Is there any information yet about what will be new in 9.2?
I mean, are they hoping/going for kernel 2.6, kde3.2?
I'm just curious what'll be changing.
Guy
> K,
>
> The release schedule for 9.2 is out.
>
>
> * Cooker snapshot: end of June
> * Beta 1: mid-July
> * Beta 2: begi
On Tuesday 24 June 2003 04:28 am, Guy Van Sanden wrote:
> Is there any information yet about what will be new in 9.2?
>
> I mean, are they hoping/going for kernel 2.6, kde3.2?
> I'm just curious what'll be changing.
>
Here is the feature request page.
http://qa.mandrakesoft.com/twiki/bin/view/Main
Man, if they did nothing else, I would just want the KDE help search
engine to work.
It's not to much to ask.
Guy Van Sanden wrote:
Is there any information yet about what will be new in 9.2?
I mean, are they hoping/going for kernel 2.6, kde3.2?
I'm just curious what'll be changing.
Guy
K,,
Am Dienstag, 24. Juni 2003 16:38 schrieb Jim C:
> Man, if they did nothing else, I would just want the KDE help search
> engine to work.
> It's not to much to ask.
>
Load the Image ones it is where. If it is not fixed , point it out in bugzilla
and post the bugnumber here/Cooker so others can vot
On Tuesday 24 Jun 2003 3:38 pm, Jim C wrote:
> Man, if they did nothing else, I would just want the KDE help
> search engine to work.
> It's not to much to ask.
>
Could be a kde problem, of course.
Anne
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
On Tue, 2003-06-24 at 01:28, Guy Van Sanden wrote:
> Is there any information yet about what will be new in 9.2?
>
> I mean, are they hoping/going for kernel 2.6, kde3.2?
> I'm just curious what'll be changing.
>
> Guy
Personally,
I'm hoping for very little new and a whole lot fixed. Suppor
On 24 Jun 2003 10:28:27 +0200
Guy Van Sanden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there any information yet about what will be new in 9.2?
>
> I mean, are they hoping/going for kernel 2.6, kde3.2?
> I'm just curious what'll be changing.
I am running it right now, and the choices for kernels are only
, 2003 9:39 PM
Subject: Re: [expert] Get your burners warmed up folks
> On 24 Jun 2003 10:28:27 +0200
> Guy Van Sanden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Is there any information yet about what will be new in 9.2?
> >
> > I mean, are they hoping/going for kernel 2.6,
On 24 Jun 2003 11:47:32 -0700
James Sparenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm hoping for very little new and a whole lot fixed. Support for
> ATI Trident S3 and SIS chips would be nice. It's a point release and
> I think getting what they have "working" buffed polished and debugged
> wou
Il mar, 2003-06-24 alle 23:17, Miark wrote:
> On 24 Jun 2003 11:47:32 -0700
> 9.2 is _not_ a point release in the common sense of the word because Mandrakesoft
> does not, in fact, make them.
I absolutely agree. As 9.1 is definitively _not_ a point release as
well.
Can't wait :)
Cesare
Want
On Tuesday June 24 2003 04:17 pm, Miark wrote:
> 9.2 is _not_ a point release in the common sense of the word
> because Mandrakesoft does not, in fact, make them. 9.2 will have
> the latest and greatest of everything available; point being you
> can expect as many bugs in this release as with any o
From: "Adrian Golumbovici" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> kernel 2.6 would have been cool. at least as a side choice even a
2.5.xx
> would have been ok as a side choice when installing. :)
>
AFAIK there could be a 2.5.xx (or 2.6.x), since Juan is working on it...
As for 2.5 changing to 2.6, the estimat
I've been wondering about that. If Mandrakesoft don't make point releases,
what is
the meaning of their version numbers? Why have, for example, 9.2?
From: Miark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9.2 is _not_ a point release in the common sense of the word because
Mandrakesoft
does not, in fact, make them.
On Wed, 25 Jun 2003 08:57:56 +0930
"Brian Schroeder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've been wondering about that. If Mandrakesoft don't make point releases,
> what is the meaning of their version numbers? Why have, for example, 9.2?
A series number shares common core components and has more or
Probably not. I've endured the deluge of Cooker email for a while now
and can tell you that once 9.2 hits beta, it's all bug fixes until
release time. If you want it in, it'll have to be before the first
beta.
Maybe I'm wrong (heaven knows that's happened enough :-), but I thought
the odd number
On Tue, 2003-06-24 at 14:17, Miark wrote:
> On 24 Jun 2003 11:47:32 -0700
> James Sparenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I'm hoping for very little new and a whole lot fixed. Support for
> > ATI Trident S3 and SIS chips would be nice. It's a point release and
> > I think getting what
lt;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 9:39 PM
> Subject: Re: [expert] Get your burners warmed up folks
>
>
> > On 24 Jun 2003 10:28:27 +0200
> > Guy Van Sanden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Is th
On Tue, 2003-06-24 at 19:34, David Smith wrote:
> Probably not. I've endured the deluge of Cooker email for a while now
> and can tell you that once 9.2 hits beta, it's all bug fixes until
> release time. If you want it in, it'll have to be before the first
> beta.
>
> Maybe I'm wrong (heaven kn
On Tue, 2003-06-24 at 16:27, Brian Schroeder wrote:
> I've been wondering about that. If Mandrakesoft don't make point releases,
> what is
> the meaning of their version numbers? Why have, for example, 9.2?
Cause everyone else did I guess. *GRIN*
James
>
>
> >From: Miark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Am Mittwoch, 25. Juni 2003 07:09 schrieb James Sparenberg:
> On Tue, 2003-06-24 at 14:17, Miark wrote:
> > On 24 Jun 2003 11:47:32 -0700
> >
> > James Sparenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >I'm hoping for very little new and a whole lot fixed. Support for
> > > ATI Trident S3 and SIS chips
On Wednesday 25 June 2003 01:13, James Sparenberg wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-06-24 at 12:46, Adrian Golumbovici wrote:
> > kernel 2.6 would have been cool. at least as a side choice even a
> > 2.5.xx would have been ok as a side choice when installing. :)
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Adrian
>
> There i
On Wed, 2003-06-25 at 00:41, Steffen Barszus wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 25. Juni 2003 07:09 schrieb James Sparenberg:
> > On Tue, 2003-06-24 at 14:17, Miark wrote:
> > > On 24 Jun 2003 11:47:32 -0700
> > >
> > > James Sparenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >I'm hoping for very little new and a
On Wed, 2003-06-25 at 01:30, Robert Crawford wrote:
> On Wednesday 25 June 2003 01:13, James Sparenberg wrote:
> > On Tue, 2003-06-24 at 12:46, Adrian Golumbovici wrote:
> > > kernel 2.6 would have been cool. at least as a side choice even a
> > > 2.5.xx would have been ok as a side choice when
Am Mittwoch, 25. Juni 2003 11:23 schrieb James Sparenberg:
> On Wed, 2003-06-25 at 00:41, Steffen Barszus wrote:
> > Hmm wasn't 9.1 a step in that direction ? If you have specific ideas I
> > would say speak up on cooker and ask to add it to the cooker wiki feature
> > requests.
> >
> > Steffen
On Tuesday 24 Jun 2003 11:16 pm, Thomas Backlund wrote:
> From: "Adrian Golumbovici" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > kernel 2.6 would have been cool. at least as a side choice
> > even a
>
> 2.5.xx
>
> > would have been ok as a side choice when installing. :)
>
> AFAIK there could be a 2.5.xx (or 2.6
** Anne Wilson (Mittwoch, 25. Juni 2003 12:05)
> I'm seriously considering staying with 9.1. The rate of change is
> too fast for me, as I'm spending so much time getting to know each
> new system and configuring it as I want that I can't spend enough
> time on learning bigger issues - security i
On Wednesday 25 June 2003 06:05 am, Anne Wilson wrote:
> I'm seriously considering staying with 9.1. The rate of change is too
> fast for me, as I'm spending so much time getting to know each new
> system and configuring it as I want that I can't spend enough time on
> learning bigger issues - se
On Wed, 2003-06-25 at 02:49, Steffen Barszus wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 25. Juni 2003 11:23 schrieb James Sparenberg:
> > On Wed, 2003-06-25 at 00:41, Steffen Barszus wrote:
>
>
> > > Hmm wasn't 9.1 a step in that direction ? If you have specific ideas I
> > > would say speak up on cooker and ask to a
On Wed, 2003-06-25 at 03:05, Anne Wilson wrote:
> On Tuesday 24 Jun 2003 11:16 pm, Thomas Backlund wrote:
> > From: "Adrian Golumbovici" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > > kernel 2.6 would have been cool. at least as a side choice
> > > even a
> >
> > 2.5.xx
> >
> > > would have been ok as a side ch
On Wednesday 25 Jun 2003 6:59 pm, James Sparenberg wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-06-25 at 03:05, Anne Wilson wrote:
> > I know that I can run higher point versions of a kernel with
> > existing mandrake distros, but will 2.6 mean changed libraries,
> > etc., so that it won't be compatible?
> >
> > Anne
>
>
On Wednesday 25 June 2003 05:28, James Sparenberg wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-06-25 at 01:30, Robert Crawford wrote:
> > > James
> >
> > James- I looked all around in cooker, and couldn't find the 2.5 kernel
> > you mentioned.
>
> Did you look in cooker's contrib or cooker's main... It was in contrib
>
On Wed, 2003-06-25 at 11:09, Robert Crawford wrote:
> On Wednesday 25 June 2003 05:28, James Sparenberg wrote:
> > On Wed, 2003-06-25 at 01:30, Robert Crawford wrote:
>
> > > > James
> > >
> > > James- I looked all around in cooker, and couldn't find the 2.5 kernel
> > > you mentioned.
> >
> > Did
It's only a couple of weeks since I upgraded my main system to 9.1.
From: "Ronald J. Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Wednesday 25 June 2003 06:05 am, Anne Wilson wrote:
> I'm seriously considering staying with 9.1. The rate of change is too
> fast for me, as I'm spending so much time getting to kn
On Wednesday 25 June 2003 07:38 pm, Brian Schroeder wrote:
> It's only a couple of weeks since I upgraded my main system to 9.1.
That may be true, but 9.1 has been out since end of March. It would seem you
waited three months after the release of 9.1 to upgrade. We are talking
about the start o
On Wed, 2003-06-25 at 16:38, Brian Schroeder wrote:
> It's only a couple of weeks since I upgraded my main system to 9.1.
>
> >From: "Ronald J. Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
You sound like me... I wait untill the bug fixes are "all In" and
Texstar and PLF are good and warm... then I upgrade the main
At 09.41 25/06/2003, you wrote:
> What I'm hoping is...
>
> 1. No new installer
Will not be, it was the jump to Gtk2 what caused the new installer
So it's GTK2 fault to slow down so much it? I think it's too slow to be
acceptable.
I also hope to see a *faster* Mandrake Control Center, it takes ag
36 matches
Mail list logo
