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
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
-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 requires
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 don't
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 we
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
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 info.
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 integrate well
an
-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 menubar
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 would be
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 oftopic. But club
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 panel and you
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 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 , includes as far
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, being an
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 the best, so
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 is NOT
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 ignore,
-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 currently
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. The
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 the real
-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 them
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
On Thursday 19 June 2003 04:50 pm, Buchan Milne wrote:
quote who=w9ya
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
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
operating
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 stuff
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, but
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, but
On Thursday 19 June 2003 04:50 pm, Buchan Milne wrote:
quote who=w9ya
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
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
operating
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 subject
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 MUCH
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 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 rpmdrake
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 world
-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 much
-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
than
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.
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 is
-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.
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 options
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, they
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/)
Thanks.
IMHO,
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 to me.
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 20:26
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 to show
]
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 prime
motivation for many join'n the Club
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 on
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 are.
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 rpmdrake
-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 gnome2
-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
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 Xwindow,
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 users to select
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
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 matter.
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
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.
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 failing
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. For
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 rpmdrake and
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 security
-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's
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
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 the
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 that was
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. Personally I never
quote who=w9ya
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't
On Thursday 19 June 2003 04:50 pm, Buchan Milne wrote:
quote who=w9ya
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
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
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 the best, so
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
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 stuff
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 and
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.
Indeed users
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 suggestion
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
Pierre Jarillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Le Lundi 16 Juin 2003 17:52, Guillaume Cottenceau a écrit :
It would be better that rpmdrake also show already-installed software,
maybe greyed out or with a mention this software is already installed
on your machine.
No, it's a long
So, with current tools, a newbie may not find the software needed, only
because it is already installed. It happens. Isn't that sad ?
I think the vast majority of those cases are not happening
because those applications are so large they don't get unnoticed
by the user (e.g. whe
I still fail to see why people start installing software to see
installed packages.. Typical scenario is to start the given
program for a given task, isn't it? I launche installing
software when I want to install software..
Perhaps to see the description of current installed packages.
Even if
On 17 Jun 2003, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
I still fail to see why people start installing software to see
installed packages.. Typical scenario is to start the given
program for a given task, isn't it? I launche installing
software when I want to install software..
GC, we have talked
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 17 Jun 2003, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
GC, we have talked about this before. You are not easily convinced but
the
issue keeps coming up. If you really want to know, post a poll on
mandrakeclub (or do a telephone poll
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 17 Jun 2003, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
I still fail to see why people start installing software to see
installed packages.. Typical scenario is to start the given
program for a given task, isn't it? I launche installing
software when I want to install
Buchan Milne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
Think a bit further, currently rpmdrake has an easy interface, but
not a
friendly one. (Look at some Mac software). rpmdrake has become quite
nice,
but it is sometimes not suited for the things many users want.
And of course, at present
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
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,
Le Mardi 17 Juin 2003 11:57, Guillaume Cottenceau a écrit :
I still fail to see why people start installing software to see
installed packages.. Typical scenario is to start the given
program for a given task, isn't it? I launche installing
software when I want to install software..
You are
Buchan Milne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
But, I think especially in this mode it needs to search packages, since
the admin will know what he installed, users not.
Argh you're harsh on me.
BTW, menu options only start in user mode, I assume then for
installation, rpmdrake should be
Pierre Jarillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Le Mardi 17 Juin 2003 11:57, Guillaume Cottenceau a écrit :
I still fail to see why people start installing software to see
installed packages.. Typical scenario is to start the given
program for a given task, isn't it? I launche installing
On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 10:02, Pierre Jarillon wrote:
Le Mardi 17 Juin 2003 11:57, Guillaume Cottenceau a écrit :
I still fail to see why people start installing software to see
installed packages.. Typical scenario is to start the given
program for a given task, isn't it? I launche
On 17 Jun 2003, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
Untrue! This time you suck.. you asked for that feature, I've
^ haha, I think Buchan was a bit too annoying?
said I would add it, I've added it on May 28, but you didn't even
notice :(.
I didn't see it as well, thanks!
d.
Le Mardi 17 Juin 2003 16:26, Guillaume Cottenceau a écrit :
contacts with newbies and sometimes I feel a lack of patience with them !
But newbies are our new users and we have to take care of them.
Ask for some people in the street to test Mandrake 9.1. Experience this.
Sure you'll be
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 17 Jun 2003, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
Untrue! This time you suck.. you asked for that feature, I've
^ haha, I think Buchan was a bit too annoying?
No, it's that other times he's right.
--
Guillaume Cottenceau -
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
Buchan Milne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But, I think especially in this mode it needs to search packages, since
the admin will know what he installed, users not.
Argh you're harsh on me.
Only because we want Mandrake
Le Mardi 17 Juin 2003 18:14, Buchan Milne a écrit :
Only because we want Mandrake to be the best :-)
s/Mandrake/gc/ here :)
--
Linux pour Mac !? Enfin le moyen de transformer
une pomme en véritable ordinateur. - JL.
Olivier Thauvin - http://nanardon.homelinux.org/
On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 09:35, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 17 Jun 2003, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
I still fail to see why people start installing software to see
installed packages.. Typical scenario is to start the given
program for a given task,
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 distro.
-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
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 wars,
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 people who
-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:
1 - 100 of 122 matches
Mail list logo
