pe of thing to do.
>
> -Original Message -
> From: Sujeet Bhatt
> To: Mandrake Expert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 15:01:26 -0600
> Subject: Re: [expert] KDE 2.1 Final : Still 2 apps that won't run from desktop
> applink
>
> > On Wednesday 07
Expert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 15:01:26 -0600
Subject: Re: [expert] KDE 2.1 Final : Still 2 apps that won't run from desktop
applink
> On Wednesday 07 March 2001 17:26, George Czerw declaimed unto the faithful:
> > Beginning with KDE 2.1 Beta 2, I have 2 applic
On Wednesday 07 March 2001 17:26, George Czerw declaimed unto the faithful:
> Beginning with KDE 2.1 Beta 2, I have 2 applications that will NOT
> launch from any KDE applink or menu entry that I create, and I can't
> figure out why they won't launch, because if I enter the identical
> command lin
On Sunday 04 March 2001 09:50 am, Collins Richey wrote:
> > run 'rpm --rebuilddb' and 'update-menus -v'
>
> Yep, that worked, at least partially. The KDE panel now has the
> appropriate icons.
>
> Two further questions:
>
> 1. Where would I RTFM to know that this was needed?
'apropos
Another reason I love linux, I can have my point and click
environment, and my commandline too.
On Sunday 04 March 2001 06:55 am, Mark Weaver wrote:
> you use gFTP to grab'em from the mirror then put them in their own dir
> on your hard drive, when they're all done open a terminal window and
Update-menus normally takes only a minute or so to run. What you want to do
is hit after it _appears_ to hang. I don't know why this is (sigh...)
M.
On Sunday 04 March 2001 07:50, Collins Richey wrote:
> On Sunday 04 March 2001 06:09, you wrote:
> > On Saturday 03 March 2001 09:19 pm, Collins
On Sunday 04 March 2001 06:09, you wrote:
> On Saturday 03 March 2001 09:19 pm, Collins Richey wrote:
> > >create a directory to d/l the rpms to, then paste the URL with
> > > *.rpms added into nt (Webdownloader) or your favorite other. eg,
> > > ftp://sunsite.uio.no/pub/unix/Linux/Mandrake-de
On Sunday 04 March 2001 08:02, Mark Weaver wrote:
>
> Ya know...it just doesn't feel right without Chris. Anyone know how to
> get in touch with him?
I'm still here and reading the lists. If anyone has a question, just ask.
Just a change in email addresses ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
-Chris
--
New En
I get this alot, all you have to do normally is log out and log back in
--
Microsoft is not the answer, its the question.
And the answer is no. www.badran.co.uk
On Saturday 03 March 2001 09:19 pm, Collins Richey wrote:
> >create a directory to d/l the rpms to, then paste the URL with
> > *.rpms added into nt (Webdownloader) or your favorite other. eg,
> > ftp://sunsite.uio.no/pub/unix/Linux/Mandrake-devel/unsupported/i586/kde
> >-2.1 /*.rpm When the
On Sat Mar 03 2001 23:19, You wrote:
>
> 4. The panel is present, but most of the icons have the gearwheel (generic
> icon) instead of the expected icon.
>
try doing as root and from console:
rpm -i --rebuilddb
update-menus -v
--
Atentamente,
Pedro Del Medico P.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux User #14
Marc Siegel wrote:
>
> > KDE 2.1 final binary RPMs for Mandrake 7.2 are now in the
> > mandrake-devel/unsupported/KDE-2.1 directory on the mirrors.
> >
> > I wish I knew who to give credit to for this work ...
> >
> > I am glad they are in a subdirectory of their own; it makes updating
> > so eas
Ron Stodden wrote:
>
> Marc Siegel wrote:
> >
> > > KDE 2.1 final binary RPMs for Mandrake 7.2 are now in the
> > > mandrake-devel/unsupported/KDE-2.1 directory on the mirrors.
> > >
> > > I wish I knew who to give credit to for this work ...
> > >
> > > I am glad they are in a subdirectory of th
On Saturday 03 March 2001 11:26, you wrote:
> On Saturday 03 March 2001 11:58 am, Marc Siegel wrote:
> > > KDE 2.1 final binary RPMs for Mandrake 7.2 are now in the
> > > mandrake-devel/unsupported/KDE-2.1 directory on the mirrors.
> > > I wish I knew who to give credit to for this work ...
> > >
Marc Siegel wrote:
>
> > KDE 2.1 final binary RPMs for Mandrake 7.2 are now in the
> > mandrake-devel/unsupported/KDE-2.1 directory on the mirrors.
> >
> > I wish I knew who to give credit to for this work ...
> >
> > I am glad they are in a subdirectory of their own; it makes updating
> > so eas
On Saturday 03 March 2001 11:58 am, Marc Siegel wrote:
> > KDE 2.1 final binary RPMs for Mandrake 7.2 are now in the
> > mandrake-devel/unsupported/KDE-2.1 directory on the mirrors.
> > I wish I knew who to give credit to for this work ...
> > I am glad they are in a subdirectory of their own; it
> KDE 2.1 final binary RPMs for Mandrake 7.2 are now in the
> mandrake-devel/unsupported/KDE-2.1 directory on the mirrors.
>
> I wish I knew who to give credit to for this work ...
>
> I am glad they are in a subdirectory of their own; it makes updating
> so easy.
How does this make updating eas
Alan Shoemaker wrote:
> Ron/everybodyyou can find the below announcement in a
> README file on the KDE ftp site at:
>
>
>http://ftp.sourceforge.net/pub/mirrors/kde/stable/latest/distribution/rpm/Mandrake/7.2/
No go. This space is empty.
> The KDE packages for Linux-Mandrake 7.2 are still
Ron Stodden wrote:
> KDE 2.1 final in binary form for the various distributions
> was promised on the KDE site by Monday February 26.
>
> It is now 3.5 hours into Tuesday GMT and there is no sign
> of the KDE 2.1 final update to Mandrake 7.2.
>
> Where is it? What is happening? When and where
Ron Stodden wrote:
>
> KDE 2.1 final in binary form for the various distributions was
> promised on the KDE site by Monday February 26.
>
> It is now 3.5 hours into Tuesday GMT and there is no sign of the KDE
> 2.1 final update to Mandrake 7.2.
>
> Where is it? What is happening? When and w
> I completely understand what you're saying, but unless the creators of
> Netscape and those responsible for maintaining and changing it decide to
> write it to do the things being suggested in this thread it's not going
Oh...you're just saying "That's the way it is, deal with it." Well,
you'r
On Tuesday 27 February 2001 08:41, Cecil Watson wrote:
> http://ftp.sourceforge.net/pub/mirrors/kde/stable/latest/distribution/rpm/M
>andrake/7.2/
I'm there now - it's empty :(
--
David E. Fox
Larry Marshall wrote:
>
> > While I understand this to be a desire of many who use the browsers in
> > this manner, I don't understand "why" this is. The browser was never
> > designed to do such a thing. Why would one want it to? Why not just kill
>
> Mark...look at what Konquerer is doing and
No kidding, reminds me of the NT "user adjustment" that required a reboot
every 45 days. Sheeez, the only adjustment a user should have to make, is
to upgrade periodically as the developers squish bugs (ie this one).
--- Pierre Fortin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mark,
>
> [At the risk of start
> While I understand this to be a desire of many who use the browsers in
> this manner, I don't understand "why" this is. The browser was never
> designed to do such a thing. Why would one want it to? Why not just kill
Mark...look at what Konquerer is doing and think about the question
you just
Pierre Fortin wrote:
>
> Mark,
>
> [At the risk of starting a thread that won't die...]
>
> With all due respect, your comments really puzzle me... especially in a Linux
> forum... Extending your argument, why was it ever necessary to make Linux so
> reliable? Users could just "dump and resta
While I understand this to be a desire of many who use the browsers in
this manner, I don't understand "why" this is. The browser was never
designed to do such a thing. Why would one want it to? Why not just kill
the browser now and then, dump the cache and restart the browser. Since
linux memory
Mark,
[At the risk of starting a thread that won't die...]
With all due respect, your comments really puzzle me... especially in a Linux
forum... Extending your argument, why was it ever necessary to make Linux so
reliable? Users could just "dump and restart" it too...
Just as I hate reboots,
Well, part of the rush is for what is hoped to be an
acceptable browser.
Opera, Netscape6, Netscape 4.76 inevitably crash about
the time you get a decent mix of websites up. I
expect the browser to be up 24/7. Maybe Konqueror
Final can do this.
-Bill
--- Mark Weaver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
7 Feb 2001 13:33:08 -0800 (PST)
> From: Bill Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [expert] KDE 2.1 final
>
>
> Well, that's because the Linux community runs in
> Sensitivity Severity Mode (SSM). That is, the
All in good time. what's the rush?
--
Mark
"If you don't share your concepts and ideals, they end up being worthless,"
"Sharing is what makes them powerful."
On Tue, 27 Feb 2001, Ron Stodden wrote:
> Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 13:33:42 +1100
> From: Ron Stodden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Repl
Cecil Watson wrote:
>
>
>http://ftp.sourceforge.net/pub/mirrors/kde/stable/latest/distribution/rpm/Mandrake/7.2/
Huh? 7.2/i586/ is an empty directory. Nothing there.
--
Regards,
Ron. [au]
ctories are _empty_
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Cecil Watson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 11:41 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [expert] KDE 2.1 final
> >
> > http://ftp.sourceforge.net/pu
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 11:41 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [expert] KDE 2.1 final
>
> http://ftp.sourceforge.net/pub/mirrors/kde/stable/latest/distribution/rpm/Ma
> ndrake/7.2/
>
> Ron Stodden wrote:
>
> > KDE 2.1 final in binary form for the vario
On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 13:33 -0800, Bill Barnes wrote:
>
> Well, that's because the Linux community runs in
> Sensitivity Severity Mode (SSM). That is, the more
> desperate your needs the more likely a link or a
> package will be broken.
You may not know it because it reaches way back to when
ere is nothing under either directory
> > SRPMS and i586 directories are _empty_
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-
> > From: Cecil Watson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 11:41 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject:
acketta,Ronald J" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> BUM link!
>
> there is nothing under either directory
> SRPMS and i586 directories are _empty_
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Cecil Watson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 20
BUM link!
there is nothing under either directory
SRPMS and i586 directories are _empty_
-Original Message-
From: Cecil Watson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 11:41 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [expert] KDE 2.1 final
http://ftp.sourceforge.net/pub
http://ftp.sourceforge.net/pub/mirrors/kde/stable/latest/distribution/rpm/Mandrake/7.2/
Ron Stodden wrote:
> KDE 2.1 final in binary form for the various distributions was
> promised on the KDE site by Monday February 26.
>
> It is now 3.5 hours into Tuesday GMT and there is no sign of the KDE
39 matches
Mail list logo
