Keld Jørn Simonsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
better ntp support, configurable out of mcc
it already is, but from the time wizard, not from the server
section
where is that, then? It might just be my blind eyes.
I try mcc, go to system, then launch the set date and time.
It is not
Keld Jørn Simonsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
better ntp support, configurable out of mcc
it already is, but from the time wizard, not from the server section
Just noting in passing, this is a genuine problem, even for cookers.
My system administators installed some patches to reject
On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 14:03:47 +
Thierry Vignaud [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
you need to install the drakwizard package.
I tied using the time server in drakwizard, on multiple occasions and
with all listed Time Severs, but all I get is
Warning: The time servers are not responding..etc.
Have
- Original Message -
From: Thierry Vignaud [EMAIL PROTECTED] where is that, then?
It might just be my blind eyes.
I try mcc, go to system, then launch the set date and time.
It is not there.
you need to install the drakwizard package.
This also could be improved by adding a
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 02:03:47PM +, Thierry Vignaud wrote:
Keld Jørn Simonsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
better ntp support, configurable out of mcc
it already is, but from the time wizard, not from the server
section
where is that, then? It might just be my blind eyes.
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 02:05:16PM +, Thierry Vignaud wrote:
Keld Jørn Simonsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
better ntp support, configurable out of mcc
it already is, but from the time wizard, not from the server section
Just noting in passing, this is a genuine problem, even
Keld Jørn Simonsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
better ntp support, configurable out of mcc
it already is, but from the time wizard, not from the server
section
where is that, then? It might just be my blind eyes.
I try mcc, go to system, then launch the set date and
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 08:25:01PM +, Thierry Vignaud wrote:
Keld Jørn Simonsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
better ntp support, configurable out of mcc
it already is, but from the time wizard, not from the server
section
where is that, then? It might just be my
Charles A Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
you need to install the drakwizard package.
I tied using the time server in drakwizard, on multiple occasions
and with all listed Time Severs, but all I get is
Warning: The time servers are not responding..etc.
Have only been successful if
ef2 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I try mcc, go to system, then launch the set date and time.
It is not there.
you need to install the drakwizard package.
This also could be improved by adding a server tools entry to
check in the drakconf menu. So that the first time, it would install
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 01:34:46PM +0200, Thierry Vignaud wrote:
Keld Jørn Simonsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
better ntp support, configurable out of mcc
it already is, but from the time wizard, not from the server section
where is that, then? It might just be my blind eyes.
I try mcc, go
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 01:34:46PM +0200, Thierry Vignaud wrote:
Keld Jørn Simonsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
better ntp support, configurable out of mcc
it already is, but from the time wizard, not from the server section
Just noting in passing, this is a genuine problem, even for
Keld Jørn Simonsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
better ntp support, configurable out of mcc
it already is, but from the time wizard, not from the server section
harmonization of drakx and mcc - using the same wizards etc.
code consolidation will always be a goal
Ainsi parlait Vincent Danen :
BTW, I actually need a solution for this too. At present, all samba
builds from the source release get identical %{version}-%{release} which
is probably a bad thing ...
%define version 3.0
%define release 1
%define distro 92
Version: %version
Release:
Ainsi parlait Austin :
On 09/26/2003 09:38:37 AM, Götz Waschk wrote:
It would be nice if packages would include an implicit epoch tag, so a
package build on 9.2 will always be newer than one for 9.1 with the
same version and release tags.
Hmmm, this is a neat idea. At present, any mdk
On 10/01/2003 08:23:10 AM, Guillaume Rousse wrote:
That's exactly why you shouldn't use individual packages, but only trust
repositories. And this is a repository job to sort package by distribution
target.
You don't have to tell me that. You have to tell that to thousands of RedHat
converts
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 02:34:02PM -0400, Austin wrote:
On 09/26/2003 03:17:02 PM, Luca Berra wrote:
It would be nice if packages would include an implicit epoch tag, so a
package build on 9.2 will always be newer than one for 9.1 with the
same version and release tags.
it would conflict with
.. my personal guess for new Mandrake 10 (or 9.3?!?!)...
- GCC 3.3.2 or better GCC 3.4.x
- Linux Kernel 2.6.x
- New KDE 3.2.x
- New Lib QT 3.2.x
- improved ACPI support! (Now is very bad!)
- improved Notebook/Laptop support with hibernate/suspend native support
(for me is very very
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Luca Landi wrote:
.. my personal guess for new Mandrake 10 (or 9.3?!?!)...
- GCC 3.3.2 or better GCC 3.4.x
Requesting a specific version is pointless. What if 3.5 is stable alredady?
- Linux Kernel 2.6.x
What if 2.6.0 isn't out yet?
- New KDE
Buchan Milne wrote:
Instead of discussing version numbers, maybe you would like to discuss
things we actually have control over?
A better draksound : I proposed already an automatic serial test of OSS
and ALSA drivers.
Drakxservices : sort them by themes, and add more precise help to
Eric Fernandez wrote:
Buchan Milne wrote:
Instead of discussing version numbers, maybe you would like to discuss
things we actually have control over?
A better draksound : I proposed already an automatic serial test of
OSS and ALSA drivers.
Drakxservices : sort them by themes, and add more
On Fri, 2003-09-26 at 11:37, Luca Landi wrote:
.. my personal guess for new Mandrake 10 (or 9.3?!?!)...
- GCC 3.3.2 or better GCC 3.4.x
- Linux Kernel 2.6.x
- New KDE 3.2.x
- New Lib QT 3.2.x
- improved ACPI support! (Now is very bad!)
Um. MDK doesn't write acpi support. acpi4linux write
,
Luca
- Original Message -
From: Adam Williamson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 1:59 PM
Subject: Re: [Cooker] [Mandrake 10] An Idea for next MDK 10...
On Fri, 2003-09-26 at 11:37, Luca Landi wrote:
.. my personal guess for new Mandrake 10 (or 9.3
My 2 øre for mdk 10:
better drakbakup support (it has already be greatly improved), including
wizard setup for automatic backup (to disk)
better ntp support, configurable out of mcc
better setup for terminal-server, and this setup included in mcc
pxe supported directly with terminal-server.
On Fri, 26 Sep 2003, Keld [iso-8859-1] Jørn Simonsen wrote:
My 2 øre for mdk 10:
better drakbakup support (it has already be greatly improved), including
wizard setup for automatic backup (to disk)
I've got your notes on this one. Will look at it.
better setup for terminal-server, and
Am Freitag, 26. September 2003, 15:14:50 Uhr MET, schrieb Keld Jørn Simonsen:
configurability of a contrib source out of postinstall in DrakX
This is a good idea. I hope the suits don't decide against this to
protect the added value of their powerpack DVDs.
possiblity to nuke files with
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Keld Jørn Simonsen wrote:
My 2 øre for mdk 10:
configurability of a contrib source out of postinstall in DrakX
I would like to be able to specify an update source (since we have a
local internal mirror, and bandwidth to official mirrors is both
On 09/26/2003 09:38:37 AM, Götz Waschk wrote:
It would be nice if packages would include an implicit epoch tag, so a
package build on 9.2 will always be newer than one for 9.1 with the
same version and release tags.
Hmmm, this is a neat idea. At present, any mdk rpm you grab off the net, you
Le ven 26/09/2003 à 12:32, Austin a écrit :
On 09/26/2003 09:38:37 AM, Götz Waschk wrote:
It would be nice if packages would include an implicit epoch tag, so a
package build on 9.2 will always be newer than one for 9.1 with the
same version and release tags.
Hmmm, this is a neat idea.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Austin wrote:
On 09/26/2003 09:38:37 AM, Götz Waschk wrote:
It would be nice if packages would include an implicit epoch tag, so a
package build on 9.2 will always be newer than one for 9.1 with the
same version and release tags.
Hmmm, this is
On Fri Sep 26, 2003 at 03:38:37PM +0200, Götz Waschk wrote:
configurability of a contrib source out of postinstall in DrakX
This is a good idea. I hope the suits don't decide against this to
protect the added value of their powerpack DVDs.
possiblity to nuke files with standard virus
On Fri Sep 26, 2003 at 05:57:52PM +0200, Buchan Milne wrote:
It would be nice if packages would include an implicit epoch tag, so a
package build on 9.2 will always be newer than one for 9.1 with the
same version and release tags.
Hmmm, this is a neat idea. At present, any mdk rpm
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 03:52:18PM +0200, Buchan Milne wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Keld Jørn Simonsen wrote:
My 2 øre for mdk 10:
configurability of a contrib source out of postinstall in DrakX
I would like to be able to specify an update source (since we
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Keld Jørn Simonsen wrote:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 03:52:18PM +0200, Buchan Milne wrote:
Keld Jørn Simonsen wrote:
My 2 øre for mdk 10:
installing out of a disk .img with all boot facilities as a standard
install way.
Can you explain this one more?
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 03:38:37PM +0200, Götz Waschk wrote:
Which leads me to another problem: backported packages: Projects like
plf sometimes need to backport cooker or contrib packages to the
stable distribution. This can lead to problems when upgrading to the
next stable distribution, when
On 09/26/2003 03:17:02 PM, Luca Berra wrote:
It would be nice if packages would include an implicit epoch tag, so a
package build on 9.2 will always be newer than one for 9.1 with the
same version and release tags.
it would conflict with epochs set for other purposes
Not if all our packages were
36 matches
Mail list logo
