Moins,
On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 02:27 +, Vincenzo Ciancia wrote:
On 11/11/2008 Scott Kitterman wrote:
I would encourage you (and others, you certainly aren't the only one)
to hold
your temper and if you can't say something helpful, just take your
hands off
the keyboard. Being
2008/11/13 (``-_-´´) -- Fernando [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Olá Mario e a todos.
===snip===
I never understood why the proposed rep is not pined down/back...
--
BUGabundo :o)
(``-_-´´) http://LinuxNoDEI.BUGabundo.net
Linux user #443786GPG key 1024D/A1784EBB
My new micro-blog @
If a distributor adds more goodies to the kernel, then be happy, but
that doesn't mean, that it really works...even when the distributor puts
the hardware on the list of supported hardware.
I hope this is not really the idea of the ubuntu developers on this
topic, because if so, then I can
Hi,
On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 09:00 +, Vincenzo Ciancia wrote:
If a distributor adds more goodies to the kernel, then be happy, but
that doesn't mean, that it really works...even when the distributor puts
the hardware on the list of supported hardware.
I hope this is not really the
Sarah - this should make sense on its own, but it builds on an idea I
suggested in
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-discuss/2008-November/006250.html
which you might provide a little background to this post.
3) There are plenty of other hardware regressions by which I am affected
Canonical does provide Support for Ubuntu for You, when you want to
pay
it. If not, fix it yourself, or help us fixing it e.g. join the irc
and
point people to it. If people can't help you directly, because of not
having the broken hardware, you can try to provide this hardware to
the
Am 13.11.2008 um 10:32 schrieb Stephan Hermann:
But reality told me different.
Stephan, your points about the unfortunate truth are valid.
Nevertheless, software quality is one of the keys to success.
I've just filed the second bug where one of the Gnome applets
segfaults in a standard
On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 09:00:36 + Vincenzo Ciancia [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
If a distributor adds more goodies to the kernel, then be happy, but
that doesn't mean, that it really works...even when the distributor puts
the hardware on the list of supported hardware.
I hope this is not
Markus Hitter [2008-11-13 11:56 +0100]:
While we can't fix developers, we can put more automatic helpers
into place:
- Keep Apport enabled even on stable releases. Hiding bugs doesn't
help.
We don't disable Apport in stable releases because we want to hide
bugs. The reasons are, in
Stephan Hermann wrote:
On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 11:56 +0100, Markus Hitter wrote:
- Allow downgrades. This should help narrowing potential causes of
the trouble.
This is something I don't understand.
When I upgrade to a new release, I always think (or is it knowing): Ok,
for the next 4
2008/11/13 Andrew Sayers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Stephan Hermann wrote:
On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 11:56 +0100, Markus Hitter wrote:
- Allow downgrades. This should help narrowing potential causes of
the trouble.
This is something I don't understand.
When I upgrade to a new release, I
On Thursday 13 November 2008 05:13, Andrew Sayers wrote:
Sarah - this should make sense on its own, but it builds on an idea I
suggested in
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-discuss/2008-November/006250
.html
which you might provide a little background to this post.
3) There
On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 20:36 +1100, Sarah Hobbs wrote:
Take the intel 3945 card, for example. Vincenzo says it doesn't work
for him, under various modes. Various users on the forums have also
mentioned that their systems don't work with these cards.
However, other users on the forums,
Hi all , I've doned the asbestos pants
On an upgrade from 8.04 to 8.10 the symlink from /usr/bin/gcc
to /usr/bin/gcc-4.3 is not made.
on a clean install of 8.10 its made.
I verified it as well by reloading 8.04 and upgrading, and then do a
clean install of 8.10.
If I put that on the forums it
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:55 PM, Mackenzie Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 20:36 +1100, Sarah Hobbs wrote:
Take the intel 3945 card, for example. Vincenzo says it doesn't work
for him, under various modes. Various users on the forums have also
mentioned that their
On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 21:58 +0100, Nicolas Deschildre wrote:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:55 PM, Mackenzie Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 20:36 +1100, Sarah Hobbs wrote:
Take the intel 3945 card, for example. Vincenzo says it doesn't work
for him, under various modes.
On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 21:58 +0100, Nicolas Deschildre wrote:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:55 PM, Mackenzie Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 20:36 +1100, Sarah Hobbs wrote:
Take the intel 3945 card, for example. Vincenzo says it doesn't work
for him, under various modes.
On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 16:14:31 -0500 Mackenzie Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I haven't bothered trying to use the GUI with my iwl4965 and WEP. I
just expect NM to not work when it comes to WEP.
I have 4965 and it worked fine for me with KNetworkManager and WEP in
Hardy. I have't had a need
On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 12:48:40 +0100 Martin Pitt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Markus Hitter [2008-11-13 11:56 +0100]:
While we can't fix developers, we can put more automatic helpers
into place:
- Keep Apport enabled even on stable releases. Hiding bugs doesn't
help.
We don't disable
On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 21:12 -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 16:14:31 -0500 Mackenzie Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I haven't bothered trying to use the GUI with my iwl4965 and WEP. I
just expect NM to not work when it comes to WEP.
I have 4965 and it worked fine for
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 2:25 AM, Scott Kitterman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have heard people discuss post-release regressions due to SRU/security
updates. I was chatting with another developer last night who said he'd
found Hardy very stable at release and less so as it got updated.
Perhaps
21 matches
Mail list logo
