Then 2 minutes later the following ones additionally:
Jan 3 13:09:39 athlon-sp gconfd (spluess-2773): GConf server is not in use,
shutting down.
Jan 3 13:09:39 athlon-sp gconfd (spluess-2773): Exiting
Jan 3 13:09:39 athlon-sp gconfd (spluess-2773): CORBA_ORB_destroy: ORB still
has 2 refs.
Jan
And in /var/log/messages I get the following couple of lines:
tail -f messages
Jan 3 13:07:39 athlon-sp gconfd (spluess-2773): starting (version 1.2.1), pid
2773 user 'spluess'
Jan 3 13:07:39 athlon-sp gconfd (spluess-2773): Resolved address
"xml:readonly:/etc/gconf/gconf.xml.mandatory" to a r
Ok, the strace output is pretty long. Here is just the last page before it
ends:
open("/usr/share/fonts/default/Type1/fonts.cache-1", O_RDONLY) = 19
stat64("/usr/share/fonts/default/Type1", {st_mode=S_IFDIR|0755, st_size=3536,
...}) = 0
stat64("/usr/share/fonts/default/Type1/fonts.cache-1", {st_
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
It starts for me without problemtry 'strace mozilla' to look where stops
On Friday 03 January 2003 19:38, Serge Plüss wrote:
[...]
> mozilla is not giving any error messages, just doesn't launch. I tried to
[...]
cu...;o)
- --
Franco Silvestro
c/o
> On Wed, 2003-01-01 at 21:39, Ibukun Olumuyiwa wrote:
>> > On Tue, 2002-12-31 at 17:14, Serge Plüss wrote:
>> >> Hi there
>> >>
>> >> Since the last urpmi --auto-select --auto -v for the latest cooker
>> mozilla (whose packages didn't change with that last update) won't
>> start anylonger. These
On Wed, 2003-01-01 at 21:39, Ibukun Olumuyiwa wrote:
> > On Tue, 2002-12-31 at 17:14, Serge Plüss wrote:
> >> Hi there
> >>
> >> Since the last urpmi --auto-select --auto -v for the latest cooker
> >> mozilla (whose packages didn't change with that last update) won't
> >> start anylonger. These ar
> On Tue, 2002-12-31 at 17:14, Serge Plüss wrote:
>> Hi there
>>
>> Since the last urpmi --auto-select --auto -v for the latest cooker
>> mozilla (whose packages didn't change with that last update) won't
>> start anylonger. These are the mozilla packages (not changed in that
>> update):
>> mozil
On Tue, 2002-12-31 at 17:14, Serge Plüss wrote:
> Hi there
>
> Since the last urpmi --auto-select --auto -v for the latest cooker mozilla
> (whose packages didn't change with that last update) won't start anylonger.
> These are the mozilla packages (not changed in that update):
> mozilla-1.3-0.al
On Wed, 2002-12-18 at 04:17, Ben Reser wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 03:58:29PM +1300, Jason Greenwood wrote:
> > That is Soo subjective. But I guess when you are paying the
> > developers then
>
hey
we got a Mozilla that works with Flash, whats the point, It didnt make
sense not to r
On Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 03:58:29PM +1300, Jason Greenwood wrote:
> That is Soo subjective. But I guess when you are paying the
> developers then
Of course it's subjective. I don't understand why everyone thinks every
policy has to be so rigid and set in stone that a computer could enforc
That is Soo subjective. But I guess when you are paying the developers
then
Anyway, I don't feel I misreperesented anything as I had a re-read of the
previous thread. The way my original request was handled was totally disrespectful
IMHO. Doesn't matter, I have thick skin. You tend to
On Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 12:01:09PM +1300, Jason Greenwood wrote:
> I agree with that methodology as well, however, there were many on the
> list who stated this was not the case and not the position of Mandrake
> on the issue.
You are misrepresenting what I said.
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=
I agree with that methodology as well, however, there were many on the list
who stated this was not the case and not the position of Mandrake on the
issue.
Cheers
Jason
Austin Acton wrote:
On Tue, 2002-12-17 at 17:20, Jason Greenwood wrote:
As per the MAJOR (and heated) thread o
On Tue, 2002-12-17 at 17:20, Jason Greenwood wrote:
> As per the MAJOR (and heated) thread on this very issue, I thought
> Mandrake didn't package beta (never mind alpha) releases of Mozilla
> since they had their own beta testers...what gives??
True, however Mandrake has traditionally used beta
Le Mardi 17 Décembre 2002 23:00, Austin Acton a écrit :
> Welcome back, flash...
> Austin
confirmed on 2 machines, it works again
:))
Pascal
As per the MAJOR (and heated) thread on this very issue, I thought
Mandrake didn't package beta (never mind alpha) releases of Mozilla
since they had their own beta testers...what gives??
Cheers
Jason
Austin Acton wrote:
Welcome back, flash...
Austin
On Fri, 2002-12-13 at 22:08, Austin Acton wrote:
> Also, I can't seem to fill in text boxes in webpages with mozilla 1.2.1.
> I click on the box, but no cursor appears.
> Anyone else?
> Austin
Happens from time to time for me also. But opening a new tab switching
to that one, then back to the firs
On Fri, 2002-12-13 at 14:23, Pascal Cavy wrote:
> Just reload the same page several times to make it crash.
> ie try http://www.macromedia.com
Nope. After 27 reloads, still no crash.
Austin
--
Austin Acton Hon.B.Sc.
Synthetic Organic Chemist, Teaching Assist
My mistake.
I meant galeon in the last post.
Text boxes in mozilla are fine.
Austin
--
Austin Acton Hon.B.Sc.
Synthetic Organic Chemist, Teaching Assistant
Department of Chemistry, York University, Toronto
MandrakeClub Volunteer (www.ma
Also, I can't seem to fill in text boxes in webpages with mozilla 1.2.1.
I click on the box, but no cursor appears.
Anyone else?
Austin
--
Austin Acton Hon.B.Sc.
Synthetic Organic Chemist, Teaching Assistant
Department of Chemistry, York University,
Just reload the same page several times to make it crash.
ie try http://www.macromedia.com
IBM J2RE 1.4.1 works but scrolling bars do no work, I can scroll but as soon
as I unclick the windows goes back to top :(1.3.1 works but fonts are
uggly.
Le Vendredi 13 Décembre 2002 20:15, Austin
On Fri, 2002-12-13 at 13:14, Nelson Bartley wrote:
> Yes I've noticed the first three there as well, though I'm not quite
> sure why flash seems to error like that. (FYI, it will crash my mozilla
> once I open another page w/ flash on it)
That's odd. Mine never crashes on flash pages, but the ani
On Fri, 2002-12-13 at 13:30, David Walluck wrote:
> There's got to be a better way then manually making the symlink so that
> mozilla can find the Java plugin,
Ummm, there are RPMS on Mandrake Club.
Austin
--
Austin Acton Hon.B.Sc.
Synthetic Organic Chemist,
On Fri, 2002-12-13 at 18:36, Glen Kjaerulff wrote:
> On Fri, 2002-12-13 at 18:17, Austin Acton wrote:
> > Hey,
> > I wondering if you all have the same problems with mozilla 1.2.1 and
> > plugins. As it stands with me:
> >
> > real 5: works
> > flash 6: says it's installed, but flash animations d
On Fri, 2002-12-13 at 18:17, Austin Acton wrote:
> Hey,
> I wondering if you all have the same problems with mozilla 1.2.1 and
> plugins. As it stands with me:
>
> real 5: works
> flash 6: says it's installed, but flash animations don't run, but
> doesn't crash either
> sun java 1.4.1: works
> ad
Nelson Bartley wrote:
Yes I've noticed the first three there as well, though I'm not quite
sure why flash seems to error like that. (FYI, it will crash my mozilla
once I open another page w/ flash on it)
I notice *tons* of crashes in the latest release, probably due to flash.
Also, the Java plu
Yes I've noticed the first three there as well, though I'm not quite
sure why flash seems to error like that. (FYI, it will crash my mozilla
once I open another page w/ flash on it)
Gizmo
On Fri, 2002-12-13 at 12:17, Austin Acton wrote:
> Hey,
> I wondering if you all have the same problems with
On Fri, 2002-12-06 at 06:40, Felix Miata wrote:
> Lonnie Borntreger wrote:
>
> > Somehow Mozilla got stuck in a mode where all new windows - including
> > the initial one - always open in full-screen mode. No matter what size
> > I change the window to on exit, it always restarts full-screen.
>
Lonnie Borntreger wrote:
> Somehow Mozilla got stuck in a mode where all new windows - including
> the initial one - always open in full-screen mode. No matter what size
> I change the window to on exit, it always restarts full-screen.
> I can't find anything in the preferences files to indica
On Tue, 03 Dec 2002 22:33:28 +0100, Guillaume Rousse wrote:
> Is there a specific reason to install mozilla in
> /usr/lib/mozilla- ? First, it is not coherent with other packages
> (at least those without major version in package name), second it breaks
> plugin installation for konqueror...
Ask
Robert Fox wrote:
Only one website (http://linuxtoday.com) crashes Mozilla without errors
- it simply disaapears. This is confirmed on three separate machines
now. This especially happens when I click through some of the stories
and back to the main page.
I believe it has to do with the popup ad
On 1 Dec 2002, Chris Picton wrote:
> On Sat, 2002-11-30 at 22:07, Buchan Milne wrote:
> Isn't the point of the dependencies list inside an RPM that the RPM can
> explicitly, at the time of install, let the user know what extra
> libraries and versions are needed in order for the RPM to work
> cor
On Sat, 2002-11-30 at 22:07, Buchan Milne wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Nov 2002, DEGAND Nicolas wrote:
>
> > Le Samedi 30 Novembre 2002 19:55, vous avez écrit :
> >
> > OK. It wanted only 3 or 4 dependencies, so it was intriguing. I suppose the
> > dependencies are fouled up.
> >
>
> NO! The root cause is
On Sat, 30 Nov 2002, DEGAND Nicolas wrote:
> Le Samedi 30 Novembre 2002 19:55, vous avez écrit :
>
> OK. It wanted only 3 or 4 dependencies, so it was intriguing. I suppose the
> dependencies are fouled up.
>
NO! The root cause is you guys mixing cooker and stable. It often works,
but you are gua
Le Samedi 30 Novembre 2002 19:55, vous avez écrit :
> On Sat, 2002-11-30 at 15:56, DEGAND Nicolas wrote:
> > I am using a vanilla MDK 9.0 with KDE 3.0.5 added.
> >
> > I have added a cooker source and installed with urpmi Mozilla 1.2-1 and
> > later 1.2-3. In both cases when I launch it, it dies si
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Friday 29 November 2002 1:25 pm, Lonnie Borntreger wrote:
> On Fri, 2002-11-29 at 13:08, Charles A Edwards wrote:
> > On 29 Nov 2002 12:41:03 -0600
> >
> > Lonnie Borntreger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > So, should imwheel be running, or not?
> >
On Fri, 29 Nov 2002 14:16:39 -0500
Timothy J Fontaine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What a great philosophy of supporting only the main wm's... please lets put out
>those who might want/need imwheel to support more buttons or want to utilize all the
>other features of it
I said nothing about rem
On Fri, 2002-11-29 at 13:08, Charles A Edwards wrote:
> On 29 Nov 2002 12:41:03 -0600
> Lonnie Borntreger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > So, should imwheel be running, or not?
>
> For my 2 cents imwheel should not even be installed.
> All the main WMs have built-in wheel support.
OK. I'll mak
On Fri, 29 Nov 2002 14:08:52 -0500
Charles A Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For my 2 cents imwheel should not even be installed.
> All the main WMs have built-in wheel support.
What a great philosophy of supporting only the main wm's... please lets put out those
who might want/need imwheel
On 29 Nov 2002 12:41:03 -0600
Lonnie Borntreger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, should imwheel be running, or not?
For my 2 cents imwheel should not even be installed.
All the main WMs have built-in wheel support.
Charles
It is always the best policy to tell the truth, u
On Fri, 2002-11-29 at 03:49, Frederic Crozat wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Nov 2002 03:28:44 +, Lonnie Borntreger wrote:
>
> > No matter how the settings in Preferences->Advanced->Mouse Wheel are
> > set, using the wheel results in a full-page scroll. The modifier keys
> > also have no affect on the wh
Frederic Crozat wrote:
On Fri, 29 Nov 2002 16:50:58 +0100, Michal Bukovjan wrote:
Spacebar no longer scrolls an email, nor it goes to the next one.
It does nothing.
Regression from 1.1, or packaging (gtk+2 ?) bug?
Simple to test :
download tarball for mozilla 1.2 (gtk1 version).. And fill
On Fri, 29 Nov 2002 17:28:59 +0100, Robert Fox wrote:
> Mozilla 1.2-3mdk running fine with plugins (Java, Realplayer, Plugger and
> Flash) - Cooker installed base.
>
> Only one website (http://linuxtoday.com) crashes Mozilla without errors -
> it simply disaapears. This is confirmed on three sep
On Fri, 2002-11-29 at 16:09, Oden Eriksson wrote:
> fredagen den 29 november 2002 16.58 skrev Frederic Crozat:
> > On Fri, 29 Nov 2002 16:55:18 +0100, Oden Eriksson wrote:
> > > Hi.
> > >
> > > It appears mozilla-1.2-2mdk requires pango-1.1.3 to build on ML9.0?
> >
> > We don't support compiling co
fredagen den 29 november 2002 16.58 skrev Frederic Crozat:
> On Fri, 29 Nov 2002 16:55:18 +0100, Oden Eriksson wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > It appears mozilla-1.2-2mdk requires pango-1.1.3 to build on ML9.0?
>
> We don't support compiling cooker packages on 9.0..
Yes I know that, but I think there will
On Fri, 29 Nov 2002 16:55:18 +0100, Oden Eriksson wrote:
> Hi.
>
> It appears mozilla-1.2-2mdk requires pango-1.1.3 to build on ML9.0?
We don't support compiling cooker packages on 9.0..
And BTW, GTK+ 2.1 is already requiring pango 1.1.x...
--
Frederic Crozat
MandrakeSoft
On Fri, 29 Nov 2002 16:50:58 +0100, Michal Bukovjan wrote:
> Spacebar no longer scrolls an email, nor it goes to the next one.
> It does nothing.
>
> Regression from 1.1, or packaging (gtk+2 ?) bug?
Simple to test :
download tarball for mozilla 1.2 (gtk1 version).. And fill bugs
accordingly :))
Frederic Crozat wrote:
On Fri, 29 Nov 2002 14:51:39 +0100, Michal Bukovjan wrote:
Hi,
trying the new Mozilla on latest Cooker, this page:
http://www.underground.cz
does not look quite as it should, and as it used to in Mozilla 1.1 or
currently does in Konqueror.
Looks like serious font ren
On Fri, 29 Nov 2002 14:51:39 +0100, Michal Bukovjan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> trying the new Mozilla on latest Cooker, this page:
>
> http://www.underground.cz
>
> does not look quite as it should, and as it used to in Mozilla 1.1 or
> currently does in Konqueror.
>
> Looks like serious font rendering
Am Freitag, 29. November 2002, 07:57:07 Uhr MET, schrieb Charles A Edwards:
> Will the mozilla-1.2 rpm be fixed so that galeon will build with it.
> Currently neither galeon-1.26 or 1.27 will build.
> They both fail in the lib check since the mozilla-1.2 rpm does not create
>libgtkembedmoz.so or l
On Fri, 29 Nov 2002 03:28:44 +, Lonnie Borntreger wrote:
> No matter how the settings in Preferences->Advanced->Mouse Wheel are
> set, using the wheel results in a full-page scroll. The modifier keys
> also have no affect on the wheel usage.
Works here.. Be sure you don't have imwheel screwi
Am Freitag, 29. November 2002, 03:28:44 Uhr MET, schrieb Lonnie Borntreger:
> No matter how the settings in Preferences->Advanced->Mouse Wheel are
> set, using the wheel results in a full-page scroll. The modifier keys
> also have no affect on the wheel usage.
I've tried the new mozilla yesterday
from the will keep working.
Mika
Wouter Lagerweij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
27.11.2002 11:32
Please respond to cooker
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject: Re: [Cooker] Mozilla 1.2B
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 03:48, Felix Miata
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 13:30, Lea Gris wrote:
> Felix Miata wrote:
> > Wouter Lagerweij wrote:
>
> > 1-I didn't know it could be so simple. Is it really? You're not leaving
> > anything out?
> > 2-I only run i586. Where do you find an i586 build to untar?
>
> Mozilla 1.2 final is released *NOW*
>
--- Felix Miata <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Lea Gris wrote:
>
> > Felix Miata wrote:
>
> > > Wouter Lagerweij wrote:
>
> > > 1-I didn't know it could be so simple. Is it
> really? You're not leaving anything out?
> > > 2-I only run i586. Where do you find an i586
> build to untar?
>
> > Moz
Lea Gris wrote:
> Felix Miata wrote:
> > Wouter Lagerweij wrote:
> > 1-I didn't know it could be so simple. Is it really? You're not leaving anything
>out?
> > 2-I only run i586. Where do you find an i586 build to untar?
> Mozilla 1.2 final is released *NOW*
> http://www.mozilla.org/releas
Felix Miata wrote:
Wouter Lagerweij wrote:
1-I didn't know it could be so simple. Is it really? You're not leaving
anything out?
2-I only run i586. Where do you find an i586 build to untar?
Mozilla 1.2 final is released *NOW*
http://www.mozilla.org/releases/
--
Léa Gris
() Campagne du rub
Wouter Lagerweij wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 03:48, Felix Miata wrote:
> > each new Mandrake version. I've been running a new build 1.3a nearly
> > every day for almost a month, but on OS/2, where installation is a
> > simple matter of unzipping a precomiled archive and running the
> > execut
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 03:48, Felix Miata wrote:
> Jason Greenwood wrote:
>
> each new Mandrake version. I've been running a new build 1.3a nearly
> every day for almost a month, but on OS/2, where installation is a
> simple matter of unzipping a precomiled archive and running the
> executable - n
There is no need to package Mozilla 1.2B, because Moszilla 1.2 _is_ out :-)
Jason Greenwood wrote:
> Is on the Mozilla mirrors. I am running it on my cooker system and all
> seems well, and a damn sight more stable than the version in cooker at
> the moment.
> When will the this latest version be in cooker??
No point in 1.2b. After Mozilla releases 1.2, Mandrake shoul
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 00:35, J.A. Magallon wrote:
> On 2002.11.27 Adam Williamson wrote:
> >On Tue, 2002-11-26 at 23:57, Jason Greenwood wrote:
> >> Wouldn't it pay to make an exception when the one on the App providers
> >> mirror is MORE stable (though it may be a beta) than the one that is
> >>
This is your subjective opinion, on which it's not necessarily a good
idea to base a packaging decision. Since the stable Moz 1.2 will be out
in short order anyway, packaging a beta is a waste of Frederic's time
And THIS is your subjective opinion.
When you say distro, what are you referring to besides the apps?? Isn't a
"distro" just a particular conglomeration of different OSS apps chosen on
their suitability for use by end users?? I realize that there are other additions
ie. installer, config tools, software managers etc. provided by t
On 2002.11.27 Adam Williamson wrote:
>On Tue, 2002-11-26 at 23:57, Jason Greenwood wrote:
>> Wouldn't it pay to make an exception when the one on the App providers
>> mirror is MORE stable (though it may be a beta) than the one that is
>> in Cooker?? Just a thought...
>
>This is your subjective op
On Tue, 2002-11-26 at 23:57, Jason Greenwood wrote:
> Wouldn't it pay to make an exception when the one on the App providers
> mirror is MORE stable (though it may be a beta) than the one that is
> in Cooker?? Just a thought...
This is your subjective opinion, on which it's not necessarily a good
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 12:57:44PM +1300, Jason Greenwood wrote:
> Wouldn't it pay to make an exception when the one on the App providers
> mirror is MORE stable (though it may be a beta) than the one that is in
> Cooker?? Just a thought...
>
> Besides, can't the testing/problems/bugfixes that Co
Wouldn't it pay to make an exception when the one on the App providers mirror
is MORE stable (though it may be a beta) than the one that is in Cooker??
Just a thought...
Besides, can't the testing/problems/bugfixes that Cooker users can provide
be of use to Mozilla.org anyway?? We test betas o
Jason Greenwood wrote:
Is on the Mozilla mirrors. I am running it on my cooker system and all
seems well, and a damn sight more stable than the version in cooker at
the moment.
When will the this latest version be in cooker??
It's probably not worth the effort packaging it - 1.2 was supposed t
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 12:29:13PM +1300, Jason Greenwood wrote:
> Is on the Mozilla mirrors. I am running it on my cooker system and all
> seems well, and a damn sight more stable than the version in cooker at
> the moment.
>
> When will the this latest version be in cooker??
When it's actuall
I have been using Mozilla 1.2B for about 1 month now and it works pretty good
for me.
On Tuesday 26 November 2002 06:29 pm, you wrote:
> Is on the Mozilla mirrors. I am running it on my cooker system and all
> seems well, and a damn sight more stable than the version in cooker at
> the moment.
>
>
I did do a clean install (reformatted the HD).
I did manage to get it to work. I simply uninstalled it. Removed my
.mozilla directory and reinstalled. Maybe some 1's and 0's got
misplaced the first time around :)
Thanks
On Fri, 2002-09-27 at 10:21, Luis M wrote:
>
> nope. works very go
nope. works very good here...
did you install 9.0final as a clean install? I would suggest to backup
personal files and do so... not just for mozilla, but for whatever other
files left over from previous bad RPMs...
I did just that here and everything works as expected so far: Zaurus
(usbdne
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 02:12:26PM -0700, Alan Shoemaker wrote:
> mandrakeexpert incident 32736 forwarded to cooker.
>
> when replying, please cc this email address:
>
> sorry no emailaddress is listed in the mandrakeexpert
> database for the originator of this report.
>
> quoted text belo
Le Sun, 22 Sep 2002 10:07:09 -0700, J Schonberg a écrit :
> It seems that there are files missing from this RPM. Are there
> dependeencies which have not been correctly set?
All those files are generated automatically by mozilla-rebuild-database
No need to worry..
--
Frédéric Crozat
Mandrake
Sitsofe Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If the corruption is a one pixel shift (that is fixed by highlighting or
> refreshing the page) then it could well be this bug
> http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80530
It does seem to be that bug...tho I've been seeing it in text and
If the corruption is a one pixel shift (that is fixed by highlighting or
refreshing the page) then it could well be this bug
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80530
What build of moz are you using?
--
Sitsofe | http://sucs.org/~sits/
On Wed, 2002-09-11 at 11:01, Frederic Crozat wrote:
> > Yes I think it's strange to propose only Mozilla 1.1 in mdk 9.0 because
> > it's a unstable release of Mozilla. Mozilla 1.0 is the last stable
> > release.
>
> Really ? We did you saw Mozilla 1.1 is supposed to be an "unstable"
> release ??
Pierre wrote:
>> the problem is that there isn't any french translation of mozilla
>> 1.1, but there is one for 1.0. In the 8.2 release, Mozilla 9.8 was in
>> french after install : people which are going to upgrade won't
>> understand why upgrading means loosing the french traduction ! Is it
On 2002.09.11 10:46 Henri wrote:
> Igor Izyumin wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday 10 September 2002 05:15 pm, Henri wrote:
>>
>>> mandrake creators are french, the first office was in France,
>>
>>
>>> and the place where it is used the most is France...so mandrake is
>>> french, as redhat is american a
Igor Izyumin wrote:
>On Tuesday 10 September 2002 05:15 pm, Henri wrote:
>
>
>>mandrake creators are french, the first office was in France,
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>and the place where it is used the most is France...so mandrake is french,
>>as redhat is american and suse deutsch.
>>
>>
>
>Bu
Le Wed, 11 Sep 2002 06:56:30 +0200, Alexander Skwar a écrit :
> Hallo.
>
> I'm running a current cooker system. When I use the Mandrake Mozilla
> and/or Galeon packages and go to some sites, I cannot click form submit
> buttons. An example site is http://www.falk.de/. When I use the official
Pascal Terjan wrote:
> Pascal Terjan wrote:
>
>> I'll try to tune that, but is there a way to find the right value ?
>>
> OK, used bc (310*131/100, 232.5*131/100) and found "DisplaySize 406 304"
> to get 100 dpi. Not all is fine. But couldn't this be done automatically ?
s/Not/Now/
and now I go
Pascal Terjan wrote:
> I'll try to tune that, but is there a way to find the right value ?
>
OK, used bc (310*131/100, 232.5*131/100) and found "DisplaySize 406 304" to get 100
dpi.
Not all is fine. But couldn't this be done automatically ?
On Tue Sep 10 16:01 -0500, Igor Izyumin wrote:
> On Tuesday 10 September 2002 05:15 pm, Henri wrote:
> > mandrake creators are french, the first office was in France,
>
> > and the place where it is used the most is France...so mandrake is french,
> > as redhat is american and suse deutsch.
>
Laurent Culioli wrote:
> Le mar 10/09/2002 à 22:50, Pascal Terjan a écrit :
>
>>Testing http://plop.linuxfr.org/my/ I noticed *very* small fonts that should have
>been
>>8pt. It looks like it is considered as 8px while the CSS tells 8pt...
>>
>>Didn't see anything about it on mozilla's bugzilla
Le mar 10/09/2002 à 22:50, Pascal Terjan a écrit :
> Testing http://plop.linuxfr.org/my/ I noticed *very* small fonts that should have
>been
> 8pt. It looks like it is considered as 8px while the CSS tells 8pt...
>
> Didn't see anything about it on mozilla's bugzilla so maybe it's a mdk pb ?
On Tuesday 10 September 2002 05:15 pm, Henri wrote:
> mandrake creators are french, the first office was in France,
> and the place where it is used the most is France...so mandrake is french,
> as redhat is american and suse deutsch.
Bulls**t. My impression is that far more Americans using i
Le Tue, 10 Sep 2002 21:51:07 +, Henri a ecrit :
> Hi,
> It seems that mozilla 1.1 french version won't be ready for 9.0. I suggest
> to give the choice to the user during install : installing 1.0 in french,
> which works pretty well, or using the last version in english. Mandrake is
> a frenc
Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
>Henri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>
>>Hi,
>>It seems that mozilla 1.1 french version won't be ready for 9.0.
>>I suggest to give the choice to the user during install :
>>installing 1.0 in french, which works pretty well, or using the
>>last version in english.
Henri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
> It seems that mozilla 1.1 french version won't be ready for 9.0.
> I suggest to give the choice to the user during install :
> installing 1.0 in french, which works pretty well, or using the
> last version in english.
do you realize that this would need
On Tue, 10 Sep 2002 18:46:54 +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I'm running a current cooker system. When I use the Mandrake Mozilla
> and/or Galeon packages and go to some sites, I cannot click form submit
> buttons. An example site is http://www.falk.de/. When I use the official
> Mozi
Gary Lawrence Murphy wrote:
> This same issue came up for Mozilla 1.0 -- is there an archive
> anywhere with Mozilla 1.1 compiled as an upgrade for Mandrake 8.2
> systems? I won't be ready to jump to mdk-9.0 for a while but I'd
> rather use mdk RPMs than switch over to the cannonical Mozilla
>
> "B" == Buchan Milne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
B> Gary Lawrence Murphy wrote:
>> This same issue came up for Mozilla 1.0
B> How so? There are RPMs un unsupported, and I also had some up
B> pretty early at http://ranger.dnslias.com/mandrake/mandrake8.2
According to the Coo
Gary Lawrence Murphy wrote:
> This same issue came up for Mozilla 1.0
How so? There are RPMs un unsupported, and I also had some up pretty
early at http://ranger.dnslias.com/mandrake/mandrake8.2
> -- is there an archive
> anywhere with Mozilla 1.1 compiled as an upgrade for Mandrake 8.2
> syst
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Perhaps it will be on Mandrakeclub soon.
On Wednesday 28 August 2002 17:53, Gary Lawrence Murphy wrote:
> This same issue came up for Mozilla 1.0 -- is there an archive
> anywhere with Mozilla 1.1 compiled as an upgrade for Mandrake 8.2
> systems? I
On Mon, Aug 26, 2002 at 12:34:09AM -0500, Texstar wrote:
> Priority Low
>
> Clicking on MandrakeOnline in the Mozilla toolbar results in an invalid
> Security Error - Domain Name mismatch.
Solution: Change the redirect on the mandrakesoft.com server from:
http://www.mandrakeonline.com/index.php
Le Sun, 18 Aug 2002 21:11:19 +, Kenton Groombridge a écrit :
> After a recent update of mozilla off of cooker, I noticed that my java
> applets stopped working. After downloading the src.rpm of mozilla, I
> found that it is now compiled with gcc 2.
>
> I honestly believe that it should sti
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>Le Sat, 17 Aug 2002 14:32:24 +, Rick Stockton a =C3=A9crit :
>> Important note for Fred:
>> Although enigmail 0.65.1 was built for 1.1b, it DOESN'T and WON'T run w=
>ith
>> RC1. Someone more capable than I must do some work to upgrade and relea=
>
Le Sat, 17 Aug 2002 14:32:24 +, Rick Stockton a écrit :
> Important note for Fred:
> Although enigmail 0.65.1 was built for 1.1b, it DOESN'T and WON'T run with
> RC1. Someone more capable than I must do some work to upgrade and release
> a new version of enigmail after 1.1 goes final.
Now y
101 - 200 of 489 matches
Mail list logo
