On Fri, 2003-06-27 at 14:16, FACORAT Fabrice wrote:
> True.
> On top of that we can think a little bit about rpmdrake and linux
> system. With linux user can't easily install an app if the app is :
> 1°/ a package that requires others libs
? That's exactly what rpmdrake is for.
> 2°/ not a rpm
>
> PS : please, no one, no offense, but I'm becoming rather tired to
> discuss that point again and again. I think points are
> clear, enough time has been lost on that, and we now have
> other interesting subjects to discuss.
No offense taken, fair answer :)
Do the changes, and w
Eric Fernandez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >Yes, why not having rpmdrake-1 back? :))
>
> :)
> But actually the solution to make rpmdrake installer search in
> installed by default is, finally, exactly what rpmdrake 1 was
> doing !! You will have both installed and to-be-installed
"exactly", I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
FACORAT Fabrice wrote:
> Le jeu 26/06/2003 à 10:09, Eric Fernandez a écrit :
>
> True.
> On top of that we can think a little bit about rpmdrake and linux
> system. With linux user can't easily install an app if the app is :
> 1°/ a package that requi
Le jeu 26/06/2003 à 10:09, Eric Fernandez a écrit :
> But actually the solution to make rpmdrake installer search in installed
> by default is, finally, exactly what rpmdrake 1 was doing !! You will
> have both installed and to-be-installed packages in the same search list !
> The point was : why
Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
"Good idea" was rather refering to showing installed software in
searches, not specifically to providing a checkbox option for it.
And I said I think best solution would be to do it by default.
Why not doing a "browse packages" interface, independent from any
install
"Eric Fernandez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> -It would be nice if by default rpmdrake would show software that is
> >> installed. IMHO, there should be an options dialog, which has things
> >> like "show installed software in searches".
> >
> >It's a good idea[1] but I still don't see how to
Lyvim Xaphir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> (utilizing user input). I personally believe this was a decision handed
> down from management ("ergonomics team") and not a developer's decision;
> which I stand ready to be corrected on this from Buchan, GC, or whomever
> else may have better historic
Le mar 24/06/2003 à 11:15, Eric Fernandez a écrit :
> Why not doing a "browse packages" interface, independent from any
> install/uninstall consideration, with all information we can find in the
> install rpmdrake. And then depending on the fact the package is already
> installed or not, there wou
>> -It would be nice if by default rpmdrake would show software that is
>> installed. IMHO, there should be an options dialog, which has things
>> like "show installed software in searches".
>
>It's a good idea[1] but I still don't see how to integrate well
>an options dialog. I don't want to add a
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 05:02:49PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On 17 Jun 2003, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
>
> > > mandrakeclub (or do a telephone poll for registered users, but that will
> > > be more expensive).
> >
> > I don't like mandrakeclub much.
> why? This is ofcourse a bit oftopi
On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 14:37, Lyvim Xaphir wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 05:54, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> > No, Lyvim. For everyone else on this list, this is a simple practical
> > matter of what is the best way for rpmdrake to function. No-one on this
> > list, to the best of my knowledge, bein
Am Samstag, 21. Juni 2003 01:38 schrieb Pierre Jarillon:
> Le Samedi 21 Juin 2003 00:39, Steffen Barszus a écrit :
> > 1) synaptic
> > -
> > ( a newer screenshot from debian-3.0 :
> > http://linuxinstall.org/screenshots/release-3.0/synaptic.jpg)
> >
> > It is for softwaremanagment , inc
Am Samstag, 21. Juni 2003 01:49 schrieb w9ya:
> That's what I was saying !
>
> (Now be prepared for some flames.)
>
> Bob
Never intended to flame. Its just my opinion from "outside" the discussion.
Steffen
Am Samstag, 21. Juni 2003 02:49 schrieb Lyvim Xaphir:
> This is absolutely correct.
>
> > Looking to the "outside world" only to interfaces are somewhat comparable
> > to rpmdrake-1.4-alike.
>
> Correct again. Look at Windows 98SR2 at the software "Add/Remove
> Programs" applet in the control pan
On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 18:39, Steffen Barszus wrote:
> Am Freitag, 20. Juni 2003 21:36 schrieb Buchan Milne:
> >
> > IMHO, the fact that you need 17 screenshots says enough about it's
> > complexity, and although there seem to be some nice features
> > (disk-free-space meter and it seems to be able
That's what I was saying !
(Now be prepared for some flames.)
Bob
On Friday 20 June 2003 05:39 pm, Steffen Barszus wrote:
> Am Freitag, 20. Juni 2003 21:36 schrieb Buchan Milne:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Steffen Barszus wrote:
> > > Am Freitag, 20. Juni 2003
Le Samedi 21 Juin 2003 00:39, Steffen Barszus a écrit :
> 1) synaptic
> -
> ( a newer screenshot from debian-3.0 :
> http://linuxinstall.org/screenshots/release-3.0/synaptic.jpg)
>
> It is for softwaremanagment , includes as far as I can see source managment
> and looks very powerfull
Am Freitag, 20. Juni 2003 21:36 schrieb Buchan Milne:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Steffen Barszus wrote:
> > Am Freitag, 20. Juni 2003 20:26 schrieb Buchan Milne:
> >
> > [... UI review ]
> >
> > SuSE 8.1 as far as I understood. (http://lwn.net/Articles/10061/)
>
>
Buchan Milne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> BTW, if anything constructive is going to come from this, someone needs
> to put this somewhere where it won't be forgotten, either in a wiki of
> some description (cooker?) or in bugzilla (BTW, this is one of my issues
> with hugs discussions on cooker,
Buchan Milne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> -It would be nice if by default rpmdrake would show software that is
> installed. IMHO, there should be an options dialog, which has things
> like "show installed software in searches".
It's a good idea[1] but I still don't see how to integrate well
an o
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Steffen Barszus wrote:
> Am Freitag, 20. Juni 2003 20:26 schrieb Buchan Milne:
>
> [... UI review ]
>
>>SuSE
>>-
>>I haven't used SuSE much, and can't find a screenshot now ...
>
>
> Here I can help out.
>
> http://www.suse.de/~sh/YaST2-Packag
well, can you place your document on the wiki ?
> Synaptic
>
> http://distro.conectiva.com.br/prjs/synaptic/filter.jpg
> (I don't know how recent this is ...)
very very old :)
> Ok, even for a pretty advanced user, this is serisously complicated,
> and overly so (IMHO). The UI toolkit i
Am Freitag, 20. Juni 2003 20:26 schrieb Buchan Milne:
[... UI review ]
> SuSE
> -
> I haven't used SuSE much, and can't find a screenshot now ...
Here I can help out.
http://www.suse.de/~sh/YaST2-Package-Manager/screen-shots.html .This is from
SuSE 8.1 as far as I understood. (http:/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
w9ya wrote:
> On Friday 20 June 2003 12:22 pm, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Now that is very funny. There aren't any bad Mandrake rpms. and just not
> possible to create one eh ?
>
Not without being spammed to death ;-) (I get more spam from rpm-bots
tha
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
w9ya wrote:
> On Friday 20 June 2003 03:18 am, Buchan Milne wrote:
>
>>In summary
>>- -the fact that some people here find urpmi more convenient doens't mean
>>we think newbies should use it, but it means we don't use rpmdrake much
>>- -Windows isn't m
On Friday 20 June 2003 12:56 pm, Levi Ramsey wrote:
> On Fri Jun 20 11:22 -0500, w9ya wrote:
> > Finally; and I cannot be any more specific that this. Why not make a
> > better tool than Windows has, so new users can clearly see a superiority
> > right off the bat. Make it gui and play in their wor
On Friday 20 June 2003 12:22 pm, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 16:50, w9ya wrote:
> > > > I *AM* saying that a user watching me install could easily think it
> > > > was too hard. And I will maintain that having to hit all these damn
> > > > buttons, in the right order, to use the
On Fri Jun 20 11:22 -0500, w9ya wrote:
> Finally; and I cannot be any more specific that this. Why not make a better
> tool than Windows has, so new users can clearly see a superiority right off
> the bat. Make it gui and play in their world -view.
The beauty of Open Source and Free Software is
On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 16:50, w9ya wrote:
> > > I *AM* saying that a user watching me install could easily think it was
> > > too hard. And I will maintain that having to hit all these damn buttons,
> > > in the right order, to use the rpmdrake tool to find, get, and then
> > > install a program is
On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 14:37, Lyvim Xaphir wrote:
> It was never a simple matter because it involved the public at large, it
> *is* a free public debate involving history and different ideas about
> the best way for rpmdrake to function, and the fact that we all have
> different ideas on this subje
On Friday 20 June 2003 08:02 am, Greg Meyer wrote:
> Forward to Cooker. I did it again.
>
> On Friday 20 June 2003 12:38 am, w9ya wrote:
> > Well the issues you are talking about : "package management" and "query"
> > have little to nothing to do with the actual installation process in ANY
> > ope
On Thursday 19 June 2003 04:50 pm, Buchan Milne wrote:
>
>
> > On Wednesday 18 June 2003 04:27 am, Buchan Milne wrote:
> >> >>find it easier as one. Personally I never use it since urpmi is my
> >>
> >> best freind now
> >>
> >> > Oh yeah, teach them urmpi and command line...lol.
> >>
> >> Did Gr
On Friday 20 June 2003 03:18 am, Buchan Milne wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> w9ya wrote:
> > On Thursday 19 June 2003 04:50 pm, Buchan Milne wrote:
> >>So packages on a CD don't count? Again, I do agree that users should be
> >>able to see what software is installed, b
On Friday 20 June 2003 03:18 am, Buchan Milne wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> w9ya wrote:
> > On Thursday 19 June 2003 04:50 pm, Buchan Milne wrote:
> >>So packages on a CD don't count? Again, I do agree that users should be
> >>able to see what software is installed, b
Well the issues you are talking about : "package management" and "query" have
little to nothing to do with the actual installation process in ANY operating
system from a user's standpoint. So
I think the real issue we have been talking about is NOT installation at all.
But the rpm-drake stu
On Friday 20 June 2003 08:02 am, Greg Meyer wrote:
> Forward to Cooker. I did it again.
>
> On Friday 20 June 2003 12:38 am, w9ya wrote:
> > Well the issues you are talking about : "package management" and "query"
> > have little to nothing to do with the actual installation process in ANY
> > ope
On Thursday 19 June 2003 04:50 pm, Buchan Milne wrote:
>
>
> > On Wednesday 18 June 2003 04:27 am, Buchan Milne wrote:
> >> >>find it easier as one. Personally I never use it since urpmi is my
> >>
> >> best freind now
> >>
> >> > Oh yeah, teach them urmpi and command line...lol.
> >>
> >> Did Gr
On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 05:54, Adam Williamson wrote:
> No, Lyvim. For everyone else on this list, this is a simple practical
> matter of what is the best way for rpmdrake to function. No-one on this
> list, to the best of my knowledge, being an automaton, we all inevitably
> have different ideas on
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
w9ya wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 June 2003 10:50 pm, Greg Meyer wrote:
>
>>I think it is interesting that some think it is easier as two, while
others
>>find it easier as one. Personally I never use it since urpmi is my best
>>freind now
>
> Oh yeah, teach
Forward to Cooker. I did it again.
On Friday 20 June 2003 12:38 am, w9ya wrote:
> Well the issues you are talking about : "package management" and "query"
> have little to nothing to do with the actual installation process in ANY
> operating system from a user's standpoint. So
>
> I think th
On Thu, 2003-06-19 at 18:04, Lyvim Xaphir wrote:
> It is pretty well perceived by the general population, from what I see,
> that rpmdrake was redesigned for beginners. The fact that the decision
> had a rationale or the fact that the decision was acted on are not facts
> that are in dispute. Th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
w9ya wrote:
> On Thursday 19 June 2003 04:50 pm, Buchan Milne wrote:
>
>>So packages on a CD don't count? Again, I do agree that users should be
>>able to see what software is installed, but
>>
>>-kpackage does do this, as does gnorpm (if it will curr
> > IMO the kernel should ignore unrecognized options instead of
> > failing
>
> not sure of that, if i have an option that has a meaning, and it
> changes name (for whatever reason) I'd like to be notified early, not
> having to hunt problem for an option that was ignored.
the kernel should igno
On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 00:38, w9ya wrote:
> Well the issues you are talking about : "package management" and "query" have
> little to nothing to do with the actual installation process in ANY operating
> system from a user's standpoint. So
>
> I think the real issue we have been talking about
On Thu, 2003-06-19 at 06:44, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> "MEISCH,CORY (HP-Vancouver,ex1)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Without getting too many feathers ruffled, it does seem to me that
> > enhancement requests seem to fall on deaf ears.
> >
> > I have tried other distros and Mandrake is t
Well the issues you are talking about : "package management" and "query" have
little to nothing to do with the actual installation process in ANY operating
system from a user's standpoint. So
I think the real issue we have been talking about is NOT installation at all.
But the rpm-drake stu
Forwarding to cooker since I sent it to w9ya personally in error. This
happened because I was forgetful and did not workaround his reply-to settings
as he requested.
On Thursday 19 June 2003 05:29 pm, w9ya wrote:
> Or i.e. yes, it was implied, otherwise why bring it up in a
> discussion about n
On Thu, 2003-06-19 at 06:44, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> "MEISCH,CORY (HP-Vancouver,ex1)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Without getting too many feathers ruffled, it does seem to me that
> > enhancement requests seem to fall on deaf ears.
> >
> > I have tried other distros and Mandrake is t
On Thursday 19 June 2003 01:02 pm, andre wrote:
>
> It may not be the best example. But the number of people who can't find k3d
> in rpmdrake because it already installed is definitely non-zero
I know people that didn't know it was installed, so they downloaded it and
built it from source. In fa
On Thursday 19 June 2003 04:50 pm, Buchan Milne wrote:
>
>
> > On Wednesday 18 June 2003 04:27 am, Buchan Milne wrote:
> >> >>find it easier as one. Personally I never use it since urpmi is my
> >>
> >> best freind now
> >>
> >> > Oh yeah, teach them urmpi and command line...lol.
> >>
> >> Did Gr
> On Wednesday 18 June 2003 04:27 am, Buchan Milne wrote:
>> >>find it easier as one. Personally I never use it since urpmi is my
>> best freind now
>> >
>> > Oh yeah, teach them urmpi and command line...lol.
>>
>> Did Greg even vaguely suggest anyone else should use urpmi? Please, if
>> you don
On Wednesday 18 June 2003 04:27 am, Buchan Milne wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> w9ya wrote:
> > On Tuesday 17 June 2003 10:50 pm, Greg Meyer wrote:
> >>I think it is interesting that some think it is easier as two, while
>
> others
>
> >>find it easier as one. Persona
Luca Berra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > IMO the kernel should ignore unrecognized options instead of
> > failing
>
> not sure of that, if i have an option that has a meaning, and it
> changes name (for whatever reason) I'd like to be notified early,
> not having to hunt problem for an option t
On Thursday 19 June 2003 18:08, Buchan Milne wrote:
> andre wrote:
> > On Wednesday 18 June 2003 11:42, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> >>Buchan's suggestion was not for selecting rpm's, it was for
> >>allowing non-root users to browse, so that afterwards they can
> >>request software installation to
Pixel wrote:
Guillaume Cottenceau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Pixel do you think we can add mode=0644 for cd and dvd drives, in
the install, with the above mentioned addition in mount.c?
no pb.
IMO the kernel should ignore unrecognized options instead of failing
not sure of that, if i have
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
andre wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 June 2003 11:42, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
>
>>Buchan's suggestion was not for selecting rpm's, it was for
>>allowing non-root users to browse, so that afterwards they can
>>request software installation to the machine'
Le jeu 19/06/2003 à 07:08, Götz Waschk a écrit :
> Am Mittwoch, 18. Juni 2003, 12:51:48 Uhr MET, schrieb FACORAT Fabrice:
> > Now I just want to make an assumption : users should not have access to
> > package file list or at least for core or important or server software.
> > To my mind it is a se
Le jeu 19/06/2003 à 10:19, Guillaume Cottenceau a écrit :
> FACORAT Fabrice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Le mar 17/06/2003 à 22:10, andre a écrit :
> > > On Tuesday 17 June 2003 22:21, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Argh. "another addition to the GUI"..
> > > >
> > > More like rp
On Wednesday 18 June 2003 11:42, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> Buchan's suggestion was not for selecting rpm's, it was for
> allowing non-root users to browse, so that afterwards they can
> request software installation to the machine's administrator.
For which rpmdrake is totally inappropriate. Fo
Pixel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Guillaume Cottenceau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Pixel do you think we can add mode=0644 for cd and dvd drives, in
> > the install, with the above mentioned addition in mount.c?
>
> no pb.
>
> IMO the kernel should ignore unrecognized options instead of
The security problem only exist if you couldn't get that information in
another way. But i don't think that is the case seeing that only
/usr/sbin/glibc-post-upgrade isn't readable on my system as normal user.
Guillaume Cottenceau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Pixel do you think we can add mode=0644 for cd and dvd drives, in
> the install, with the above mentioned addition in mount.c?
no pb.
IMO the kernel should ignore unrecognized options instead of failing
"MEISCH,CORY (HP-Vancouver,ex1)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Without getting too many feathers ruffled, it does seem to me that
> enhancement requests seem to fall on deaf ears.
>
> I have tried other distros and Mandrake is the best, so I'm willing to give
> my time, talent, and opinion on the
Buchan Milne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Unfortunately, double clicking on an rpm on a CD still gives some
> problem
Because of Windows-only CD that leads to all files being
executable?
I have a suggestion for that, because I've been dealing with
fixing a similar problem for a friend of m
FACORAT Fabrice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Le mar 17/06/2003 à 22:10, andre a écrit :
> > On Tuesday 17 June 2003 22:21, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> > >
> > > Argh. "another addition to the GUI"..
> > >
> > More like rpmdrake and rpmdrake-remove are just not the right tool for
> > non-root u
Didier Herisson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Le Mercredi 18 Juin 2003 20.05, Bellegarde Cédric a écrit :
> > I think that urpmi need to introduce meta-package like we have on debian
> > with apt...
> >
> > For exemple, it will be cool to do an urpmi kde to install all kde
> > package or an urpmi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Didier Herisson wrote:
> I agree with that ! And rpmdrake should then also have a
classification by
> meta-package, allowing to add or remove some applications in those
families.
> It's already what is done during the install process, isn'it ?
Do peo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Bellegarde Cédric wrote:
> I think that urpmi need to introduce meta-package like we have on debian
> with apt...
>
> For exemple, it will be cool to do an urpmi kde to install all kde
> package or an urpmi Xwindow, urpmi gnome, ...
>
$ urpmq -i gnome
Le Mercredi 18 Juin 2003 20.05, Bellegarde Cédric a écrit :
> I think that urpmi need to introduce meta-package like we have on debian
> with apt...
>
> For exemple, it will be cool to do an urpmi kde to install all kde
> package or an urpmi Xwindow, urpmi gnome, ...
I agree with that ! And rpmdra
Am Mittwoch, 18. Juni 2003, 12:51:48 Uhr MET, schrieb FACORAT Fabrice:
> Now I just want to make an assumption : users should not have access to
> package file list or at least for core or important or server software.
> To my mind it is a security risk as users doesn't need to knwo where
> they ar
On Wed, 2003-06-18 at 15:43, MEISCH,CORY (HP-Vancouver,ex1) wrote:
> Without getting too many feathers ruffled, it does seem to me that
> enhancement requests seem to fall on deaf ears.
>
> I have tried other distros and Mandrake is the best, so I'm willing to give
> my time, talent, and opinion o
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 2:05 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Cooker] rpmdrake and newbies: they sometimes miss *installed*
software
On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 16:14, Tom Brinkman wrote:
>Ya know LX, IMO, you're gettin way out'a line. First the
I think that urpmi need to introduce meta-package like we have on debian
with apt...
For exemple, it will be cool to do an urpmi kde to install all kde
package or an urpmi Xwindow, urpmi gnome, ...
With this, installation of software will be easiest for newbies... The
actual problem is that newbi
andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tuesday 17 June 2003 22:21, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> >
> > Argh. "another addition to the GUI"..
> >
> More like rpmdrake and rpmdrake-remove are just not the right tool for
> non-root users to select rpms. I would remove your May 28 addition.
Buchan's
Le mar 17/06/2003 à 22:10, andre a écrit :
> On Tuesday 17 June 2003 22:21, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> >
> > Argh. "another addition to the GUI"..
> >
> More like rpmdrake and rpmdrake-remove are just not the right tool for
> non-root users to select rpms.
That's sounds sensible to me IMHO.
In
> 1 - The original point I was commenting on was that the 'drake'
> installer was getting more complicated by being broke into several
> sections. This is a fundamentally flaw concept for newbies to take
> on. We can disagree on this, but having more than one program to take
> care of installing an
On Tuesday 17 June 2003 10:50 pm, Greg Meyer wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 June 2003 11:28 pm, w9ya wrote:
> > Well, I will disagree for two reasons;
> >
> > 1 - The original point I was commenting on was that the 'drake' installer
> > was getting more complicated by being broke into several sections. Thi
On Tuesday 17 June 2003 11:28 pm, w9ya wrote:
>
> Well, I will disagree for two reasons;
>
> 1 - The original point I was commenting on was that the 'drake' installer
> was getting more complicated by being broke into several sections. This is
> a fundamentally flaw concept for newbies to take on.
On Tuesday 17 June 2003 09:16 pm, Greg Meyer wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 June 2003 09:37 pm, w9ya wrote:
> > Yesterday I was at a client's. I was installing software using the
> > 'drake' gui tools while they watched. The clients remarked that they were
> > sure glad they didn't have to install software
On Tuesday 17 June 2003 09:37 pm, w9ya wrote:
> Yesterday I was at a client's. I was installing software using the 'drake'
> gui tools while they watched. The clients remarked that they were sure glad
> they didn't have to install software on linux. They went on to say the they
> were use to a much
Yesterday I was at a client's. I was installing software using the 'drake' gui
tools while they watched. The clients remarked that they were sure glad they
didn't have to install software on linux. They went on to say the they were
use to a much easier install process. They are not stupid. They
For what it is worth, I liked the interface of rpmdrake from 8.2
better than the 9.0 9.1 stuff. I did complain about 8.2 at that time
that I found the install/remove being on the same button confusing.
But I find the current rpmdrake more confusing, being 4 separate
programs with much related func
On Tuesday 17 June 2003 22:21, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
>
> Argh. "another addition to the GUI"..
>
More like rpmdrake and rpmdrake-remove are just not the right tool for
non-root users to select rpms. I would remove your May 28 addition.
On Tuesday 17 June 2003 21:04, Buchan Milne wrote:
> Michael Scherer wrote:
> > Now, if you want someting more feature full, I will package
> > synaptics once apt-get will compile on cooker.
> > Then, just vote for someone to backport it in 9.1.
>
> $ urpmq -i apt
>
> [ apt ]
>
> No idea if it work
On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 16:14, Tom Brinkman wrote:
>Ya know LX, IMO, you're gettin way out'a line. First the prime
> motivation for many join'n the Club was to support free (speech)
> software, particularly MandrakeSoft. I know it was mine. That'n to
> avoid being a freeloader. Many, as myse
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Lyvim Xaphir wrote:
> Noted. But the topic is not really business strategy from my viewpoint;
> it's the impact that the Club has or does not have on development.
>
I don't think it encompasses all aspects of club effects on development,
merely the
On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 14:53, Buchan Milne wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Please note, this is a development list, if you want a list for
> "Mandrakesoft business strategy", maybe you can find someone to host
> such as list, but this one is not for discussing Mandrakes
andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tuesday 17 June 2003 15:39, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> > Buchan Milne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > And of course, at present rpmdrake can only be run as root. If it were
> >
> > Untrue! This time you suck.. you asked for that feature, I've
> > said I
On Tuesday June 17 2003 01:09 pm, Lyvim Xaphir wrote:
> Which is a moot point since if you are not going to pay any
> attention to users that have *purchased* a vote, what then
> convinces anyone that you will put a priority on users that HAVE
> NOT purchased a vote? Who you are *not* listening to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Lyvim Xaphir wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 14:32, Michael Scherer wrote:
>
> To make it crystal clear the point is that the money flow from the
> Mandrakeclub members is the most potent source of revenue that
> Mandrakesoft has, which I don't hesitate
On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 14:32, Michael Scherer wrote:
> > > I don't like mandrakeclub much.
> >
> > But you like their money, right? Maybe you don't like your mother,
> > but she gave birth to you, so you at least owe her a nod.
>
> Well, I don't think that Mandrakeclub give birth to Guillaume, so
On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 19:09, Lyvim Xaphir wrote:
> Which is a moot point since if you are not going to pay any attention to
> users that have *purchased* a vote, what then convinces anyone that you
> will put a priority on users that HAVE NOT purchased a vote? Who you are
> *not* listening to anyw
On Tuesday 17 June 2003 15:39, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> Buchan Milne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > And of course, at present rpmdrake can only be run as root. If it were
>
> Untrue! This time you suck.. you asked for that feature, I've
> said I would add it, I've added it on May 28, but you
On 17 Jun 2003, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > about this before. There was also a post about the slow search (to which
> > didn't quite satisfactory answer IM0, why is kpackage quicker in searching
> > than rpmdrake? Do you think it can be optimized?)
>
> what
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Michael Scherer wrote:
> Now, if you want someting more feature full, I will package synaptics
> once apt-get will compile on cooker.
> Then, just vote for someone to backport it in 9.1.
>
$ urpmq -i apt
extracting apt-0.5.5cnc4.1-3mdk.i586
Name
On 17 Jun 2003, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> Lyvim Xaphir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > gratuitously give money in return for a promise to be recognized with
> > their votes is exactly the problem that will be the downfall of the
> > Mandrake distro if it happens.
>
> MandrakeClub users are
> > I don't like mandrakeclub much.
>
> But you like their money, right? Maybe you don't like your mother,
> but she gave birth to you, so you at least owe her a nod.
Well, I don't think that Mandrakeclub give birth to Guillaume, so, I
don't realy see the point. If I wanted to start a flame wa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Please note, this is a development list, if you want a list for
"Mandrakesoft business strategy", maybe you can find someone to host
such as list, but this one is not for discussing Mandrakesoft business
strategy, and I am quite sure no posts to this l
On 17 Jun 2003, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> > mandrakeclub (or do a telephone poll for registered users, but that will
> > be more expensive).
>
> I don't like mandrakeclub much.
why? This is ofcourse a bit oftopic. But club gives you an excellent few
of the (paying) user experience of the di
1 - 100 of 122 matches
Mail list logo
