On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 06:50:16PM -0400, Bryan Kadzban wrote:
> Not sure if this is a good reason, but do the pages stay valid XHTML
They probably won't for the reasons you outlined (being forced to have to
support MSIE browsers). Maybe we can just fix the code to remain valid as long
as it doesn
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 03:43:58PM -0500, Randy McMurchy wrote:
> other avenue than littering every page with ads. I loathe SourceForge,
> and won't go there unless I must to check package versions. Even then,
The SF page is riddled with ads and the big graphic ones at that too. The type I
was loo
On 4/25/07, Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 04/25/07 12:01 CST:
>
> > I've got GNOME almost ready to go.
> >
> > Am I overlooking anything obvious?
>
> Along with D-Bus/HAL, I forgot to mention that I think we need to update
> Firefox and Thunderbird
Gerard Beekmans wrote:
> Besides the fact that ads are evil and all that, can anybody offer up
> a good reason not to pursue this?
Not sure if this is a good reason, but do the pages stay valid XHTML
1.1? We're currently serving them up as text/html (which is another
whole separate issue), with
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 14:09:18 -0600
Gerard Beekmans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Besides the fact that ads are evil and all that, can anybody offer up
> a good reason not to pursue this?
Yep. Advertising is evil, almost as bad as practical-democracy. BUT,
provided the sources are clearly from an
On Tue, Apr 24, at 07:27 Matthew Burgess wrote:
> On Tuesday 24 April 2007 08:27, Randy McMurchy wrote:
> > Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 04/24/07 02:11 CST:
> > > Then -1 to Matt's proposal to remove the patch. Seems dumb to remove
> > > a patch that provides a better end product.
> >
> > In
On 4/25/07, Gerard Beekmans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Things have come to a point where some additional revenue sources will be very
> helpful. Donations still trickle in at time but it's not even remotely close
> to
> being able to cover the recurring bills with.
I don't have any problems w
Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 04/25/07 15:43 CST:
> Please don't let LFS become like this where every page has an ad.
Please disregard my comments, as I had something else in mind (that
the actual book pages would contain ads).
However, my comments are still valid about how I despise the a
Gerard Beekmans wrote these words on 04/25/07 15:09 CST:
> The easiest place to put the ad code is in /common/header.html which means
> every
> page on www.linuxfromscratch.org (ie: all subprojectst too) receive get the
> google ads on it.
Yuck!
> If this is going to cause an outcry, let's dis
On Thu, Apr 19, at 11:29 Felix M. Palmen wrote:
> * TheOldFellow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [20070419 20:12]:
> > I don't really want to prolong this as an argument, Felix, but technical
> > is only one domain of interest here. PRACTICAL is the interesting
> > aspect. Greylisting works.
>
> Partly, at
Hiya,
I know...from the subject some of you guys will go into "not the evil ads" mode.
In spite of the expected resistance I want to bring it up anyway.
Things have come to a point where some additional revenue sources will be very
helpful. Donations still trickle in at time but it's not even rem
* USM Bish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [20070425 20:43]:
> IIRC, usually greylisting involves sending Err Code 451 (viz
> Requested action aborted: local error in processing). Since
> this implies that ATRN request cannot be processed now, or a
> temporary failure, most modern MT
Ag. D. Hatzimanikas wrote:
> Alright then, although I didn't notice any spam in mailing lists in the
> last year, since we started to require registration for posting.
You don't, but the Admins do. The system also is doing extra processing
due to the spam.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.o
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote these words on 04/25/07 09:36 CST:
> rsync to sync
> your mirrors with our main servers, and
> a cron program
> to schedule it for you.
>
> + You can find cheap href="http://www.webhostingsearch.com/linux-web-hosting.php";>linux web
> h
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 12:04:19PM +0300, Ag. D. Hatzimanikas wrote:
>
[ some snipped ]
>
> The logic behind greylisting is rejecting email with a
> temporary error code -- which is defined in RFC 821 [1] and
> should be honored by the moderns MTA's-- so:
>
>- Any "well behaved" [2] M
* Ag. D. Hatzimanikas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [20070425 12:04]:
> The logic behind greylisting is rejecting email with a temporary error
> code -- which is defined in RFC 821 [1] and should be honored by the
> moderns MTA's-- so:
>
>- Any "well behaved"
You guys who are installing HLFS and having problems installing Xorg, the
problem lies with the drivers not being assoicated with the correct
libraries. Install 7.1 from the BLFS install and re-install the vesa drivers
and re-run the LAST (gcc -shared ) command before running make install
On Tue, Apr 24, at 02:13 Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 08:46:04AM +0300, Ag. D. Hatzimanikas wrote:
> > Maybe it's a flaw in Track, maybe there is already a patch.
>
> Keep in mind that, although it may have appeared that way externally,
> the idea to try out greylisting had not
18 matches
Mail list logo
