Re: [ilugd] libXv

[Raj Shekhar]

On Sat, 2003-11-15 at 09:48, Raj Mathur wrote:


> The solution to fixing RPM dependencies is not creating more files on
> the disk; the solution is to install the RPM that says ``these files
> are installed''.

Or if you are very certain that the "/usr/X11R6/lib/libXv*" are the only
files that are throwing a spanner in your installation, you can do a
--nodeps (do not verify package dependencies).

-- 
   / \__
  (@\___Raj Shekhar  
  / O   My home : http://geocities.com/lunatech3007/
 /   (_/My blog : http://lunatech.journalspace.com/
/_/   U  



___
ilugd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd

RE: [ilugd] Re: libsigc++ install problem

[Raj Shekhar]

On Sat, 2003-11-15 at 04:34, LinuxLingam wrote:

> finally, did an updatedb.
> and checked with the rpm -qa command, to find the package was still not
> recognized.
I would suggest looking closely at your grep expression. Maybe a rpm
-qa|grep -i sig . That is the only explanation I can think of (if it
were windoze maybe a reboot would have suffice?)
-- 
   / \__
  (@\___Raj Shekhar  
  / O   My home : http://geocities.com/lunatech3007/
 /   (_/My blog : http://lunatech.journalspace.com/
/_/   U  



___
ilugd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd

[ilugd] (fwd) Re: GPL Restrictive

[Raj Mathur]

[And I thought I was paranoid with my conspiracy theories!  In
summary, MS has put $20 million into a company worth $10 million (SCO)
and an investment group with MS and 3 MS head honchos among its top 10
investors (BayStar) has pumped another $50 million into SCO.  Surely
after this no one can claim SCO's attack on Linux and the GPL to be
entirely coincidental, can they? -- Raju]

This is an RFC 1153 digest.
(1 message)
--

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ox-en] GPL Restrictive (and all the rest of those threads that this grew 
out of)
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 19:17:07 -0800

Hi

On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Martin Hardie wrote:
>
> Recall the comments of the head of the US Patent office 
> - the GPL etc is anti copyright in its effect no matter 
> what it says it is as it destroys the ability to create 
> exchangeable commodities.

Yes it is posible that this case will end up being the thing that causes
the representatives of _capitalism_ to interven in what _appears_ to be
a dispute between _capitalists_ -- look at the sides like this:

1. SCO is being bankrolled by Microsoft, to quote from slashdot:

 "During the quarter ended April 30, 2003, SCO entered into a
 licensing agreement with Microsoft Corporation ("Microsoft"). The
 initial licensing agreement allowed Microsoft, at its election, to
 exercise two options to allow Microsoft to acquire expanded licensing
 rights with respect to SCO's UNIX source code. During the quarter
 ended July 31, 2003, Microsoft exercised and paid for the first of
 these options. During SCO's current quarter, ending October 31, 2003,
 Microsoft exercised and paid $8,000,000 for the second option.
 [sec.gov] "

   
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1102542/000110465903023055/a03-4160_18k.htm

 The SECOND deal was for 8 million dollars. There was a filing last
 quarter about the first deal. That one was for 6 to 8 million dollars
 up front, plus an additional 5 million over the next three quarters.
 So the first deal totaled 11 to 13 million. Add the two deals and
 Microsoft is handing SCO about 20 million dollars. (And for all we
 know the second deal may include an additional 5 million over the
 next three quarters as well.)

 Just prior to the Microsoft deal, SCO's market capitalization was
 about 10 million dollars. Now, would someone like to explain to me
 why the hell anyone would pay 20 million to buy a licence from SCO
 when all of SCO itself only carried a 10 million dollar price tag?

 Not only that, but SCO had NEVER had a profitable quarter prior to
 the Microsoft deal. They were bleeding cash horribly and soon would
 have gone bankrupt.

 In addition to those cash payments, SCO has also received a 50
 million infusion from an investment group with ties to Microsoft.
 There isn't any evidence that Microsoft influenced this 50 million
 inventment, but it sure does look suspicious.

 http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=85893&cid=7475363

   The company that put up $50 million is BayStar, another quote:

 Baystar's own website claims Paul Allen, Microsoft, etc. in their
 list of top ten investors. IIRC, four of the top ten were Microsoft
 or close friends of Microsoft.

 http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=85893&cid=7474478

   So in total Microsoft have put in the region of $70 million into SCO
   when it was worth $10. The case that SCO puts forward will be
   Microsofts legal attempt to kill free software before it is killed by
   free software.

2. On the other side Linus' legal bill is being footed by:

 Just in case you didn't you didn't know, the OSDL is funded by a
 variety of corporations including (but not limitied to) IBM,
 Hewlett-Packard, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Red Hat, Cisco, Computer
 Associates, Fujitsu, Hitachi, and Nokia.

 http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/11/14/155201
   
   Between these companies there is a load of capital also.

So in a real way it is a dispute between capitalists however there is
something far more important going on here. 

Although capitalists can use free software in competion with other
capitalists the result of the capitalists that are backing free software
winning is, at the end of the day, not in the interests of capitalism.

The result of the software sector of the global economy switching to the
free software mode of production would result in the destruction of
'property' and the ellimination of commodities -- no need to buy stuff
no more scarcity :-)

Worst of all for capitalism  there would be an increased danger that this 
mode of production might start spreading to other sectors of the
economy. 

Free software is not being taken over by capital, now with the
development of Fedora opened up SuSE is the only distro that

Re: [ilugd] libXv

[Raj Mathur]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

> "LL" == linuxlingam  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

LL> an application am installing reports a failed dependency on
LL> libXvso.1 googling, i learn i need to have either have (and i
LL> quote):

LL>   "a shared Xv library on your system, e.g. ls
LL> /usr/X11R6/lib/libXv* should give you some .so libs, like
LL> this:

LL>   /usr/X11R6/lib/libXv.a /usr/X11R6/lib/libXv.so
LL> /usr/X11R6/lib/libXv.so.1

LL>   Alternatively you need to have libtool 1.4 or newer
LL> installed. If not and you only got libXv.a you can create the
LL> shared versions yourself:

LL>ld --whole-archive -shared -o libXv.so.1 libXv.a ln -s
LL> libXv.so.1 libXv.so ldconfig"

LL> i check the subdir, and find my libXv* files there.  i then
LL> rpm -qa libtool and find a higher version installed.  then do
LL> the ld to the ldconfig routine, warned during the ln -s
LL> libXv.so1 libXv.so that the file exists.

LL> try rpm -U *.rpm for my app, and find it still asks for the
LL> dep.

RPM doesn't care what's installed on your disk.  RPM only cares about
what it's database says is installed.

You can install the whole Internet onto your hard disk, but RPM will
still say it can't find /bin/ls unless the fileutils RPM has been
installed.

The solution to fixing RPM dependencies is not creating more files on
the disk; the solution is to install the RPM that says ``these files
are installed''.

LL> how do i resolve this, please?

I hope that makes it clear.

Regards,

- -- Raju
- -- 
Raj Mathur[EMAIL PROTECTED]  http://kandalaya.org/
   GPG: 78D4 FC67 367F 40E2 0DD5  0FEF C968 D0EF CC68 D17F
  It is the mind that moves
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.6 and Gnu Privacy Guard 

iD8DBQE/takSyWjQ78xo0X8RAvktAJ9bXYMLi/JbYrQwkCHxbXTMCMwySgCfadrg
uwMproOCkxSAVSivnaWb9dg=
=TIe1
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
ilugd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd

Re: [ilugd] outlook express address to evolution

[Sudev Barar]

On Fri, 2003-11-14 at 23:02, LinuxLingam wrote:
> discovered for a friend today, that to import outlook express emails
> into evolution, just convert the outlook express *.dbx files to *.mbx
> and then import. free and freeware utilities exist to do this
> conversion. my favourite is a 20kb utility, called dbxconv.
> also discovered several more utilities.
> 
> however, can't seem to import the address book into evolution. any body
> been able to successfully do this?
> 
> meanwhile, have got the addressbook as a csv text file, and opened that
> successfully into openoffice calc. so how do i get this into evolution?
> 
> :-)
> LL
>From what I gathered till now you have to use kmail (mozilla mail) or
something like that to first import mbx then evolution to import what
ever kmail ( or...) has stored
Have not tried this yet.
-- 
Sudev Barar

Learning Linux


___
ilugd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd

Re: [ilugd] howto upload files to linux-delhi

[Sudev Barar]

On Fri, 2003-11-14 at 15:16, LinuxLingam wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-11-14 at 11:22, Sudev Barar wrote:
> 
> > > 
> > > for mukt license, if you want people to improve and update your
> > > presentations, please publish it under the gnu fdl. (gnu.org)
> > > 
> > > hope this helps.
> > > 
> > > :-)
> > Total of 27MB...acceptable to Delhi ILUGD?
> 
> hey! don't tell me you have *one* impress presentation of 27mb.
> maybe its a couple of files. in which case i suppose it is okay.
> 
No there are five six files. But they are on my internal server as read
only presentation files. So best is that after the ILUGD if the need is
felt I will send a burned CD to who ever and he / she can put them on
web for download.


> if 27MB, check with raj, nishikant, *and* also upload on a different
> server, providing a link to that as well, in the downloads are. (just
> publish the url in the description field as well).
> 
> hth
> 
> :-)
> LL

See the sign with my name...LL in my case is learning linux. So what you
just posted is understood but well over my capabilities right now. Will
get there...hopefully.
-- 
Sudev Barar

Learning Linux


___
ilugd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd

[ilugd] Re: Future of RHCE Certification

[Sandip Bhattacharya]

Balachandran P wrote:
But
the point here is that, since Red Hat is discontinuing with desktop
versions, what future does rhce certifications have. Redhat doesnt have any
kind of certifications for its advanced server series, and so far Red Hat
has not given any notification on RHCE. Will Red Hat provide some kind of
benefits or privileges for exisiting rhce or rhct holders if they plan to
take certifications in advanced server series in case if Red Hat launches
new certifications in advanced server. For persons like myself who are
planning to take RHCE certification and also for existing rhce or rhct
holders, these issues are very important. Thanks.
Yeah, the RHCE FAQ has been updated. I am including some of the relevant 
answers below. From december 1, official RHCE *classes* will be based on 
the enterprise versions. Can only guess that the exams are going to be 
based on the ES soon after.

- Sandip

http://www.redhat.com/training/rhce/rhce_faq.html

[...]

Q. How does the release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3 affect RHCE and
   other classes offered by Red Hat?
A. With the release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3, Red Hat and its 
training partners will begin using it for Red Hat training classes and 
certification exams. This change will take place at different times in 
different locales. All US RHCE classes given by Red Hat will be 
conducted on Red Hat Enterprise Linux by December 1, 2003.

[...]

Q. For how long will my RHCE certification be considered current?

A. While evidence suggests that RHCEs who stay professionally active can 
evolve their skills in pace with new releases of Red Hat Linux OS 
technology, it is important for Red Hat to maintain a policy for 
determining whether an RHCE or RHCT certificate can be considered 
current. Thus, verification services provided for all RHCEs at 
Certification Central have always included which version a certificate 
was earned on, and whether the certificate is considered current or no 
longer current.

The validity period for all RHCEs and RHCTs is now officially pegged to 
the release of the Enterprise product commercially available at the time 
certification was earned, and certification shall be current until after 
one (1) major release of the Enterprise product. All RHCEs earned on Red 
Hat Linux 7.3 or prior will be considered current until the release of 
Red Hat Enterprise Linux AS/ES/WS 4. All RHCEs and RHCTs earned on Red 
Hat Linux 8.0 or 9 will remain current until the release of Red Hat 
Enterprise Linux 5. Validity and current status of an RHCE certificate 
will continue to be verified at Certification Central.

[...]



--
Sandip Bhattacharyahttp://www.sandipb.net
sandip at puroga.com
Puroga Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
http://www.puroga.com


___
ilugd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd

RE: [ilugd] Re: libsigc++ install problem

[LinuxLingam]

On Sat, 2003-11-15 at 02:17, Raj Shekhar wrote:
> Check the Makefile that was created when you did "./configure". It may
> have a target called "uninstall". If it does, try "make uninstall".

checked. it had. did it. worked okay.


then, installed libsigc++ through the downloaded rpm package.
that worked okay too.
finally, did an updatedb.
and checked with the rpm -qa command, to find the package was still not
recognized.

?

however, my application installed okay (!)

?



LL


___
ilugd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd

[ilugd] libXv

[LinuxLingam]

an application am installing reports a failed dependency on libXvso.1

googling, i learn i need to have either have (and i quote):

  "a shared Xv library on your system, e.g. ls /usr/X11R6/lib/libXv*
  should give you some .so libs, like this:

  /usr/X11R6/lib/libXv.a
  /usr/X11R6/lib/libXv.so
  /usr/X11R6/lib/libXv.so.1

  Alternatively you need to have libtool 1.4 or newer installed. If not
  and you only got libXv.a you can create the shared versions yourself:

   ld --whole-archive -shared -o libXv.so.1 libXv.a
   ln -s libXv.so.1 libXv.so
   ldconfig"

i check the subdir, and find my libXv* files there.
i then rpm -qa libtool and find a higher version installed.
then do the ld to the ldconfig routine, warned during the ln -s libXv.so1 libXv.so 
that the file exists.

try rpm -U *.rpm for my app, and find it still asks for the dep.

how do i resolve this, please?

:-)
LL


___
ilugd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd

Re: [ilugd] Re: Future of RHCE Certification

[Balachandran P]

Hi,

Redhat says that the validity period for all RHCEs and RHCTs is now
officially pegged to the release of the Enterprise product commercially
available at the time the certification was earned, and the certification
shall be current until after 1 major release of the enterprise product. All
RhCEs earned on Red Hat Linux 7.3 or prior will be considered current until
the release of Red Hat enterprise Linux AS/ES/WS 4. All rhces and rhcts
earned on Redhat Linux 8.0 or 9 will remain current until the release of
Redhat enterprise linux 5. So it means that the certification expiry has no
linkage to the fedora releases. The enterprise releases comes once in 2
years, so I think that RHCE in 8.0 or 9.0 will atleast last for 2 years. But
the point here is that, since Red Hat is discontinuing with desktop
versions, what future does rhce certifications have. Redhat doesnt have any
kind of certifications for its advanced server series, and so far Red Hat
has not given any notification on RHCE. Will Red Hat provide some kind of
benefits or privileges for exisiting rhce or rhct holders if they plan to
take certifications in advanced server series in case if Red Hat launches
new certifications in advanced server. For persons like myself who are
planning to take RHCE certification and also for existing rhce or rhct
holders, these issues are very important. Thanks.

P Balu

- Original Message -
From: "Sandip Bhattacharya" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 12:46 PM
Subject: [ilugd] Re: Future of RHCE Certification


> Balachandran P wrote:
>
> > Hi Friends,
> >
> > Whats your opinion on the future of RHCE certification.  Novell has
bought Suse and Redhat is going to discontinue its desktop release from
Redhat 9. Redhat will be concentrating on its advanced server series and I
am not sure whether fedora will find success. I was planning to take RHCE
exams next month end, but after these latest events, I really cant take a
decision. Is it to better to go in for a RHCE certification or concentrate
on Novell certified Linux Engineer certification. Or is there any Linux
certification which is really worth a look. I would like to hear your
opinions.
> > Thanks.
> >
>
> As a person who is involved in providing RHCE related training, I am at
> present quite pessimistic about the certification. Note that the quality
> of this certification is not in question. I have given both RHCE and LPI
> (level 1) exams, and LPI comes no where near the completeness of an RHCE
> exam. As an exployer, I would defitely give far more weightage to an
> RHCE than any other (no-lab based) exam like LPI, vendor neutral or not.
>
> However I am worried about other points. It is still unclear whether
> your present Red Hat certifications are going to be valid for the
> enterprise versions also.
>
> Also Red Hat has a policy of accepting certifications as valid or
> current for only *two* successive versions of their OS. I personally
> passed RHCE for Red Hat Linux versio 8.0 in June this year. And with the
> release of Fedora Core 1 (the new name of the free version of Red Hat
> Linux which is officially NOT supported by Red Hat), my certification
> might be already obsolete (within 5 months!!!).
>
> If Red Hat continues with this policy and it is tied down to Fedora
> Linux, then your certification for Red Hat Linux 9 today will become
> invalid with the next release of Fedora (which by Red Hat's own official
> statement will happen every 3-4 months). If it is tied down to the
> release of enterprise linux, then you dont have a problem with validity
> but with availibility - how do you get hold of an enterprise version to
> practice?
>
> - Sandip
>
> --
> Sandip Bhattacharyahttp://www.sandipb.net
> sandip at puroga.com
> Puroga Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
> http://www.puroga.com
>
>
>
> ___
> ilugd mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
>


___
ilugd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd

RE: [ilugd] Re: libsigc++ install problem

[Raj Shekhar]

Check the Makefile that was created when you did "./configure". It may
have a target called "uninstall". If it does, try "make uninstall". 

If you do not have the uninstall target, you may have to do it the hard
way. When you do the rpm install from RPM, you may get messages like
" conflicts wit already existing file ". Remove those files by
hand.

HTH

Regards
Raj Shekhar

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of LinuxLingam
Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 1:58 AM
To: The Linux-Delhi mailing list
Subject: Re: [ilugd] Re: libsigc++ install problem

sigh! the earlier hack recommended a week ago worked, but a new
application also demands deps to libsigc++, so have downloaded the *.rpm
as raj suggests.
how do i remove the compiled-from-source libsigc++ ?




___
ilugd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd

Re: [ilugd] Re: libsigc++ install problem

[LinuxLingam]

sigh! the earlier hack recommended a week ago worked, but a new
application also demands deps to libsigc++, so have downloaded the *.rpm
as raj suggests.
how do i remove the compiled-from-source libsigc++ ?

> 
> LL, you're left with two options:
> 
> 1. Remove the compiled-from-source libsigc++ that you have installed
> and install the libsigc++ rpm instead.  You problem would be fixed.
> This is the preferred way.
> 
> 2. Install your package with rpm --nodeps ... so that it ignores the
> fact that the libsigc++ rpm is not present.  It may or may not work
> after that.  Deprecated anyway.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> - -- Raju



___
ilugd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd

Re: [ilugd] Reverse Engineering

[Akshay Lamba]

Cool!! Thanks a ton raj.

Regards,
Akshay


- Original Message -
From: Raj Shekhar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Friday, November 14, 2003 11:55 pm
Subject: Re: [ilugd] Reverse Engineering

> On Fri, 2003-11-14 at 23:50, Akshay Lamba wrote:
> > Hi Everyone,
> >   Is it possible to reverse engineer an rpm? That is, is it 
> possible 
> > for me to see a SPEC file from which an rpm was created somehow?
> 
> If you have Midnight commander (mc) installed, you can navigate a 
> RPM as
> if it were a folder. Type mc on the command line, and navigate to the
> folder where the RPM file is stored. When you click on the RPM 
> file, it
> will open up like a folder. You will find a folder named "INFO", enter
> into it. There will be files named like "BUILDHOST", "GROUP" etc. 
> Thesecorrespond to the arious sections of the spec file. For 
> example, to view
> the "BUILDHOST" section, position your cursor over the file named
> "BUILDHOST", and press "F3". That will show you the contents of the
> file. Press "F10" to exit. 
> 
> HTH
> -- 
>   / \__
>  (@\___   Raj Shekhar  
>  / O  My home : http://geocities.com/lunatech3007/
> /   (_/   My blog : http://lunatech.journalspace.com/
> /_/   U
> 
> 
> 


___
ilugd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd

Re: [ilugd] Reverse Engineering

[Raj Shekhar]

On Fri, 2003-11-14 at 23:50, Akshay Lamba wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>   Is it possible to reverse engineer an rpm? That is, is it possible 
> for me to see a SPEC file from which an rpm was created somehow?

If you have Midnight commander (mc) installed, you can navigate a RPM as
if it were a folder. Type mc on the command line, and navigate to the
folder where the RPM file is stored. When you click on the RPM file, it
will open up like a folder. You will find a folder named "INFO", enter
into it. There will be files named like "BUILDHOST", "GROUP" etc. These
correspond to the arious sections of the spec file. For example, to view
the "BUILDHOST" section, position your cursor over the file named
"BUILDHOST", and press "F3". That will show you the contents of the
file. Press "F10" to exit. 

HTH
-- 
   / \__
  (@\___Raj Shekhar  
  / O   My home : http://geocities.com/lunatech3007/
 /   (_/My blog : http://lunatech.journalspace.com/
/_/   U  



___
ilugd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd

[ilugd] Reverse Engineering

[Akshay Lamba]

Hi Everyone,
  Is it possible to reverse engineer an rpm? That is, is it possible 
for me to see a SPEC file from which an rpm was created somehow?

Also, could anyone suggest me some network vulnerability scanner's like 
nessus? I read about one such scanner the other day on this mailing 
list exclusively for web server's...which one is that? 

Regards,
Akshay Lamba



___
ilugd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd

[ilugd] outlook express address to evolution

[LinuxLingam]

discovered for a friend today, that to import outlook express emails
into evolution, just convert the outlook express *.dbx files to *.mbx
and then import. free and freeware utilities exist to do this
conversion. my favourite is a 20kb utility, called dbxconv.
also discovered several more utilities.

however, can't seem to import the address book into evolution. any body
been able to successfully do this?

meanwhile, have got the addressbook as a csv text file, and opened that
successfully into openoffice calc. so how do i get this into evolution?

:-)
LL


___
ilugd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd

Re: [ilugd] intel 845 gl chipset

[Varun Varma]

LinuxLingam wrote:
redhat8 works with intel 845 gl chipset, right?
Yup. But, IIRC I had to upgrade to XFree86 4.3 to get the video drivers 
working without having to do any funny things.

RedHat 9.0 works out of the box for 845.

tried googling, and found myself doing a google thwack(?) [is that the
right term for getting exactly one search result?]
tried a more generic search 'redhat 845' and only got about 10 results.
Ummm? I got 10,900 results for the same search.

??
< !!

Regards,
Varun Varma
---
Mindframe Software & Services Pvt. Ltd.
http://www.mindsw.com
---
___
ilugd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd

[ilugd] intel 845 gl chipset

[LinuxLingam]

redhat8 works with intel 845 gl chipset, right?

tried googling, and found myself doing a google thwack(?) [is that the
right term for getting exactly one search result?]

tried a more generic search 'redhat 845' and only got about 10 results.

??
LL


___
ilugd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd

Re: [ilugd] howto upload files to linux-delhi

[LinuxLingam]

On Fri, 2003-11-14 at 11:22, Sudev Barar wrote:

> > 
> > for mukt license, if you want people to improve and update your
> > presentations, please publish it under the gnu fdl. (gnu.org)
> > 
> > hope this helps.
> > 
> > :-)
> Total of 27MB...acceptable to Delhi ILUGD?

hey! don't tell me you have *one* impress presentation of 27mb.
maybe its a couple of files. in which case i suppose it is okay.

if 27MB, check with raj, nishikant, *and* also upload on a different
server, providing a link to that as well, in the downloads are. (just
publish the url in the description field as well).

hth

:-)
LL


___
ilugd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd

Repititive SPAM Re: [ilugd] Webdeisgner Required in Noida

[Tarun Dua]

On Fri, 2003-11-14 at 13:11, amit sharma wrote:
> Webdesigner with minimum of 2 years experience in
> html, dhtml, jsp, flash etc. required for a ltd.
> company in noida.
> 
> intrested candidates may contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> please do mention the expected salary.
> 
> amit sharma
I guess you have already posted that to the list.
And there is no commercial tag to this as well.
list Gods where art thou ?
-Tarun


___
ilugd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd

[ilugd] Webdeisgner Required in Noida

[amit sharma]

Webdesigner with minimum of 2 years experience in
html, dhtml, jsp, flash etc. required for a ltd.
company in noida.

intrested candidates may contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

please do mention the expected salary.

amit sharma



__
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree

___
ilugd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd