Re: fedora 9 custom kernel

[Rahul Sundaram]

mark wrote:

can i follow the same instructions for fedora core 8 here for fedora 9?
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/CustomKernel



It is essentially the same process.

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Anyone packaging SAGE math?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Paul Johnson wrote:


The Main problem seems to be that they want to supply their own
versions of python, R, McCauley2, and just about every other piece of
related software.   I know they are trying to keep things in sync, but
this is ridiculous. Fedora has up to date versions of just about
everything.   If I could get just the SAGE part compiled against the
versions of R, python, and all those other libraries in Fedora, I hope
SAGE would not look so monstrously huge.


That is a requirement to even get pass review.

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Best guide for Fedora 9 ever !

[Rahul Sundaram]

Bill Davidsen wrote:

In any case, there's the overview and the technical issue, you need 
privileged commands to burn on some hardware, and there are some monster 
egos in play. Perhaps someone will comment on why not real cdrecord and 
capabilities.


http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/releases/7/Fedora/i386/os/RELEASE-NOTES-en_US.html#sn-cdrkit

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Best guide for Fedora 9 ever !

[Rahul Sundaram]

Antonio Olivares wrote:
 Do not worry about the CDDL license, it

is an open source license :).  The problem with it is
politics and GPL :(.  


The problem is licensing incompatibility. Some portions of cdrecord was 
relicensed to CDDL from GPL making the combination non re-distributable. 
This was explained in detail in the original announcement at


http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/09/msg2.html

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: koji.fedoraproject.org - timing out?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Luke Sheldrick wrote:

Trying to get a svn package from koji and seems to be timing out, anyone able 
to take a look?


Build System is under going maintenance.

https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-announce/2008-May/msg00012.html

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: F9 & VirtualBox

[Rahul Sundaram]

Luc MAIGNAN wrote:

Hi,

in my mind VirtualBox was present in the repositories of the previous 
versions of Fedora. But it doesn't seem to be in the F9 ones'.

Am i wrong or has it disappear ?


VirtualBox requires a third party kernel module and hence has never been 
in the official Fedora repository.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: xfce spin for F9

[Rahul Sundaram]

Globe Trotter wrote:

Hi,

Is there a xfce spin for F9 available yet?



No. We are waiting on release engineering.

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Ubuntu Remastersys for Fedora?

[Rahul Sundaram]

bob2008 wrote:

Is there a way to make a system backup into either a kickstart config file or a live CD burn like Remastersys does so that one could use Revisor?  


If you want say livecd-creator to be enhanced to support saving 
configuration changes, file a bug report or post to fedora-livecd list 
and folks can take a closer look at the requirements and discuss the 
enhancement.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Fedora 9 and Security

[Rahul Sundaram]

Timothy Murphy wrote:


Could one put this in a file somewhere on a KDE system?
(I don't have /etc/gdm/ on my Fedora-9 laptop.)


A KDE system can very well use GDM. There is a similar capability 
offered by KDM too anyway.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Expected wiki user page name

[Rahul Sundaram]

Mustafa Qasim wrote:

Hello!
Is it expected to have the user page name same as our FAS 
account name?


With the new wiki in place, yes. Previously when we were using moinmoin, 
all the contributors had a separate wiki account they need to create in 
addition to the FAS account. With Mediawiki, there is a single sign on 
mechanism in place that allows all contributors to login to the Fedora 
project wiki with their account name and password. After doing so, 
rename your wiki home page to User:.


https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FedoraProject:Wiki_migration_to-do has 
more details.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Updated NVIDIA Driver 173.14.05

[Rahul Sundaram]

Srikanth Konjarla wrote:

http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=113919

Does this mean that it would work with Fedora 9 without having to 
backout to older version of Xorg?


Thanks


Yes. Refer

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Bugs/F9Common#Proprietary_.28third-party.29_video_drivers

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Fedora 9 and Security

[Rahul Sundaram]

Amadeus W.M. wrote:


Because if I'm a new user and I want to change, say, from UUID to labels 
(post-installation) I may not know how to do that. You don't suppose new 
users would know better after than before, do you? 


You have to think about use cases and think about why non technical 
users would want to change any very low level details like this.  If 
there are good reasons why fiddling with these are important, higher 
tools like say a graphical utility can be written but thinking about why 
is always important because the need to change these settings might 
point to other things can be done better.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Dag Repo

[Rahul Sundaram]

Chris wrote:

What would be the DAG repo to use for F9 x64 ?

Thanks in advace.


Dag doesn't build for any recent release of Fedora. You might try other 
third party repos depending on what you are looking for.


http://rpmfusion.org/FedoraThirdPartyRepos

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Dag Repo

[Rahul Sundaram]

Chris wrote:
\




Allow me to restate - Does RHEL 5 equate to F9 ?


No. RHEL 5 is based off Fedora Core 6.

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: F9/KDE4.0/Nvidia not running/Dual monitors ?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Ric Moore wrote:

On Wed, 2008-05-28 at 00:22 -0400, Todd Zullinger wrote:

linuxguy wrote:

Why is the nvidia module throwing an error during boot ?  How do I fix
it ?

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Bugs/Common#Proprietary_.28third-party.29_video_drivers_do_not_work


All I get is a blank page. :) Ric


Fixed.

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: no more ddcprobe? where is /etc/sysconfig/hwconf? is kudzu gone?

[Rahul Sundaram]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Can anyone tell me what tool have replaced ddcprobe? Also where I
could look for my hardware I used to look in /etc/sysconfig/hwconf,
now I can't find it?
Does kudzu still being used on FC9? I have it on my CentOS boxes but
not on my FC9's? Thanks


Kudzu is not used in Fedora 9. HAL has superseded it.

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Is FWN 129 still being worked on?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Bruno Wolff III wrote:

There is now a redirect that indicates that FWN issue 129 should exist, but
doesn't. I am wondering if this is just it being worked on, or if it has to
do with the wiki migration?
The page I get redirected to,
https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=FWN/Issue129, doesn't exist yet.


Yes, we are working on it. Refer fedora news list for details.

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Is FWN 129 still being worked on?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:

On Mon, 2008-06-02 at 08:54 -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:

There is now a redirect that indicates that FWN issue 129 should exist, but
doesn't. I am wondering if this is just it being worked on, or if it has to
do with the wiki migration?
The page I get redirected to,
https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=FWN/Issue129, doesn't exist yet.


OK, I'll bite. What is FWN?



https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FWN

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: no more ddcprobe? where is /etc/sysconfig/hwconf? is kudzu gone?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Aaron Konstam wrote:

On Mon, 2008-06-02 at 17:40 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Can anyone tell me what tool have replaced ddcprobe? Also where I
could look for my hardware I used to look in /etc/sysconfig/hwconf,
now I can't find it?
Does kudzu still being used on FC9? I have it on my CentOS boxes but
not on my FC9's? Thanks

Kudzu is not used in Fedora 9. HAL has superseded it.

Rahul


Which only answers half the questions. What does one use in place of
ddcprobe? 


Ideally nowhere. It should just work but if you need Xorg configuration 
overrides, xorg.conf would do it system-wide.


Is the implication that lshal is how one gets the identity of

the hardware in F9?


It can be used for that, yes.

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: What to call software adder/remover??

[Rahul Sundaram]

Beartooth wrote:

	The failure may be mine -- all the more likely inasmuch as I also 
failed to see a way to attach the bugbuddy report, other than by copying 
and pasting it.


	What should I have looked under?? 


Bugzilla lists source components. In this case, that would be 
gnome-packagekit.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Packagekit Update Applet

[Rahul Sundaram]

Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:

Is there any way to tell Packagekit Update Applet not to check for new
versions of nspluginwrapper (or anything else for that matter).  The
latest version of nspluginwrapper is broken (That's another issue.), and
it would be nice if Packagekit Update Applet would stop informing me
that the older working version which is installed needs to be
upgraded.  


The upgrade icon is now pretty near useless, since the applet has to be
started to see whether anything *really* needs to be installed.\


You can do exclude=foo* in /etc/yum.conf and PackageKit will honour that.

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: CD / DVD labels

[Rahul Sundaram]

Chris wrote:

Greetings,

Are there any out there?




http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Artwork/MediaArt

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: F8: latest pidgin update broken?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Niels Weber wrote:

Hi all,

with the latest F8 pidgin update, pidgin always crashes after a few
seconds of running. It claims that it tries to dump a core but I
couldn't find that so far.
Does anyone else have this problem?


A bug report with a stack trace would be useful.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/StackTraces

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: flashplugin-nonfree and W32 codecs in F9 ?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Marcelo Magno T. Sales wrote:

Rex,

Em Sexta 13 Junho 2008, Rex Dieter escreveu:

linuxguy wrote:

W32 codecs for F9 ?

rpm.livna.org



Are all of the codecs in 
http://www.mplayerhq.hu/MPlayer/releases/codecs/ available in livna 
RPMs too?


Redistributability of those dll files are questionable. What Livna has 
is ffpmeg and other players that use ffmpeg which are not DLL wrappers 
but complete independent implementations of the codecs.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Firefox for ever

[Rahul Sundaram]

Timothy Murphy wrote:

Sorry to be mean, but why don't Fedora just admit
that no browser they produce is likely to be as good as Firefox?


Huh? That doesn't make any sense. Fedora doesn't "produce" any browser 
although it does contribute to Firefox and includes it in the repository.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: F8: latest pidgin update broken?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Niels Weber wrote:

2008/6/12 Rahul Sundaram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

Niels Weber wrote:

with the latest F8 pidgin update, pidgin always crashes after a few
seconds of running. It claims that it tries to dump a core but I
couldn't find that so far.
Does anyone else have this problem?

A bug report with a stack trace would be useful.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/StackTraces


Sure, but if no one else has this problem, it likely is something tied
to this machine. As pidgin is completely unusable for me in the
current state, I guess no one else has this problem.


I would assume others would have complained if it was a common issue. 
Nevertheless it should still be fixed if it is a bug in Pidgin.



Does it even make sense to create a stack trace without a core dump?


Sure although more information is helpful.

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: F8: latest pidgin update broken?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Niels Weber wrote:

2008/6/16 Niels Weber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

2008/6/16 Rahul Sundaram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

Niels Weber wrote:

Sure, but if no one else has this problem, it likely is something tied
to this machine. As pidgin is completely unusable for me in the
current state, I guess no one else has this problem.

I would assume others would have complained if it was a common issue.
Nevertheless it should still be fixed if it is a bug in Pidgin.


I now got a lead at the problem. It seems I have a leftover avahi
package back from F7 that won't uninstall. How to get rid of that? It
tells me that %postun fails.

# rpm -q avahi
avahi-0.6.17-1.fc7


# rpm -e --noscripts 

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: How do I login to XFCE?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Knute Johnson wrote:
I installed F9 on my laptop and then yummed up XFCE.  There is not 
option on the gdm login screen to changes sessions.  How does it work in 
F9?


If you have installed the sessions package, it should show up. Make sure 
you have done a complete installlation by running


# yum groupinstall "XFCE"

Note that you need to click on a user for the sessions menu to show up 
in GDM.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: How do I login to XFCE?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Craig White wrote:

On Wed, 2008-06-18 at 14:13 -0700, Knute Johnson wrote:
I installed F9 on my laptop and then yummed up XFCE.  There is not 
option on the gdm login screen to changes sessions.  How does it work in F9?


that's been discussed...apparently gdm doesn't have the session switcher
but kdm does...


Sorry. This is completely incorrect information.

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: How do I login to XFCE?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Knute Johnson wrote:

So I'm looking at my gdm login screen now and I don't seen any button or 
option to select another session.  Is there another package that I need 
besides the groupinstall XFCE that I already did.


No. Again, make sure you  have done a groupinstall(xfce4-session package 
must exist), click on a username in GDM login screen. You need to do 
that before you see a session menu. It works perfectly fine on several 
Fedora 9 systems I have done this with.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Forcing totem to use xine backend

[Rahul Sundaram]

Paul Smith wrote:

Dear All,

I have

$ rpm -qi totem-xine
Name: totem-xine   Relocations: (not relocatable)
Version : 2.23.2Vendor: Fedora Project
Release : 2.fc9 Build Date: Wed 23 Apr
2008 05:57:28 PM WEST
Install Date: Fri 20 Jun 2008 08:13:13 PM WEST  Build Host:
xenbuilder4.fedora.phx.redhat.com
Group   : Applications/Multimedia   Source RPM:
totem-2.23.2-2.fc9.src.rpm
Size: 89048License: GPLv2 with exception
Signature   : DSA/SHA1, Thu 24 Apr 2008 03:39:50 AM WEST, Key ID
b44269d04f2a6fd2
Packager: Fedora Project
URL : http://www.gnome.org/projects/totem/
Summary : Xine backend for Totem
Description :
This package provides the xine backend for the Totem media player.
$

However, when I run totem, I get in totem's Help --> About:

Movie Player using GStreamer 0.10.19 and GNOME

How can I force totem to use Xine backend?


http://docs.fedoraproject.org/release-notes/f9/en_US/sn-Multimedia.html

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: F8 -> F9 rpms -- Complete bollocks.

[Rahul Sundaram]

Mark Haney wrote:


Here's what I see.  It all points to F9 repos:

[EMAIL PROTECTED] yum.repos.d]# yum repolist
Loaded plugins: refresh-packagekit
repo id  repo name status
InstallMedia Fedora 8  enabled
adobe-linux-i386 Adobe Systems Incorporatedenabled
fedora   Fedora 9 - i386   enabled
updates  Fedora 9 - i386 - Updates enabled

Except the InstallMedia one.  Could that be the problem?


Yes. Disable or remove that repository file and then run

# yum install yum-utils
# package-cleanup --problems

Clean them up and run

# yum update

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: F8 -> F9 rpms -- Complete bollocks.

[Rahul Sundaram]

Mark Haney wrote:

I can do that, but it does not explain the yum update output for PHP as 
compared to the RPM query of PHP.  How can I tell if I'm getting the 
correct repos (maybe $releasever is being substituted incorrectly in yum 
somehow).


If #yum repolist points to Fedora 9 repositories completely, you 
shouldn't have any problems.  Yum can use -d  to provide 
additional debugging information but simply disabling the Fedora 8 
repositories and running the commands I have given should fix this issue.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: F8 -> F9 rpms -- Complete bollocks.

[Rahul Sundaram]

Mark Haney wrote:
Well, I did take a look at them manually and they /look/ okay.  I just 
can't tell for certain is $releasever is being inserted as '8' instead 
of '9' somehow.


That value is derived from /etc/fedora-release. If you are still unsure, 
substituting the variable with a hardcoded number would work for now.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Getting open source project into Fedora

[Rahul Sundaram]

Alan Lake wrote:
I am working with the Akelos  project, a PHP 
port of Ruby on Rails.  I would like to find out how we might get this 
LGPL project included with Fedora.  I am also interested in learning how 
one might go about finding a corporate sponsor for it.


You don't need "corporate" sponsors to get any free and open source 
project into Fedora. Just follow


http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: automatic updatedb in F9?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Globe Trotter wrote:

Hi,

Does anyone know how to get updatedb to update automagically? Like say, every 
hour?


Move /etc/cron.daily/mlocate.cron to /etc/cron.hourly. Hourly is 
probably a bit of overkill however.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: MPEG video under Fedora 9

[Rahul Sundaram]

Tim wrote:


I'm not using the computer I installed them on at the moment, nor when I
wrote that.  I couldn't remember if they're used in combination, or if
you used one or the other.  I recall reading that the ugly ones had some
risk, and not to install them unless you needed them.  By risk, I don't
mean patent infringing code, but not too reliable coding.


You are confusing the categorization.  Base and good is included in 
Fedora. Bad means bad quality and not reliable yet. Ugly means good 
codecs but patent encumbered.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: BOINC again !? -- BINGO, BINGO and BINGO

[Rahul Sundaram]

Tom Horsley wrote:


I don't think any problems in NetworkManager will ever be considered
bugs until RedHat foists it on their paying RHEL customers


There is a little problem with that theory. Both Red Hat and upstream 
bugzilla shows a considerable amount of bugs being filed and fixed on a 
regular basis and RHEL 5 already includes NetworkManager as a fully 
supported component. There is also a large amount of work that needs to 
be done on fixing software that doesn't react well to network 
connections disappearing underneath them as happens often with wireless 
networks on laptops and mobile systems.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Thunderbird update problem

[Rahul Sundaram]

Mark Haney wrote:
Wow, it must be my time for problems with Tbird.  I'm trying to update 
to the latest version (2.0.0.14-1) in yum but when I do I get this:


Running Transaction
 Updating   : thunderbird   [1/2]
Error unpacking rpm package thunderbird-2.0.0.14-1.fc9.i386
error: unpacking of archive failed on file 
/usr/lib/thunderbird-2.0.0.14/dictionaries: cpio: rename


Updated: thunderbird.i386 0:2.0.0.14-1.fc9
Complete!

I've tried 'yum clean all', but that doesn't seem to help.  What's going 
on here?


RPM doesn't allow a file to replace a directory.

# yum reinstall thunderbird

Should fix the issue.

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Mirror bandwidth and user redirection

[Rahul Sundaram]

Matt Domsch wrote:


For countries with fewer mirrors, such as India, where there's some
relatively fast mirrors, and several relatively slower mirrors, this
should mean that users will more often get directed to the faster
mirrors.


Thanks Matt Domsch. Good work.

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Xfce xfburn missing?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Wong Kwok-hon wrote:

Hello,

I used xfce and feel it is faster but I cannot found the xfburn so I
cannot burn CD/DVD.

Would you tell me where can I get the xfburn rpm ?


Xfburn is not in Fedora because it was unreliable. Xfce team uses 
GnomeBaker instead. Brasero can also be used as a alternative.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Xfce xfburn missing?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Wong Kwok-hon wrote:

So it is crossed ? I meant it used gnome apps... not Xfce itself...


Not sure what you mean. Xfburn and gnomebaker just uses GTK. There is 
nothing desktop environment specific about them.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Yumex cleaned my system..... How do I contact yum-team?

[Rahul Sundaram]

DB wrote:

Good evening (at least it is in Austria!)

I'm new to Linux & Fedora, last messed with Unix in about '89...

I've (eventually) installed F9, with a selection of odds & ends, and
found that yumex SEEMED to be a better way of updating & installing than
the Gnome Add/Remove Software.  My problem comes when I try to remove
"something" (e.g. CUPS) when yumex seems to consider every application
that uses or links to CUPS as being a dependency.  In my naive, trusting
way (!), I assumed the 223 listed dependencies were sort of .dlls which
CUPS had added to everything that needed to print.  Oh, how wrong can
you be? 223 deleted apps later & I had a bare bones system - even
yumex was gone! & most of Gnome!

SO, after a day & half fiddling, I got back to a working system again
(95%).  I posted the situation on FedoraForum & was advised to bring it
to the attention of "Them what looks after Yum",  but I can't find out
how to contact the yum team.

Any suggestions on how one contacts the yum team???


Yumex is a different developer from yum itself but all of them can be 
contacted via the mailing list at


https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/pipermail/yum/

I don't see what they could do about you accidentally removing packages 
more than intended on your system however.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

ICQ Patch

[Rahul Sundaram]

Hi,

I just filed a RFE to apply a patch to Pidgin that makes it work with 
ICQ again


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453691

Just a heads up.

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: ICQ Patch

[Rahul Sundaram]

Konstantin Svist wrote:

Rahul Sundaram wrote:

Hi,

I just filed a RFE to apply a patch to Pidgin that makes it work with 
ICQ again


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453691

Just a heads up.

Rahul



I tried going to the URL mentioned in the bug description and the site 
is pretty much unavailable right now for whatever reason.

I think it might help if you attached a copy of the patch to the RFE.

BTW, I'm not a Fedora dev, don't ask me to apply it :)


New versions of pidgin are being build as we speak. So you can pretty 
much ignore it for now and just wait.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: BOINC again !? -- BINGO, BINGO and BINGO

[Rahul Sundaram]

Timothy Murphy wrote:


But this was a specific, concrete query.
Why does NM wait until the user has logged in to start?


That's a wrong assumption. NM doesn't wait until the user has started. 
It is a system service which starts at boot. nm-applet(GNOME) or 
Knetworkmanager (KDE) is just a frontend to the system service called 
NM. It is possible to write a console frontend  to do a similar task for 
the non-desktop case but NM atleast initially was designed to make 
wireless network access easier. It has grown additional functionality 
over time however.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: BOINC again !? -- BINGO, BINGO and BINGO

[Rahul Sundaram]

Timothy Murphy wrote:

Sorry, Rahul, you have lost me here.
When I say that NM waits until the user logs in
I mean that NetworkManager does not connect me to my AP
until I login.


Again, you are confusing between NM and nm-applet.


Therefore any application that requires me to be connected
has to wait until I login.
This doesn't worry me particularly, but it does puzzle me.

I am asking the reason for this delay.


I believe I already answered that. NM was initially designed to manage 
wireless networks easily where it makes more sense to connect after you 
login. Refer


http://www.redhat.com/magazine/003jan05/features/networkmanager/


Perhaps if there was some minimal documentation for NM this might be clear.


Perhaps if you will volunteer to contribute, it would have been done by 
now. If you want to wait for someone else to do the work, it is going to 
be done when others find time and interest to do it.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: BOINC again !? -- BINGO, BINGO and BINGO

[Rahul Sundaram]

Tim wrote:

Timothy Murphy:

Perhaps if there was some minimal documentation for NM this might be clear.


Rahul Sundaram:
Perhaps if you will volunteer to contribute, it would have been done by 
now. If you want to wait for someone else to do the work, it is going to 
be done when others find time and interest to do it.


How could anybody without the needed information write documentation for
it?  And trying to figure out documentation by reading the source code,
apart from being a difficult task, is only going to sensible if the
authors don't change what the program does.

Program authors have to write the documentation.  Anybody else doing it
will just be documenting guesswork.


Having written lots of documentation for programs I didn't write, I can 
assure you that isn't the case. You can start writing about the basics 
of what you can observe, search and find out and ask the developers for 
additional details. Usually, they will be more than willing to help you 
out. Recently, I wrote almost the entire PackageKit documentation this 
way. If anyone volunteers, I will be glad to guide them.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: That thread - Any hope of KDE 3.5 in F10?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Pete Snider wrote:

Thank you for pointing that out, I wasn't aware that all packages had
to be able to be installed at one time.
I'll try it on a fresh disk this week, it should be interesting.


The guidelines are more detailed than that.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Conflicts

You might want to read up on it before trying things out.

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Closed source modules will be banned from kernel?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Antonio Olivares wrote:

Dear all,

Closed source kernel drivers would not be allowed to run under new kernels?

Does this mean that a new nvidia driver would not work anymore :(

For which kernels would this affect us?


If there was any intention of banning proprietary modules, the statement 
would have included such details. As of now, this is merely a position 
statement explaining many of the kernel developer's perspective. Vendors 
distributing such modules should take note.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Firefox required for latest F8 updates

[Rahul Sundaram]

Matthew Saltzman wrote:

Ah, it looks better now, except that evolution-rss still requires
gecko-libs = 1.8.1.14, so updating firefox2 breaks that.

Does that need to be Bugzilla'd?


That would help. Please do.

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Closed source modules will be banned from kernel?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Antonio Olivares wrote:

Thank you Alan for sharing your expertise on this issue.  I also wonder if the 
kernel ever gets released under GPL v3.  If it does, then surely the binary 
stuff would be banned for good.


GPLv2 vs GPLv3 doesn't make much of a difference. There is no specific 
language covering proprietary modules in either license. It is copyright 
holders intent and the definition of derivative work that matters. 
Several copyright holders have clearly established their intent in the 
position statement.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Closed source modules will be banned from kernel?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Antonio Olivares wrote:

If it did not make much of a difference, then why is Linus Torvalds very much 
opposed to releasing the kernel(s) in this new version?



Linus doesn't support proprietary drivers and never mentioned anything 
about it in his explanations on not moving to GPLv3. He also explicitly 
said that he was willing to consider it if others like Solaris move over 
to enable better code sharing.


A couple of references:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-6171300-7.html

http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/9/22/217

I see many projects are thinking of releasing in GPL version 3, but they need to contact some authors about it.  Mplayer is one that comes to mind, I read in their site something like that.  


This depends on the number of copyright holders and whether they have 
assigned copyright to a single entity like the FSF or other 
organizations. If the original code was not licensed under GPLv2 or 
later, then all the significant copyright holders have to explicitly 
agree to relicense the code. Some projects might just not do that.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Pencil project - Sketching tool

[Rahul Sundaram]

Hi

Maybe this will come in handy.

http://www.evolus.vn/Pencil/Home.html

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: pidgin system tray ?

[Rahul Sundaram]

lostson wrote:
Hello 
 I have used pidgin for awhile now and i click on the system tray icon

to bring it up and usually then again to put it back in the tray. I dont
know why i do this just always have. Now though you cannot click on the
system tray icon and it goes back to the tray it just sits there on my
desktop. I have to click on the close button to get it to go back to the
tray. Is this a new feature or a bug ? 


Works correctly as described in Fedora 9.

Pidgin 2.4.3-1.fc9

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Closed source modules will be banned from kernel?

[Rahul Sundaram]

John Burton wrote:
Hmmm... do "Open Source" modules have the same problem?  Do these 
"wholesale gratuitous changes" occur during minor revision changes or 
major version changes? Major version changes in most software change the 
API, while minor revisions do not. Are the kernel modules not consistent 
with this?


The kernel has a stable user space API and volatile in-kernel modules 
interfaces API. The reasons are outlined in


http://lxr.linux.no/linux/Documentation/stable_api_nonsense.txt

For free and open source code (including but not limited to driver 
modules) that is included within the upstream kernel, this presents no 
problems since whenever API changes occur, whoever is making the API 
change can go ahead and fix all the consumers of the API.


Linux kernel doesn't follow the traditional stable vs unstable tree 
development model in recent 2.6 kernel releases. Discussions on the 
reason for the change are outlined in many places including


http://lwn.net/Articles/94386/

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Closed source modules will be banned from kernel?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Les Mikesell wrote:


Do you also happen to have a link for Red Hat's position on this problem 
or a description of how they deal with it in an enterprise product?


I don't have a link to a position paper but refer to

http://www.kerneldrivers.org/RHEL5

Also sticking to the same baseline kernel mitigates a problem to a good 
extend.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Nice Linux(Fedora) Blog from Newbie perspective..?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Mustafa Qasim wrote:
Hello fellows can you point out some good Fedora Linux Blogs from a 
newbie or beginner to intermediate perspective...


http://dailypackage.fedorabook.com/

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: relevance of "Legacy Software Support" in f9?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Robert P. J. Day wrote:

  setting up an f9 system for someone else, and i'm wondering how big
a deal it is these days to install legacy software support anymore.
i've always included it in previous installs of fedora but, for the
sake of simplicity, i'm wondering if it's safe to just leave it out
these days.

  will doing that break anything critical or anything still commonly
used?


There are number of third party non-free software including RealPlayer 
and VMWare that are pooly packaged and do not specify the dependencies 
they need. Most of them are build against very old versions of the base 
libraries for compatibility and hence would depend on components from 
the legacy group.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Gnome XDMCP defaults.conf file missing?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Dan Thurman wrote:

Daniel B. Thurman wrote:

In F8, it used to be at: /usr/share/gdm but in F9

it is missing?  Where is this moved to now?

Thanks!
Dan


Can someone please tell me how to turn on XDMCP?
I cannot seem to find it.


GDM in Fedora 9 is a complete rewrite and doesn't yet support this among 
other options.


http://live.gnome.org/GDM/ToDo

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Jonathan Roberts wrote:

   My opinion is that it's political in nature.  GNU doesn't like Red
Hat and, by extension, anything that Red Hat contributes to.  OC, I have
absolutely no proof nor reason for this opinion.  But it's a gut feel.


Not the case.


Right.

Many of the GNU projects including GCC, glibc, coreutils etc is either 
maintained by Red Hat or has significant Red Hat contributors.


https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/RedHatContributions

It is true however that FSF is somewhat reluctant to endorse major 
distributions without explicit policy and I think that's understandable. 
However FSF's policy itself towards some of more ancillary things in a 
distribution such as content, documentation and firmware was earlier 
unclear and that has been getting fixed now. See below.



The situation with Fedora and the FSF is, as I understand it:

 * Fedora allows some non-free firmware in the distribution, the
policy under which this is allowed was linked to in a previous message
in this thread
 * The FSF will not give "free" status to any distribution that
explicitly allows non-free firmware in it
 * Fedora people have been in touch to discuss this with them, and
progress has been made.

Rahul Sundaram is the one who's worked on this, and I'm sure he knows
the details so perhaps he might post so we're crystal clear :)


I described the last status at

http://lwn.net/Articles/282771/

Meanwhile David Woodhouse has been working on patches to make it 
possible to separate the firmware that is currently inside the kernel.


http://lwn.net/Articles/284932/

Aside for the legal and philosophical issues, this has several other 
practical advantages and there is a kernel summit discussion in the 
agenda. If and when that gets done, end users would be able to exclude 
the firmware completely and it would also be possible to create a 
separate spin more targeted towards meeting FSF's criteria


http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/FedoraFreedom

Rahul




--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: fedora-live and fedora-late-live

[Rahul Sundaram]

Steven Stern wrote:

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

I had put throw together a F9 box yesterday by installing from the F9
Live CD.  I notice that two daemons are loaded, fedora-live and
fedora-late-live.  Are these necessary after the system is installed to
disk?


Nope. Feel free to remove them/turn them off.

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Les Mikesell wrote:

On the other hand, Linus was once widely quoted as saying that loadable 
binary driver modules were not derivative works of the kernel - and I 
believe that the initial popularity of depended on that interpretation 
just as much as the wide use of glibc depends on it not claiming 
programs that use it as derivatives.  He has waffled on that position 
more recently but there is no clear statement or legal precedent.


You have made similar statements in the past while providing no 
references every single time in the discussion even when asked. If you 
truly believe in what you are saying, I would ask you (again) to provide 
a direct quote. If he was so widely quoted on this as you claim, this 
should be no problem at all. I very much doubt you will.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Firefox update problem

[Rahul Sundaram]

Steven Stern wrote:

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

$ sudo yum update firefox
Error: Missing Dependency: gecko-libs = 1.9 is needed by package
nspluginwrapper-1.1.0-2.fc9.i386 (installed)


The problem here is that in rushing out the security fix for Firefox, 
nspluginwrapper was not rebuild and still requires the older version of 
gecko-lib. This is now a known issue and is being fixed.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Les Mikesell wrote:

Rahul Sundaram wrote:


On the other hand, Linus was once widely quoted as saying that 
loadable binary driver modules were not derivative works of the 
kernel - and I believe that the initial popularity of depended on 
that interpretation just as much as the wide use of glibc depends on 
it not claiming programs that use it as derivatives.  He has waffled 
on that position more recently but there is no clear statement or 
legal precedent.


You have made similar statements in the past while providing no 
references every single time in the discussion even when asked. If you 
truly believe in what you are saying, I would ask you (again) to 
provide a direct quote. If he was so widely quoted on this as you 
claim, this should be no problem at all. I very much doubt you will.


Does this direct quote from 1995 help your memory problem?


Claiming that I have memory problems after you have been misstating the 
case for a long time without any references is quite rich. The below 
quote or mail nowhere has a blanket statement saying binary modules are 
not derivative works as you claim. He has expressed his opinions quite 
clearly in many many discussions. Here is a collection


http://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/linux/lk/COPYING-modules.txt
http://web.archive.org/web/20060202062935/people.redhat.com/arjanv/COPYING.modules

In short: It depends on the specific details. Note that Linus is only 
one of the many copyright holders and other kernel developers intention 
matters too and they clearly don't agree with binary modules at all.


http://www.kroah.com/log/linux/ols_2006_keynote.html



   "Another way to look at this - using the legal rather than the
moral viewpoint - is to just see module loading as "use" of the
kernel, rather than as linking against it.  I prefer to explain
the rationale behind it using the _moral_ reason to do it, though."

http://groups.google.com/group/gnu.misc.discuss/msg/d5af1cc0012c3bec

Hence his exception to the GPL permitting use of the kernel interfaces. 


I have told you before that there is no such exception and I quote from 
the first link:


"Well, there really is no exception. However, copyright law obviously
hinges on the definition of "derived work", and as such anything can
always be argued on that point"

And if you read his statement there on why it is OK to have a non-GPL 
AFS module, you might perhaps understand why I am perplexed that it is 
not OK to have a non-GPL zfs module (ignoring the practical issues of 
connecting the code for the moment).


You were told about the problems earlier on too and you choose to ignore 
it. CDDL was deliberately designed to be incompatible with GPL


http://lwn.net/Articles/198171/

ZFS has patents and nobody wants to take the risk

http://kerneltrap.org/node/8066

ZFS (if and when someone ports it to Linux) might still be able to live 
a life like AFS does as a third party kernel module which would not get 
merged in the upstream kernel. Meanwhile, I would be betting on btrfs ( 
http://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main_Page) to get mature and 
merged in as a alternative with similar features.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Kernel upstream changes

[Rahul Sundaram]

Antonio Olivares wrote:
On a somewhat related note to kernel.org, 


will aufs be incorporated into the kernel?

http://lwn.net/Articles/283279/

and squashfs + lzma compression also

http://kerneltrap.org/Linux/Squashfs_Aiming_For_Mainline_Kernel

These things would help tremendously in the creation of livecd's and have other uses as well. 


You should direct these questions to lkml as these are completely 
unrelated to the discussion in this thread.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Les Mikesell wrote:
I don't see how anyone can forget that he plainly wrote that demanding 
that modules be GPL'd is both legally and morally wrong.  Or have any 
question about the meaning of this portion of the Linux license:


Again, he said no such thing. In fact, he argued explicitly that even if 
it legally correct, it is morally wrong.



  "NOTE! This copyright does *not* cover user programs that use
   kernel services by normal system calls - this is merely considered
   normal use of the kernel, and does *not* fall under the heading
   of "derived work".


This is clearly talking about syscall interface and unrelated to the 
kernel modules interface.



"Well, there really is no exception.


So his own quote, and the FSF legal counsel's understanding of the terms 
as he stated them were both wrong?


The portion I quote is from a mail from Linus.  He clearly says there is 
no exception


Read again,

http://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/linux/lk/COPYING-modules.txt
http://web.archive.org/web/20060202062935/people.redhat.com/arjanv/COPYING.modules

FSF didn't give a direct interpretation of his quote and that cannot be 
held more authoritative than the original copyright holders anyway. 
Simply put, FSF doesn't hold copyright over the Linux kernel. The 
copyright holders (which is more than just Linus) intention's matter.


You were told about the problems earlier on too and you choose to 
ignore it. CDDL was deliberately designed to be incompatible with GPL


Deliberate? _Everything_ that is not the GPL is incompatible with the GPL.


This one is a clear lie. There are dozens and dozens of GPL compatible 
licenses. Any license which has no additional restrictions above and 
beyond GPL requirements are compatible with it.


http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing

Rahul


--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Anders Karlsson wrote:


Just so that I understand this right.

Any license which will permit being replaced by the GPL, when the
software it covers is combined with software under the GPL - is
compatible with the GPL?


Anyone except the copyright holder cannot replace the terms of the 
license. If I developed software and licensed it using any of the 
licenses compatible with the GPL, that original software stays under the 
license I released forever. Software Freedom Law Center published a 
paper describing the effect of combining BSD and GPL license if you are 
interested in the details


http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2007/gpl-non-gpl-collaboration.html

Note that the specific details maybe dependent on the copyright laws of 
your region too.


Rahul




--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Anders Karlsson wrote:

And any license that does not permit itself to be replaced or
over-ruled by the GPL - is hence incompatible - even if it explicitly
permits combination with the GPL for any derived work or combination
work.

Am I understanding this right?


This part is incorrect. If has additional requirements but explicitly 
states that the combination is compatible with GPL, then it is. Affero 
GPL (AGPL) is a example of this.


http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/agpl-3.0.html

"Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, you have 
permission to link or combine any covered work with a work licensed 
under version 3 of the GNU General Public License into a single combined 
work, and to convey the resulting work. The terms of this License will 
continue to apply to the part which is the covered work, but the work 
with which it is combined will remain governed by version 3 of the GNU 
General Public License."


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: policy question

[Rahul Sundaram]

Beartooth wrote:
	Can anybody explain to a non-technoid how the developers go about 
deciding whether a new thing gets added to the current Fedora release, or 
held to become part of the next?


Can you explain what you mean by a "new thing"? Do you mean a new 
software package or new feature or something else?


New packages go through a peer review process described in

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process

They should in minimum pass the MUST requirements

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines

Major features before a new release go through a feature process 
described in


http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Policy

A release is done as per the release criteria

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA#Release_Testing

Individual features have to go through the testing plan and if that 
fails would be postponed to the next release. One example here is 
swfdec, a free and open source flash player that was installed in the 
Fedora 9 beta and removed in the final release because it failed the 
criteria set in


https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/TestResults/Fedora9Swfdec/Rawhide

It is a combination of release schedule set by release engineering, QA 
team determining release critical bugs and Fedora Engineering steering 
committee managing the overall process.


Post release, it is generally the people maintaining the package 
(whether a individual or a team) determines whether it should be made 
available as a update. One recommendation is not to break ABI post release.


https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/PackagingTricks

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Alexandre Oliva wrote:

If Linux developers had gone down that path, they'd have created
inconvenience for people who make uses that are permitted by copyright
law, such as those who load their own private modules, never
distributed, and therefore never licensed, and a few other situations
involving works that are allegedly not derived works.


They haven't done anything like this. Someone proposed a patch and it 
was rejected for the reasons you outlined among other things.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Anders Karlsson wrote:

* Rahul Sundaram  [20080720 19:42]:

Anders Karlsson wrote:

And any license that does not permit itself to be replaced or
over-ruled by the GPL - is hence incompatible - even if it explicitly
permits combination with the GPL for any derived work or combination
work.

Am I understanding this right?
This part is incorrect. If has additional requirements but explicitly  
states that the combination is compatible with GPL, then it is. Affero  
GPL (AGPL) is a example of this.


http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/agpl-3.0.html


Thanks Rahul for taking the time to be plesant and provide useful
answers to a genuine question. You are a credit to your employer and
to the organisation you represent.


That would be Red Hat and Fedora respectively but as always my opinions 
are my own and you should find a lawyer for legal opinions on specific 
instances



So the part of the work that is non-GPL licensed, can stay non-GPL
licensed in the combined works and derivatives?


I would differentiate between original and derivative (along with 
combined work) here just to be more precise.


Not only can it stay that way, it must that way for the original code. 
Again, nooone other than the original copyright holder(s) cannot 
arbitrarily change the license of the original code and even the 
copyright holder cannot retroactively change it for the original code 
(aside from providing it under different licenses in addition)


For derivative works, the author creating a derivative work (that 
includes substantial creative works justifying copyright) might choose 
to publish it under a different license if the original license permits 
that. If the license requires that the derivative work also fall under 
the same license, it is generally referred to as copyleft.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyleft

GPL was the first license which used this technique but there are 
several others which follow a similar technique to various extends 
including the Mozilla Public License, MPL ( and MPL derived licenses 
such as CDDL used by OpenSolaris), IBM CPL (used for Postfix)and even 
the Microsoft Reciprocal License (which is both free and open source)


http://www.microsoft.com/opensource/licenses.mspx#Ms-RL

Even if the combined code is under GPL, the original code is still under 
whatever license it was originally licensed under and will remain that way.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Anders Karlsson wrote:

So works licenced under the GPL can not be used to create derivative
works if the resulting work is not also under the GPL, even if the GPL
licenced part was the substantially smaller contributor to the whole?


This is correct and by design. FSF explains the general idea behind this at

http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/

If you like even simpler terminology, Creative Commons has a explanation

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/GPL/2.0/

Creative Commons Attribute Share Alike is similar to GPL but for content

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/us/

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: I need help with Fedora

[Rahul Sundaram]

Kevin J. Cummings wrote:
In general, if you don't know what you are doing then maybe Linux isn't 
for you?


Oh please. Can you avoid that elitist attitude? There are new comers to 
Linux and Fedora all the time and not all of them are experts. These are 
valuable users to the community and we don't need to drive them away 
with statements like these. None of us were born with any of this 
knowledge anyway. Remember, you were a newbie too when you got started.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Alexandre Oliva wrote:

On Jul 20, 2008, Rahul Sundaram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Alexandre Oliva wrote:

If Linux developers had gone down that path, they'd



They haven't done anything like this.


IIRC that "'d" stands for "would", meaning the whole consequent is
conditioned on the antecedent.  Isn't that so?


Maybe. I am merely clarifying.

Rahul


--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Les Mikesell wrote:

How can you say that after reading from the link:

  "After all, the driver wasn't actually derived from linux
   itself: it's a real driver in its own right, so I don't
   feel that I have the moral right to force him to switch copyrights.

How much clearer can you be that it would be morally wrong to pretend 
that a module is a derived work or to force a copyright change???


You are taking a specific case of AFS and trying to generalise it. Sorry 
 I am not buying that. Neither will anyone seeing the other in numerous 
statements made by Linus I have referred to.  A direct quote from Linus 
that explains this


http://kerneltrap.org/node/1735

"Historically, there's been things like the original Andrew filesystem
module: a standard filesystem that really wasn't written for Linux in 
the first place, and just implements a UNIX filesystem. Is that derived 
just because it got ported to Linux that had a reasonably similar VFS 
interface to what other UNIXes did? Personally, I didn't feel that I 
could make that judgment call. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't, but it 
clearly is a gray area.


Personally, I think that case wasn't a derived work, and I was willing 
to tell the AFS guys so.


Does that mean that any kernel module is automatically not a derived 
work? HELL NO!"


And you conveniently deleted the context that disproves this.  From that 
same link above quoting Linus directly:


  "...just see module loading as "use" of the kernel, rather than
   as linking against it."


Again, you are taking two different statements and trying to collapse 
them together to give it a context that does not exist


That seems pretty direct to me.  And the only interpretation possible 
knowing Linus was publicly quoted as saying modules 'use' the kernel 
services.


Like I said, you can repeat this all you want. The facts of the matter 
remains,


 * Linus has repeated claimed that the copyright of derivative works 
depends on the specific instance


 * He is not the only copyright holder and others have expressed even 
more strongly their beliefs that modules are derivative work.


 * FSF is not the copyright holder and their views are not relevant to 
a discussion about the Linux kernel


* Historically, the interface between modules and the kernel were weaker 
and one could get away with this argument but that case is much harder 
to make today.


You have clearly been shown to twist facts to the extend of claiming 
that no license other than GPL is compatible with itself and I am not 
willing to argue with you anymore about this. Good luck with your trolling.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Les Mikesell wrote:

Rahul Sundaram wrote:

>>

  "...just see module loading as "use" of the kernel, rather than
   as linking against it."


Again, you are taking two different statements and trying to collapse 
them together to give it a context that does not exist


This statement was repeated in other contexts


So you now accept that the context that you brought to this list does 
not support your argument that Linus claimed that binary modules are not 
derived work in a blanket fashion. That's good.


 - that's just what google
popped up first.  Do you really believe that Linus himself did not 
understand exactly the context that this wording applied to?  He said it 
specifically to clarify any doubt about the matter.


He understands very well. I am still waiting on on a specific mail that 
supports your claim. Mine is here


http://web.archive.org/web/20060202062935/people.redhat.com/arjanv/COPYING.modules

"I claim that a "binary linux kernel module" is a derived work of the
kernel, and thus has to come with sources."

 * He is not the only copyright holder and others have expressed even 
more strongly their beliefs that modules are derivative work.


That's kind of irrelevant to the fact that they may not be.


Copyright 101. Intention of the copyright holders are very very relevant.

You have clearly been shown to twist facts to the extend of claiming 
that no license other than GPL is compatible with itself and I am not 
willing to argue with you anymore about this.


There is no twisting involved to point out that the 'work-as-a-whole' 
clause of the GPL forces exactly its own terms on all components.  If 
you don't like to talk about that, so be it.


You claimed

"Deliberate? _Everything_ that is not the GPL is incompatible with the GPL."

This is a clear lie. There is no excuse for it.

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Les Mikesell wrote:


No, I'm saying that Linus knew exactly what he meant every time he said 
modules "use" the kernel services instead of linking with it, and he 
chose that wording because he also knew exactly what his license said 
about things that "use" the kernel services.  This was his only story in 
1995 - well published, not contradicted.


You have yet to show other instances where he said this. The only 
instance you showed was just in the context of the AFS module and not a 
generic claim. You are well aware of that now.



"I claim that a "binary linux kernel module" is a derived work of the
kernel, and thus has to come with sources."


I don't want to believe that the 1995 statements were lies.


Setting aside that you have not proved your original claim, you also now 
prefer to ignore statements that disprove yours. Reminds me of a ostrich 
burying it's head in the sand.



Copyright 101. Intention of the copyright holders are very very relevant.


What?  If something isn't a derivative work, the copyright of the thing 
it isn't derived from has no bearing.


You haven't show it isn't derived work. Don't try to win an argument 
using circular logic.



You claimed

"Deliberate? _Everything_ that is not the GPL is incompatible with the 
GPL."


This is a clear lie. There is no excuse for it.


On the contrary, the whole point of the GPL and its 'work-as-a-whole' 
clause was to be incompatible with every other license.   It is by 
design and the lie is to claim otherwise. 


It however is not incompatible with every other license as clearly 
demonstrated by


http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses

Keep burying your head deeper in the sand.

 Please show how something can
include any GPL-covered work, yet be distributed under different terms 
if you insist on claiming that.


I don't have to show anything like that. You claimed that GPL isn't 
compatible with anything but itself. That is a false claim that easily 
disproved by dozens of licenses that are clearly compatible with it.


http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing

Don't make blanket claims and then retroactively try to twist it to 
apply your own meaning to it. That is such a obvious ploy visible to 
everyone. Now that I have shown to everyone watching the discussion what 
a obvious troll you are, have a nice day ;-).


Rahul



--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Truecrypt on Fedora

[Rahul Sundaram]

Valent Turkovic wrote:

Legal still hasn't said no AFAIK:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454667

So can somebody update that bugreport?


What is there to update? We are still waiting on legal and the status is 
provided there already.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: OCR in Fedora?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Valent Turkovic wrote:



I guess that it the strenght of OCRopus because it should have that
feature if I'm not mistaken. Unfortunatelly OCRopus is not in Fedore
repos so I can't test it. I hope it gets there soon.


The dependency is already is in the repo. If you want to help maintain, 
come up on irc in #fedora-devel and ask.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Where is the "automatic login" now?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Marcelo M. Garcia wrote:

Hi John

It worked. Thank you.

There was a button in System->Administration->Login(?) where was 
possible to make this kind of configuration, do you know why this 
disappeared?


Refer

http://docs.fedoraproject.org/release-notes/f9/en_US/sn-Desktop.html#sn-GNOMEDisplayManager

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Two different users on the same machine

[Rahul Sundaram]

Paul Smith wrote:

Dear All,

I am running XFCE on F9, and I would like to know how to allow two
different users to login on my machine at the same time. On F8, I
remember a menu entry

System --> New Login

but I cannot find it on F9.

Any ideas?


Don't recall the menu placement offhand but run gdmflexiserver command 
to get the same effect.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Two different users on the same machine

[Rahul Sundaram]

Paul Smith wrote:

On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 10:45 PM, Rahul Sundaram
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I am running XFCE on F9, and I would like to know how to allow two
different users to login on my machine at the same time. On F8, I
remember a menu entry

System --> New Login

but I cannot find it on F9.

Any ideas?

Don't recall the menu placement offhand but run gdmflexiserver command to
get the same effect.


Thanks, Rahul, but it does not work:


Are you using gnome screensaver? If so you might try locking your screen 
and click switch user in there.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Two different users on the same machine

[Rahul Sundaram]

Paul Smith wrote:



No, I am using XscreenSaver. How to switch to gnome screensaver?


# yum remove xscreensaver\*
# yum install gnome-screensaver

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Announcement: New repo with updated ClamAV packages for Fedora 8

[Rahul Sundaram]

Keith G. Robertson-Turner wrote:


Also I'm still investigating the legality of building unrar against GPL
sources. I think this is not a question of whether the author gives his
permission to distribute freeware, but more a question of whether GPL
software can be linked to proprietary software.


Unrar support is a copyright infringement.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=334371

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Unofficial Fedora FAQ Updated for Fedora 9

[Rahul Sundaram]

Valent Turkovic wrote:

On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 1:58 PM, Stephen Berg (Contractor)



Did you consider letting the author of that FAQ know about that needed
change instead of this list?  http://www.fedorafaq.org/contribute/


I thought that OP was the author and that he is reading this list.


You can't make any such assumptions. This list is very high traffic that 
people often miss out messages. You would want to contact the author 
directly instead.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: What will be the codename for Fedora 10?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Antonio Olivares wrote:


https://admin.fedoraproject.org/voting/about/10

Since voting has ended, where are the official results?


You might have searched a bit.

https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-announce-list/2008-July/msg00014.html

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: How to swee youtube videos,

[Rahul Sundaram]

g wrote:



i did. looked real interesting, so i pulled tar and source to give it
a try.

site is www.getmiro.com in case you want to have a look.


# yum install miro works fine.

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: 'Overlay' in terms of Live CD

[Rahul Sundaram]

Anne Wilson wrote:
Can someone please give me a quick definition of 'overlay' in terms of a 
live-CD?  I find lots of mentions by googling, but nothing that helps me get 
to grips with it.  I need to know whether I should set a large overlay if I 
build from a KDE 4.0 Live CD with the intention of updating to KDE 4.1.


Overlay in simple terms is a additional storage layer. Everything that 
you do as an update is stored in this overlay and more you do updates 
and the larger they are, the larger your overlay size should be.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Announcing Fedora 10 Alpha!

[Rahul Sundaram]

Scott (angrykeyboarder) wrote:

Jesse Keating wrote:



Get the Alpha The Alpha release is available both through the 
mirroring system and via

bittorrent.

For direct http access to a local mirror:

http://download.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/releases/test/10-Alpha/ 



For a list of mirrors carrying the content and the various protocols
they support:

http://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/publiclist/Fedora/10-Alpha/



I'm afraid that was a tad premature. Many mirrors don't have it yet.


Some mirrors are just slow to sync the content. Waiting for all the 
hundreds of them to sync isn't a option. Pick the content off from the 
ones that are more current.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: why Fedora 9 cannot be used as dom0 for XEN

[Rahul Sundaram]

David Hláčik wrote:

Hello,

can someone explain me, why Fedora 9 does not have dom0 xen kernel?
So why package 'xen' in base repository is?

I really do not understand that. Fedora should be developement edge 
for Redhat new technologies , so where is newest xen with newest 
kernel-xen?
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/XenPvops explains why this is the 
case. In rawhide, the separate xen kernel has also been dropped. Refer


https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-xen/2008-July/msg00044.html

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Project Stick In The Mud :-)

[Rahul Sundaram]

Arthur Pemberton wrote:



yum install libflashsupport from the Adobe repo


It comes from the Fedora repo and not the Adobe repo. It is a hack to 
workaround the broken way in which Flash uses ALSA. This has been fixed 
by Adobe in their latest beta release of Flash.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Project Stick In The Mud :-)

[Rahul Sundaram]

Russell Miller wrote:

I did write a bug report a couple of months back that hasn't even been 
looked at yet - and I handed them a new specfile on a silver platter.  
Oh well.  Maybe it'll get better the more reports I submit.


What was the bz number?

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Project Stick In The Mud :-)

[Rahul Sundaram]

Russell Miller wrote:


454127

And it was closer to a month ago than two months.  My bad.  Still a long 
time though.


It would be useful to product a diff instead of a new spec and attach 
that instead. We have a quite large number of bugs opened so additional 
help is welcome. If you are interested, you could sign-up to be a 
co-maintainer even.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: Project Stick In The Mud :-)

[Rahul Sundaram]

Russell Miller wrote:



I'm probably one of the few people who use that library, so I could 
co-maintain it if there aren't any objections.  How do I go about 
signing up?


http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join

This process might seem a bit awkard if you are new, so if you need 
help, come up to #fedora-devel and ask.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: New Bugzilla workflows?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Allen Kistler wrote:
Is there any page or document that describes the new (RH?) Bugzilla 
workflow states?


For example, I reported a bug for F9.  It's now in the MODIFIED state, 
so it shows up as RETEST on my "front" page.  I've retested it, but the 
bug is still there and the only thing I can do in BZ is close it, which 
is obviously *not* what I want to do.


Is this a BZ bug or is there something I'm missing?


Seems to be a bug. Drop a mail to mail id in the top of 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/ with the description and the bug report 
number that shows the issue.


Rahul


--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: How secure is Fedora without SELinux ?

[Rahul Sundaram]

David Jansen wrote:

How secure is a current Fedora (9) system without SELinux? Of course it
is less secure than the same system with SELinux enabled, but is it
still at the same level of security as any other Linux distribution that
doesn't come with SELinux enabled? or are there packages that depend on
SELinux for their security, eg services that run as root on Fedora in
stead of as an unpriviledged user, assuming that SELinux takes care of
limiting root to what the service is supposed to do?


SELinux is a additional security layer above and beyond the regular 
security features. Nothing in Fedora would solely rely on SELinux to 
provide the basic security.


http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Security/Features

Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: where to request a newer package version?

[Rahul Sundaram]

Craig White wrote:


you picked an interesting test case to be sure because on RHEL, they are
indeed using subversion-1.5.1 but on Fedora, 1.5.1 is only available in
updates-testing


It happens often for those paying close attention. Sometimes RHEL does 
include components not part of Fedora for quite sometime. GFS cluster 
filesystem is a prominent example that comes to mind. Fedora didn't 
include it till it was merged upstream. Quick, spread the news. RHEL is 
a beta for Fedora ;-)


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: F8(1) vs multimedia production(0)

[Rahul Sundaram]

Antonio Olivares wrote:


Telling us to move to another distro is not the correct answer.  Also to get it 
from livna or freshrpms might be an option, but is it the best alternative?


Ideally, we would see software patents going away but meanwhile we would 
want to see good support for non patent encumbered codecs and supporting 
them out of the box by using multimedia frameworks like gstreamer is the 
best alternative we have and that is what Fedora does. Third party repos 
makes it very easy to drop in the additional codecs as plugins.


As Jef noted, Firefox 3.1 will include native support for ogg (theora 
for video and vorbis for audio) which is also a pretty good move. If you 
disagree and want proprietary or patent encumbered codec support by 
default, Fedora probably isn't the right choice for you.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

Re: F8(1) vs multimedia production(0)

[Rahul Sundaram]

Antonio Olivares wrote:


Here like I have mentioned in the same thread.  A Fedora spin without (all the 
free stuff(non patent encumbered ) that is provided by default)
would make sense and would free Fedora/Red Hat from litigation and would 
make it easier to include the stuff that will make media players play
everything under the sun and will not get in the way when buiding these 
apps.


It won't make sense for Fedora to not include support for the non-patent 
encumbered codecs since one of the primary objectives of Fedora is to 
enable and support free and open source software. Besides multimedia 
frameworks like gstreamer is a dependency of many many apps and 
excluding them all is not feasible. Normally users who want additional 
components would just grab those from a third party repo. If you are 
compiling from source, that's a smaller nice of users and you are very 
well equipped to remove whatever you don't want. Again, if you disagree 
and think your goal will help end users, feel free to build a Fedora 
spin exactly the way you want. The tools that we used to build Fedora 
are all available as part of Fedora.


It is not a bad thing Rahul. I have mplayer and gecko-media player built from source and I am doing fine.  I am not complaining.  
It would make sense to not have to ship crippled players *unless the 
users want those only**


Gstreamer has a plugin model and we don't include some of the plugins. 
This process doesn't require actively crippling anything.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list