire
Re: lilo graphical screen (was Re: [Cooker] Aurora bug)
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 lilo, and another great advantage is that you don't even need to make another drawing! Isn't life beautiful? :-) Grégoire PS : I cannot believe such a good idea could be ignored. Sorry for the noise.
Re: lilo graphical screen (was Re: [Cooker] Aurora bug)
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-Mandrake if you use lilo to boot Windows... i agree. françois ? Yes, why not, fpitoun or fbastok ? François.
Re: lilo graphical screen (was Re: [Cooker] Aurora bug)
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 all, that's quite stupid to write Welcome to Linux-Mandrake if you use lilo to boot Windows... i agree. françois ? Yes, why not, fpitoun or fbastok ? François. why not ? -- Frederic Bastok Co-Founder
Re: lilo graphical screen (was Re: [Cooker] Aurora bug)
Dominik Bittl [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sorry, but what is it in english (fpitoun,fbastok )?? Because cooker is in english :-) François.
Re: [Cooker] Aurora bug
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 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... Hence after an upgrade for me. Grégoire But you can deselect it during a upgrade/install Now that touched a raw nerve!! I usually install cooker in expert mode and choose flat list view to deselect Aurora (so I can see it). But then when the installer freaks after some packages are installed and it sends me back to package selection - Aurora is selected again - that's bloody devious. Aurora is fast becoming a bad word. What the Aurora is going on? 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. However, I'll try to fix most of the annoying stuff, so if you could enumerate all the Bad Things Aurora is doing, feel free, I'll see what I can do. -- Warly
RE: [Cooker] Aurora bug
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 Things Aurora is doing, feel free, I'll see what I can do. 1. no support for IntelliMouse (of type imps/2) at least in WsLib versions. Setting mouse type to ps/2 activates it in Aurora but then gpm goes mad. 2. No support for l10n. Currently most mesages of initscripts are translated but Aurora is using iso8859-1 font that makes it hard to read Russian messages. Aurora is supposed to use English messages in this case but this does not work (I do not know if it is initscripts or aurora bug). Of course, making it to fallback to English does really make aurora more useful. Those users who understand English (I mean, non-native English of course) probably switch aurora off anyway; and those who would like aurora may have problems with English (experts vs. newbie). 3. old update bug - link for aurora monitor is removed when updating aurora. 4. of course, issue with interactive programs on startup (notably kudzu). It's all so far, but I stopped using aurora long ago, so it is all from memory. -andrej
Re: [Cooker] Aurora bug
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 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 Things Aurora is doing, feel free, I'll see what I can do. 1. no support for IntelliMouse (of type imps/2) at least in WsLib versions. Setting mouse type to ps/2 activates it in Aurora but then gpm goes mad. 2. No support for l10n. Currently most mesages of initscripts are translated but Aurora is using iso8859-1 font that makes it hard to read Russian messages. Aurora is supposed to use English messages in this case but this does not work (I do not know if it is initscripts or aurora bug). Of course, making it to fallback to English does really make aurora more useful. Those users who understand English (I mean, non-native English of course) probably switch aurora off anyway; and those who would like aurora may have problems with English (experts vs. newbie). 3. old update bug - link for aurora monitor is removed when updating aurora. 4. of course, issue with interactive programs on startup (notably kudzu). It's all so far, but I stopped using aurora long ago, so it is all from memory. -andrej
Re: [Cooker] Aurora bug
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. grin 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 english?? Or isn't that a part of Aurora ? No. I think it's related to the framebuffer video. Grégoire
RE: [Cooker] Aurora bug
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
Re: [Cooker] Aurora bug
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 internationalization. grin 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 english?? Because unfortunately english is the lingua franca of the Net? You can see it here on the list...people from many non-english-speaking nations all talking in english...I, for one, can't understand a word in french without help, and same can be said of almost any other language on earth (except my native spanish, and a couple of dead or almost-dead languages not spoken outside of Mexico). Vox -- Pain is the gift of the gods, and I'm the one they chose as their messenger... For info on safety in the BDSM lifestyle http://www.the-vox.com Think of the Linux community as a niche economy isolated by its beliefs. Kind of like the Amish, except that our religion requires us to use _higher_ technology than everyone else. -- Donald B. Marti Jr. Vox populi, vox deii
Re: [Cooker] Aurora bug
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 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... Hence after an upgrade for me. Grégoire But you can deselect it during a upgrade/install Now that touched a raw nerve!! I usually install cooker in expert mode and choose flat list view to deselect Aurora (so I can see it). But then when the installer freaks after some packages are installed and it sends me back to package selection - Aurora is selected again - that's bloody devious. Aurora is fast becoming a bad word. What the Aurora is going on? 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. Tough luck Warly. I don't have a problem with Aurora per se. I decided a long time ago that it just wasn't for me - I want to see what's goung on - but there's nothing wrong with others having it if they want. The problem for me is the installer insisting I should have it when I clearly deselected the choice. However, I'll try to fix most of the annoying stuff, so if you could enumerate all the Bad Things Aurora is doing, feel free, I'll see what I can do. -- Peter Ruskin, Wrexham, Wales. Registered Linux User No. 219434 ( see http://counter.li.org/ ). Linux Mandrake release 8.0 (Cooker) for i586, kernel 2.4.3-20mdk-win4lin-pnr1. XFree86 4.0.3, patch level 7mdk. KDE: 2.2. Qt: 2.3.1. Uptime: 3:25
lilo graphical screen (was Re: [Cooker] Aurora bug)
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 english?? Because unfortunately english is the lingua franca of the Net? You can see it here on the list...people from many non-english-speaking nations all talking in english...I, for one, can't understand a word in french without help, and same can be said of almost any other language on earth (except my native spanish, and a couple of dead or almost-dead languages not spoken outside of Mexico). 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... Grégoire
Re: lilo graphical screen (was Re: [Cooker] Aurora bug)
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 agree. françois ?
[Cooker] Aurora bug
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 mouse, and see if the blue screen of HardDrake appears. If it's not solved, then Aurora will be the first thing I will delete after upgrade to 8.1. ;) Grégoire
Re: [Cooker] Aurora bug
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 mouse, and see if the blue screen of HardDrake appears. If it's not solved, then Aurora will be the first thing I will delete after upgrade to 8.1. ;) Grégoire I see you are not the average cooker user. They don't delete it *after* an upgrade.
Re: [Cooker] Aurora bug
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... Hence after an upgrade for me. Grégoire
Re: [Cooker] Aurora bug
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.fr/linux_wizard/index.html
Re: [Cooker] Aurora bug
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. :) I wrote this because chances are Aurora be installed by default in 8.1... Hence after an upgrade for me. Grégoire But you can deselect it during a upgrade/install
Re: [Cooker] Aurora bug
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 *after* an upgrade. I'm not running Cooker. :) I wrote this because chances are Aurora be installed by default in 8.1... Hence after an upgrade for me. Grégoire But you can deselect it during a upgrade/install Now that touched a raw nerve!! I usually install cooker in expert mode and choose flat list view to deselect Aurora (so I can see it). But then when the installer freaks after some packages are installed and it sends me back to package selection - Aurora is selected again - that's bloody devious. Aurora is fast becoming a bad word. What the Aurora is going on? -- Peter Ruskin, Wrexham, Wales. Registered Linux User No. 219434 ( see http://counter.li.org/ ). Linux Mandrake release 8.0 (Cooker) for i586, kernel 2.4.3-20mdk-win4lin-pnr1. XFree86 4.0.3, patch level 7mdk. KDE: 2.2. Qt: 2.3.1. Uptime: 12:36
[Cooker] Aurora update - Monitor link trashed again
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--1 root root0 Aug 31 15:29 Monitor -rwx--1 root root 336 Aug 30 15:33 Monitor-NewStyle-Categorizing-WsLib.rc* -rw-r--r--1 root root0 Aug 30 15:33 Monitor.rpmnew -rwxr--r--1 root root 1782 Aug 30 15:33 rc* One more example of maintained and useful package (sorry, could not resist). -andrej
Re: [Cooker] Aurora update - Monitor link trashed again
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 been there forever. I don't understand how Mandrake can work on a distro that they aren't using themselves. If they are using it then bugs like this would be caught immediately. I can't comment on the libsafe situation, but judging from msec (and the fact that it is a piece of software that actually seems to work), I do believe Yoann knows a thing or two about security. But that said, Bastille is so badly supported even though the author is supposedly employed by Mandrake. I don't understand. My guess is that they (Jay and Yoann) are working on a next-generation Bastille project, but if this won't end up in 8.1, then Bastille needs to be supported in 8.1/Cooker too. -- Sincerely, David Walluck [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Cooker] Aurora choice in install
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 the torch and run with it. It'd be nice if Aurora could meaningfully deal with things like Kudzu. Borsenkow Andrej wrote: 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 they do not like when unmaintained software is continued to be included in main distro for no apparent reason. -andrej
Re: [Cooker] Aurora choice in install
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 they do not like when unmaintained software is continued to be included in main distro for no apparent reason. -andrej
Re: [Cooker] Aurora is installed even if everything deselected
Digital Wokan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There's an alphabetical list? I've only seen that workstation/server/blah/someotherblah breakdown of RPMs. How do I choose my RPMs alphabetically during the install? click on the Toggle between flat and group sorted button (in individual package selection)
Re: [Cooker] Aurora is installed even if everything deselected
On Mon, Aug 13, 2001 at 02:04:27AM -0400, Tim wrote: Is it just me... or would it be easier for everyone if Mandrake could just no .. it's not just you :) have a check box along with the Boot Loader choices to let us choose Aurora or not? Personally I hate the thing and prefer my nice ugly text boot and it would solve everyone's problems if we could just have an easy to find box to check. ACK ! That's what I said last week or the week before .. but somehow Pixel responed with something like: ..just boot in linux-nofb or uncheck in flat-file-listing.. Perhaps he has just missed our point .. Well .. let's try again :-) Possibly have it unchecked by default for expert installs and leave it checked for newbie installs so that they can get nice pretty screens at boot up time while those of us that like our ugly consoles just get our text (hopefully with lots of green PASSED in it!) flamebait or maybe, as Aurora is a Mandrake development, they want to show their nice product to everyone - and that's why it's so hard to disable resp. well hidden .. /flamebait Christian -- Things that make you go Hmmm: If a train station is where the train stops, what is a workstation?
