Re: [Cooker] Why ext3fs is a default fs, not ReiserFS?

2002-10-11 Thread Dave Fluri
vendredi, le 11 octobre, 2002 18h21, Todd Lyons a écrit: > Dave Fluri wrote on Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 12:35:03AM -0400 : > > I've never had a lick of trouble with either ext3 or ReiserFS. After a > > couple of years of trouble-free use of ReiserFS, I installed Debian on >

Re: [Cooker] Why ext3fs is a default fs, not ReiserFS?

2002-10-10 Thread Dave Fluri
jeudi. le 10 octobre 10, 2002 04h12, Per ?yvind Karlsen a écrit: > ReiserFS is still not to be trusted.. > I have experienced this for myself and alot of other people are > complaining too... > > oh well, back to work*sigh* > > Aleksander Adamowski wrote: > > In the 9.0 installer, during the "Setu

Re: [Cooker] MakeCD problems: Warly, do you have a workaround?

2002-10-09 Thread Dave Fluri
mardi, le 08 octobre, 2002 06h19, Leon Brooks a écrit: > On Tuesday 08 October 2002 03:15 am, Warly wrote: > > Leon Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> On Friday 04 October 2002 01:47 am, Warly wrote: > >> > >> I found at least one reason for the ISO not being created: > >>> /mnt/disk/cooker//

Re: [Cooker] devfsd.conf

2002-10-01 Thread Dave Fluri
mardi, le 01 octobre, 2002 01h38, Peter Polman a écrit: > On Monday 30 Sep 2002 2:04 pm, Biagio Lucini wrote: > > On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Now that 9.0 is out ... > > > > > > Minor spelling corrections in English version. > > > > > > > > > Initialize not initialise > > >

Re: [Cooker] About MandrakeExpert

2002-03-05 Thread Dave Fluri
hing from Mandrakesoft. They say that they will pay us for support but it's hard to figure. If anyone should have received some money it's dakota (marc) or me. I can't speak for dakota but I know I've never even heard a thing from Mandrake. I've installed Debian on my box... I still have and use Mandrake but I'm doing it without expectation of recompense. Perhaps I was misguided to expect otherwise... Dave Fluri North Bay, Ontario Canada

Re: [Cooker] Aurora crash at boot

2001-12-20 Thread Dave Fluri
Le mercredi 19 décembre, 2001, Chuck a écrit : > Indeed. > Aurora is unneeded, hides useful boot-time system messages, > and is oft broken. So why not ->CAN-IT<- once and for all? I'm so happy to hear that I am not alone in my assessment. I've often wondered precisely WHY we have Aurora. What p