Re: [Cooker] XFree-4.0.2-11 doesn't work anymore

2001-03-19 Thread Frederic Lepied
Joakim Bodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Michael Betz wrote: > > > Upgrading to the latest XFree4.2 packages left me without > > an X display with my Matrox G200. System's coming up fine, > > even the X Server is starting without any complains but > > then it seems to just turn off the video s

Re: [Cooker] XFree-4.0.2-11 doesn't work anymore

2001-03-16 Thread Joakim Bodin
Michael Betz wrote: > Upgrading to the latest XFree4.2 packages left me without > an X display with my Matrox G200. System's coming up fine, > even the X Server is starting without any complains but > then it seems to just turn off the video signal and > my monitor goes into power save mode. All

[Cooker] XFree-4.0.2-11 doesn't work anymore

2001-03-16 Thread Michael Betz
Upgrading to the latest XFree4.2 packages left me without an X display with my Matrox G200. System's coming up fine, even the X Server is starting without any complains but then it seems to just turn off the video signal and my monitor goes into power save mode. All earlier releases worked fine.

[Cooker] XFree 4.0.2-8mdk compiling with kernel(-headers) 2.4.2-8mdk

2001-03-12 Thread RA
System: Mdk 7.2 (gcc-2.95.2-12mdk), kernel 2.4.2-8mdk I had to modify some *_dma.c of XFree 4.0.2-8mdk for successful compilation (with agp support). The patch is attached. --- XFree86-4.0.2/xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/os-support/linux/drm/kernel/gamma_dma.c.old Fri Mar 9 17:36:01

[Cooker] XFree 4.0.2-8mdk compiling with kernel(-headers) 2.4.2-8mdk

2001-03-09 Thread RA
System: Mdk 7.2 (gcc-2.95.2-12mdk), kernel 2.4.2-8mdk I had to modify some *_dma.c of XFree 4.0.2-8mdk for successful compilation. The patch is attached. XFree86-4.0.2-dma_tqnext.patch.bz2

Re: [Cooker] XFree-4.0.2 fonts antialising and Qt patches?

2001-02-22 Thread Daouda LO
"Andrej Borsenkow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > Andrej Borsenkow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > I've read that to enable use of fonts antialising in KDE you need Qt > > > compiled with special patches. Is it correct? Does Qt in cooker include > > > these patches? > > > > Nope , w

RE: [Cooker] XFree-4.0.2 fonts antialising and Qt patches?

2001-02-21 Thread Andrej Borsenkow
> > Andrej Borsenkow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I've read that to enable use of fonts antialising in KDE you need Qt > > compiled with special patches. Is it correct? Does Qt in cooker include > > these patches? > > Nope , we remove them since it's in alpha stage . > You mean to say th

Re: [Cooker] XFree-4.0.2 fonts antialising and Qt patches?

2001-02-21 Thread Daouda LO
Andrej Borsenkow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I've read that to enable use of fonts antialising in KDE you need Qt > compiled with special patches. Is it correct? Does Qt in cooker include > these patches? Nope , we remove them since it's in alpha stage .

Re: Fwd: Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2 (small rant) ;)

2001-01-08 Thread Emmanuel Szabados
andrake user, I felicitate the Mandrake team, contributors and Tim for there Initiative and patient daily work. Emmanuel Szabados-. Tim McKenzie wrote: > -- Forwarded Message ------ > Subject: Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2 (small rant) ;) > Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 23:24:41 -0500

[Cooker] XFree-4.0.2 & mga & alpha

2000-12-24 Thread Stefan van der Eijk
XFree-4.0.2 doesn't run on my alpha. The last 4.0.1za versions worked fine though. This is the output I'm getting when I run "startx". The alpha (miata) has a 4Mb Matrox Millienium II card in it... The problem probably lies in the mga_drv.o module (see the error messages below): Any idea's? Ste

Re: [Cooker] XFree-4.0.2

2000-12-22 Thread Robert L Martin
The trick is to make it profitable, paying not only for its own cost but for the dimunition of the revenue stream of people not buying the newest boxed sets because they already have the updates, but that is more a business and feasibility issue than a technical or moral one. -

Re: [Cooker] XFree-4.0.2

2000-12-22 Thread Stefan Yordan
Le Vendredi 22 Décembre 2000 20:59, vous avez écrit : > Not so. Here's what happens: > > FTP Connection Failed > > Description: Login incorrect. > > Seems there is no anonymous ftp to this site. The ftp is anonymous, it works, i mirrored everything, the server is just very busy. CU Stef -- '

Re: [Cooker] XFree-4.0.2

2000-12-22 Thread Ron Stodden
civileme wrote: > XFree-4.0.2 can be found (for 7.2) at > > ftp://mandragon.org/pub/mandrake Not so. Here's what happens: FTP Connection Failed Description: Login incorrect. Seems there is no anonymous ftp to this site. -- Regards, Ron. [AU]

[Cooker] XFree-4.0.2

2000-12-22 Thread civileme
Wow, what a rush! Some things need correction: KDE 2.0.1 is on /Mandrake-devel/unsupported directory for 7.2 XFree-4.0.2 can be found (for 7.2) at ftp://mandragon.org/pub/mandrake And the latter is NOT from Mandrake directly but from a LM user named Eric Guntermann. Sometimes in these discu

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-22 Thread Salane
December 2000 09:55 am, you wrote: > - Original Message - > From: "Salane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2000 8:49 PM > Subject: Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2 > > > Not only that, with some p

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-22 Thread Hoyt
- Original Message - From: "Salane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2000 8:49 PM Subject: Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2 > Not only that, with some patience and reading of ..oh what maybe > mandrakeuser.org o

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-22 Thread Pedro Rosa
Franck Martin wrote: > I liked the system of Walnut, where you could subscribe for several years to > slackware or other CDs. > > I think Mandrake should do that online, where you receive automatically the > new version of Mandrake in the post. Nothing Fancy just the CDs in an > envelope. For us

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-21 Thread Salane
Not only that, with some patience and reading of ..oh what maybe mandrakeuser.org one can download the rpms one needs. I am on 7.2 with 4.0.2 and its working perfectly. On Thursday 21 December 2000 06:53 am, you wrote: > Christian A Strømmen [Number1/NumeroUno] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wri

RE: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-21 Thread Franck Martin
00 12:38 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2 Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > Ed Wilts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > [...] > > > I would be willing to pay a subscription fee just for the benefit of running > > Cooker! Right now I feel guilty s

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-21 Thread Arnold Troeger
Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > Ed Wilts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > [...] > > > I would be willing to pay a subscription fee just for the benefit of running > > Cooker! Right now I feel guilty since I'm not financially supporting > > Mandrake. Buying a copy in a local computer store supports

RE: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-21 Thread Steve Wray
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tim McKenzie > I might suggest a change in topic... Or perhaps a new mailing > list for rants > such as this. For those of you that have problems upgrading your > packages, > and especially for the

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-21 Thread Guillaume Cottenceau
Christian A Strømmen [Number1/NumeroUno] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thursday 21 December 2000 12:41, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > > Christian A Strømmen [Number1/NumeroUno] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Wednesday 20 December 2000 22:04, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > > > > We can't d

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-21 Thread Christian A Strømmen [Number1/NumeroUno]
On Thursday 21 December 2000 12:41, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > Christian A Strømmen [Number1/NumeroUno] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Wednesday 20 December 2000 22:04, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > > > We can't do everything. > > > > This is FAR from everything... > > You're welcomed to qu

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-21 Thread Vadim Plessky
Thursday 21 December 2000 15:05, ?? : | Vadim Plessky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > | | > | This is currently under question here at MandrakeSoft :-). | > | > I hope not for Cooker? | > Otherwise, it will be really hard to achieve *stability* | > What I like in Mandra

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-21 Thread Tim McKenzie
I might suggest a change in topic... Or perhaps a new mailing list for rants such as this. For those of you that have problems upgrading your packages, and especially for the ones that are starting to compare MandrakeSoft so a certain large monopoly type "business" let me point out one simple f

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-21 Thread Mark Hillary
llary - Original Message - From: "Vincent Danen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2000 11:12 PM Subject: Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2 > On Wed Dec 20, 2000 at 11:47:16PM +0100, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > > > &g

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-21 Thread Guillaume Cottenceau
Vadim Plessky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Thursday 21 December 2000 11:58, Guillaume Cottenceau ???: > | Neal Pitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > | > I'd pay a subscription fee for a service that backported certain > | > "interesting" packages from cooker to the release version if it

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-21 Thread Vadim Plessky
Thursday 21 December 2000 11:58, Guillaume Cottenceau ???: | Neal Pitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > I'd pay a subscription fee for a service that backported certain | > "interesting" packages from cooker to the release version if it meant I | > could see them in say, maybe a month

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-21 Thread Michael R. Batchelor
Guillaume answered: >Neal Pitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> I'd pay a subscription fee for a service that backported certain >> "interesting" packages from cooker to the release version if it meant I >> could see them in say, maybe a month of release time. Why pay money? To >> encourage spee

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-21 Thread Guillaume Cottenceau
Ed Wilts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] > I would be willing to pay a subscription fee just for the benefit of running > Cooker! Right now I feel guilty since I'm not financially supporting > Mandrake. Buying a copy in a local computer store supports the distributor > and the store a lo

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-21 Thread Guillaume Cottenceau
Mike Perry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I would certainly be ready to part with my hard earned shekels > for a service such as Neal is suggesting, however it would be > even better if such a service also included fixes for "non security" > bugs found after the product release, and not just more

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-21 Thread Ed Wilts
On Thursday 21 December 2000 06:41, Mike Perry wrote: > I would certainly be ready to part with my hard earned shekels > for a service such as Neal is suggesting, however it would be > even better if such a service also included fixes for "non security" > bugs found after the product release, and

RE: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-21 Thread Mike Perry
l. <<<>>> The three most dangerous things are a programmer with a soldering iron, a manager who codes, and a user who gets ideas. > -Original Message- > From: Guillaume Cottenceau [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thu, December 21, 2000 13:58 > To: [EMA

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-21 Thread Guillaume Cottenceau
Neal Pitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'd pay a subscription fee for a service that backported certain > "interesting" packages from cooker to the release version if it meant I > could see them in say, maybe a month of release time. Why pay money? To > encourage speedy releases, and to benif

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-21 Thread Guillaume Cottenceau
"David Foresman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] > software like kde2.1, gnome 1.2, kernel 2.4, and xfree 4.0.2 should be ^^ Did someone tell you that it's not yet even *released* as a stable version?? -- Guillaume Cottenceau - http://us.mandra

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-21 Thread Guillaume Cottenceau
Christian A Strømmen [Number1/NumeroUno] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] > I'm not arguing about this. What I'm arguing about is that Mandrake seems to > "refuse" to release packages to the customers, while almost every other > distribution out there does this. I'm not so sure that every

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-21 Thread Guillaume Cottenceau
Christian A Strømmen [Number1/NumeroUno] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wednesday 20 December 2000 22:04, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > > We can't do everything. > > This is FAR from everything... You're welcomed to quit this mailing list and go somewhere where people approach the infinity be

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-21 Thread Vadim Plessky
Thursday 21 December 2000 08:19, ?? : | I'd pay a subscription fee for a service that backported certain | "interesting" packages from cooker to the release version if it meant I | could see them in say, maybe a month of release time. Why pay money? | To encourage speedy releases,

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-21 Thread Neal Pitts
I'd pay a subscription fee for a service that backported certain "interesting" packages from cooker to the release version if it meant I could see them in say, maybe a month of release time. Why pay money? To encourage speedy releases, and to benifit from the integration that Mandrake does w

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-20 Thread David Foresman
ginal Message - From: "Christian A Strømmen [Number1/NumeroUno]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Guillaume Cottenceau" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Godin, Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2000 10:53 PM Subject:

Fwd: Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2 (small rant) ;)

2000-12-20 Thread Tim McKenzie
-- Forwarded Message -- Subject: Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2 (small rant) ;) Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 23:24:41 -0500 From: Tim McKenzie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Wednesday 20 December 2000 23:53, you wrote: > On Wednesday 20 December 2000 22:04,

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-20 Thread Christian A Strømmen [Number1/NumeroUno]
On Thursday 21 December 2000 05:34, Ed Wilts wrote: > In my opinion, they have thought about it. Now it's time for YOU to think > about it. A Mandrake Linux release is a tested, integrated release. > You're making the silly assumption that each package is totally > independent, and this is inco

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-20 Thread Ed Wilts
On Wednesday 20 December 2000 22:53, you wrote: > On Wednesday 20 December 2000 22:04, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > > We can't do everything. > > This is FAR from everything... > > > We do use MandrakeUpdate for security updates. It already costs resources > > because changing something means: >

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-20 Thread Christian A Strømmen [Number1/NumeroUno]
On Wednesday 20 December 2000 22:04, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > We can't do everything. This is FAR from everything... > We do use MandrakeUpdate for security updates. It already costs resources > because changing something means: > > - doing it for a number of old distribs (7.2, 7.1, 7.0, 6.

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-20 Thread Vincent Danen
On Wed Dec 20, 2000 at 11:47:16PM +0100, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > > > We do use MandrakeUpdate for security updates. It already costs resources > > > because changing something means: > > > > > > - doing it for a number of old distribs (7.2, 7.1, 7.0, 6.1) > > > > Don't forget 6.0... we st

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-20 Thread Guillaume Cottenceau
"Hoyt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] > Yes, it's a lot of work, but it gives the impression that you don't > support your product in the way a consumer understands support. It's > also an argument for not having so many point releases and further > illustrates that Linux is really still in

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-20 Thread Guillaume Cottenceau
Vincent Danen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed Dec 20, 2000 at 10:04:24PM +0100, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > > > We can't do everything. > > > > We do use MandrakeUpdate for security updates. It already costs resources > > because changing something means: > > > > - doing it for a number

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-20 Thread Shalrath
> Christian A Strømmen [Number1/NumeroUno] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > What's up with Mandrake??? Why is EVERYTHING added to cooker and not to > > normal updates? The use of MandrakeUpdate seems to be quite unnecessary > > since Mandrake doesn't add stuff to it.. Everything seems to be i

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-20 Thread Hoyt
- Original Message - From: "Guillaume Cottenceau" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Godin, Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2000 4:04 PM Subject: Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-20 Thread Vincent Danen
On Wed Dec 20, 2000 at 10:04:24PM +0100, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > We can't do everything. > > We do use MandrakeUpdate for security updates. It already costs resources > because changing something means: > > - doing it for a number of old distribs (7.2, 7.1, 7.0, 6.1) Don't forget 6.0...

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-20 Thread Guillaume Cottenceau
Christian A Strømmen [Number1/NumeroUno] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] > What's up with Mandrake??? Why is EVERYTHING added to cooker and not to > normal updates? The use of MandrakeUpdate seems to be quite unnecessary > since Mandrake doesn't add stuff to it.. Everything seems to be

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-20 Thread Christian A Strømmen [Number1/NumeroUno]
On Wednesday 20 December 2000 17:06, Godin, Paul wrote: > XFree 4.0.2 is out, will it be incorporated in cooker. > > Paul Godin What's up with Mandrake??? Why is EVERYTHING added to cooker and not to normal updates? The use of MandrakeUpdate seems to be quite unnecessary since Mandrake doesn

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-20 Thread mosfet
BTW, it may be a good idea to update the ATI and fb stuff from CVS. Keith Packard made some hacks that allows the new Render extension to be run on ATI Mach 64 cards, which are pretty popular. It had to happen right after 4.0.2 because of the freeze. This extension allows users to use antialias

RE: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-20 Thread Godin, Paul
Title: RE: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2 > XFree 4.0.2 is out, will it be incorporated in cooker. > First, could you please configure your Outlook to not send HTML on > this list.. DONE > Second, XF 4.0.2 has been uploaded earlier today by Fred Lepied.. Already advised. -- Fré

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-20 Thread Frederic Crozat
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Godin, Paul") writes: > XFree 4.0.2 is out, will it be incorporated in cooker. First, could you please configure your Outlook to not send HTML on this list.. Second, XF 4.0.2 has been uploaded earlier today by Fred Lepied.. -- Frédéric Crozat MandrakeSoft

Re: [Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-20 Thread Antony Suter
> "Godin, Paul" wrote: > > XFree 4.0.2 is out, will it be incorporated in cooker. > > Paul Godin Too late! :) Its already there. -- - Antony Suter ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) "Examiner" openpgp:71ADFC87 - "...to condense fact from the vapor of nuance."

[Cooker] Xfree 4.0.2

2000-12-20 Thread Godin, Paul
Title: Xfree 4.0.2 XFree 4.0.2 is out, will it be incorporated in cooker. Paul Godin