On Sun, 2013-01-13 at 07:49 -0800, Tom London wrote:
snip...
--
Christopher A Williams chriswfed...@cawllc.com
found in:
/usr/src/kernels/3.6.11-3.fc18.x86_64/include/linux
Put that all together and I suspect that the actual issue isn't so much
the different tree structure - it's
O
n Mon, 2013-01-14 at 09:20 -0600, Justin M. Forbes wrote:
...And because of the way Workstation 9.0.1 is trying to deal with it, I
believe this now falls squarely back on the Fedora team to look at and
resolve. You can't blame Workstation or its licensing model - don't even
start.
On Sat, 2013-01-12 at 19:32 -0700, Christopher A. Williams wrote:
snip...
...Looked again at this. It's actually not quite what's needed. It says
to make a symbolic link from:
/usr/src/linux-3.7/include/generated/uapi/linux/version.h
to
/usr/src/linux-3.7/include/linux/version.h
know that's not all of the information people are asking for, but
hopefully it does shed some additional light on the situation...
Cheers,
Chris
--
Christopher A. Williams chriswfed...@cawllc.com
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org
On Sat, 2013-01-12 at 15:26 +, Frank Murphy wrote:
On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 07:56:40 -0700
Christopher A. Williams chriswfed...@cawllc.com wrote:
http://slackblogs.blogspot.ie/2012/12/linux-kernel-37-vmware-workstation-and.html
thank the great God Google,
now why didn't I think
On Sat, 2013-01-12 at 09:23 -0700, Christopher A. Williams wrote:
On Sat, 2013-01-12 at 15:26 +, Frank Murphy wrote:
On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 07:56:40 -0700
Christopher A. Williams chriswfed...@cawllc.com wrote:
http://slackblogs.blogspot.ie/2012/12/linux-kernel-37-vmware-workstation
On Wed, 2012-09-12 at 08:18 -0600, Tim Flink wrote:
On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 04:33:57 -0400 (EDT)
Kamil Paral kpa...@redhat.com wrote:
The two mockups that I'm looking at right now (identical other than
the table column ordering) are:
On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 23:59 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 07/09/2012 11:43 PM, David Lehman wrote:
On Sun, 2012-07-08 at 07:49 -0600, Christopher A. Williams wrote:
Agreed. And I fear the universe, in this case, may be winning by
producing bigger idiot developers.
Indeed -- bigger idiot
. Is that just too much to ask despite that reasonably good
versions of such have been successfully accomplished in the past?
Chris
--
Christopher A. Williams chriswfed...@cawllc.com
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo
On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 12:49 -0500, David Lehman wrote:
On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 11:23 -0600, Christopher A. Williams wrote:
On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 11:52 -0500, David Lehman wrote:
Exactly what is so bad with that practice (of installing both
desktops) as to frown upon it?
I am
DEs.
...And thanks for being a stand-up guy about all this in the end.
Chris
--
Christopher A. Williams chriswfed...@cawllc.com
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
.
Agreed. And I fear the universe, in this case, may be winning by
producing bigger idiot developers.
Chris
--
Christopher A. Williams chriswfed...@cawllc.com
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 14:06 -0400, Scott Robbins wrote:
On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 11:29:06AM -0600, Christopher A. Williams wrote:
Before I go ahead and submit a BZ on this, has anyone else noticed that
the Java plugin is not listed in Firefox on F15? If you do
about:plugins, everything else
Before I go ahead and submit a BZ on this, has anyone else noticed that
the Java plugin is not listed in Firefox on F15? If you do
about:plugins, everything else you would expect to be there is. The Java
plugin is visibly absent.
I've even tried adding the latest Java (Update 25) from Sun/Oracle.
On Fri, 2010-10-15 at 12:33 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
SR == Scott Robbins scot...@nyc.rr.com writes:
SR I've never quite understood this logic. If it's working, there is a
SR change in Fedora, and it doesn't work, this is NVidia's job to fix?
Yes, precisely.
Their code is not
On Fri, 2010-10-15 at 13:33 -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 11:59:35 -0600,
Christopher A. Williams chriswfed...@cawllc.com wrote:
The pragmatic reality is that we will all be dealing with a mix of
OpenSource and proprietary software for the foreseeable future
On Fri, 2010-10-15 at 13:08 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
CAW == Christopher A Williams chriswfed...@cawllc.com writes:
CAW Actually, this is an oversimplified view based on pure ideology -
CAW and exactly the one which causes issues between the OpenSource and
CAW other communities
On Fri, 2010-10-15 at 16:49 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
Christopher A. Williams wrote:
But the two camps can - and should - at least be expected to play
nicely with each other. The rules of engagement between the two could
be similar to when two proprietary software companies
On Wed, 2010-07-07 at 17:02 +, Jonathan Kamens wrote:
I wasn't being snarky, I was being pragmatic.
You're absolutely right that a triager should have looked at the bug
in bugzilla, tried to reproduce it, and comment on the results. I
can't comment on why that didn't happen. What I was
On Wed, 2010-07-07 at 10:43 -0600, Kevin DeKorte wrote:
The issue with nspluginwrapper and the 64-bit plugin remains, however.
But since Adobe has pulled the 64-bit plugin for now, we'll have to wait
and see if the new version still has the problem. Based on the behavior
I'm seeing, this
On Wed, 2010-07-07 at 01:14 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 20:53 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 16:38 -0700, Rob Healey wrote:
Greetings:
Is there anything that can be used as a substitute for the flash
player since Adobe refuses and
On Wed, 2010-07-07 at 10:01 -0400, Jonathan Kamens wrote:
On 7/7/2010 9:55 AM, Christopher A. Williams wrote:
Thanks for the pointer. Your install method works just great.
...Unfortunately, it also still means that certain sites still do not
play video correctly due to issues
On Wed, 2010-07-07 at 11:04 -0400, Jonathan Kamens wrote:
On 7/7/2010 10:44 AM, Christopher A. Williams wrote:
Not true. Just because YOU can't reproduce it doesn't mean it isn't
happening. Others have reproduced the problem and also commented as such
on the bug report.
Whether
23 matches
Mail list logo
