I hve been helping with Linux to a Friend who works as video editor and does 3D animations for TV and he uses Blender for 3D modeling and Jashaka for video composition and cinelerra for video editing. I'm sending a copy of this message to him, maybe he can help you. His mail is akumal_@xxxxxxxxxxx > I am a huge linux fan and want to switch my entire computer system to > linux based software. However, i have not found a 3d animation suite > that compares to NewTeks Lightwave 3d or a video editing suite > comparable to NewTeks VideoToaster or Adobe Premeire. If any one knows > of a descent software package please let me know. The few I have found > do not meet my needs. > > John Chapman > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 8 > Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 22:19:41 -0400 > From: John Chapman <chapmanj@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Nvidia VIVO > To: fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx > Message-ID: <40AD673D.8020800@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Hello, > > i have an ASUS nvidia 5200 card with vivo, is there any capture and > export software that will work with my card? > > > John Chapman > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 9 > Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 22:26:49 -0400 > From: Aaron Gaudio <prothonotar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: IMAP Version > To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> > Message-ID: <20040521022649.GB22166@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Behold, William Hooper <whooperhsd3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> hath decreed: > > > > Aaron Gaudio said: > > > > >> If you look at the release notes for FC2, you will see it comes with two > > >> imap servers - dovecot and cyrus-imapd > > >> > > > > > > Since I didn't need the functionality of cyrus-imapd, I built imapd-2002d > > > against FC2 just fine, based on existing RPMs. I can provide my SRPM > > > privately if requested. > > > > Any reason to prefer it over dovecot? > > > > Dunno. It was the first imapd implementation I found when I was > looking (I wouldn't know to look for a package called dovecot > for an imap daemon ;). I'll look into it sometime when I get a > chance. > > -- > > prothonotar at tarnation.dyndns.org > "Every man is a mob, a chain gang of idiots." > - Jonathan Nolan, /Memento Mori/ > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: not available > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 197 bytes > Desc: not available > Url : /archives/fedora-list/attachments/20040520/c9574456/attachment.bin > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 10 > Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 20:26:17 -0600 > From: "Rodolfo J. Paiz" <rpaiz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: nvidia and FC2 > To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> > Message-ID: <6.1.0.6.0.20040520202304.02562698@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed > > At 10:45 5/20/2004, Rui Miguel Seabra wrote: > >On Thu, 2004-05-20 at 17:23 +0100, John Hodrien wrote: > > > Absolutely, which is why nvidia have recognised it as such and are > > fixing it. > > > I don't think nvidia deserve a beating over this, it's just annoying for us > > > that's all. > > > >No. They recognized it as a limitation FC has, and that they will work > >around _THAT_ limitation. > > Yes. It *is* a limitation on their software. The stack is limited to 4K. > That is a correct and true statement. > > No statement at all is made on whether such a limitation is right or wrong, > necessary or unnecessary. In fact no value judgments are made at all. > > >At least that's what their statement says between the lines. > > Well, that's what you get for reading between the lines. If your opinions > and beliefs are strong enough (and we all know just how pig-he^H^H^H^H > strongly you believe), then you can and will read anything you please > "between the lines." They did not *say* that... you interpreted it. You > might be right in your interpretation, or you might not. But being > convinced that your interpretation is necessarily right is laughable. > > Cheers, > > > -- > Rodolfo J. Paiz > rpaiz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://www.simpaticus.com > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 11 > Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 22:31:46 -0400 > From: Luc Bouchard <luc@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: nvidia and FC2 > To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> > Message-ID: <40AD6A12.8010305@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Rui Miguel Seabra wrote: > > >On Thu, 2004-05-20 at 13:14 -0400, Jeremy Brown wrote: > > > > > >>OK, that's part of the issue, but in reality the NVidia driver contains > >>a number of patented technologies that can't even be legally implemented > >>in an open source driver. S3TC comes to mind; please read: > >> > >> > > > >Contrary to the three options pointed out, there is only one option: > > > > HELP END THE SOFTWARE PATENT NIGHTMARE! > > > >Rui > > > > > Exactly how do you propose doing that? You yourself have stated that > you do not know of any 3D card that is supported by open source > drivers. Please enlighten us so we too can be on the pure path. > > Luc Bouchard > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 12 > Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 23:21:13 -0300 > From: Andre Costa <acosta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: APIC blues with SMP kernel > To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> > Message-ID: <20040520232113.725a69ee.acosta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > > On Thu, 20 May 2004 12:23:06 +0100 > Dave Jones <davej@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Thu, 2004-05-20 at 02:28, Andre Costa wrote: > > > > > I am compiling a vanilla kernel as we speak, will try it out during > > > the weekend. However, given the fact that Fedora kernel is supposed > > > to provide superior performance compared to vanilla kernels, I would > > > like to use it instead, if at all possible... > > > > > > So, my questions are: > > > > > > 1. any success stories out there about SMP + Fedora on P4s? > > > > worked fine for me (I've now upgraded my p4 ht to run fc2) > > How did it go? I will do that sooner or later, but I guess I'd rather > collect more feedback before I jump into it. > > > > 2. any black-magic to use besides 'noapic', 'acpi=ht' and 'apm=off'? > > > > acpi=on ? > > Well, I didn't pass this explicitely, but I had already tried booting > without any 'acpi=xxx'. IIRC results were pretty much the same as > 'acpi=ht'. I will double check it later. > > > > 3. do vanilla kernels work with Fedora just fine (w/ or w/o SMP)? > > > > should do. > > Thks, will try it. > > Best, > > Andre > > -- > Andre Oliveira da Costa > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 13 > Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 23:18:13 -0300 > From: Andre Costa <acosta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: APIC blues with SMP kernel > To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> > Message-ID: <20040520231813.7bf551e8.acosta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > > Hi Wolfgang, > > On Thu, 20 May 2004 17:50:30 +1000 > "Wolfgang Gill" <wolfgang@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Wed, 19 May 2004 22:28:49 -0300, Andre Costa wrote > > > Hi, > > > > > > I have a P4 at work, and I have been having bad times trying to make > > > > > > it work with hyper-threading enabled. > > > > > > What happens are occasional lockups -- system appears to hang > > > (keyboard, mouse and X freeze, although machine still responds to > > > pings; all other services -- ssh, web, postgres -- are also dead). > > > > > > Last time it froze, its last words were: > > > > > > May 19 14:11:19 dali kernel: APIC error on CPU1: 00(40) > > > > > > May 19 14:11:39 dali kernel: hda: dma_timer_expiry: dma status == > > > 0x24 > > > > > > I know about APIC problems, but the fact is that if I pass 'noapic' > > > to the kernel before boot, the sibling CPU is detected but it > > > doesn't seem to be activated: it appears on top and gkrellm but it > > > never does anything (i.e. it remains with 0% usage). > > > > > > I googled around, and this dma_timer_expiry problem seems to be > > > kernel 2.6.x related. This leads me to think this is specific to > > > Fedora kernel, since RH backported many 2.6 features into its 2.4 > > > kernel... > > > > > > I am compiling a vanilla kernel as we speak, will try it out during > > > the weekend. However, given the fact that Fedora kernel is supposed > > > to provide superior performance compared to vanilla kernels, I would > > > > > > like to use it instead, if at all possible... > > > > > > So, my questions are: > > > > > > 1. any success stories out there about SMP + Fedora on P4s? > > > 2. any black-magic to use besides 'noapic', 'acpi=ht' and 'apm=off'? > > > 3. do vanilla kernels work with Fedora just fine (w/ or w/o SMP)? > > > > > > BTW: FC2 is not an option in the near future, so please don't > > > suggest I upgrade ;) > > > > > > TIA > > > > > > Andre > > > > > > -- > > > Andre Oliveira da Costa > > <snip> > > > > My first suggestion would be to update your mother board BIOS. There > > maybe there are some bugs in the APIC code in the BIOS. Or change the > > APIC level from 1.4 to 1.1. > > Mmmh... ok, I will try that -- I do recall seeing this on BIOS setup. > > > I don't have any APIC problems with my servers, as I run Tyan MPX > > mother boards, and have not seen APIC problems at all. I've run RH9, > > FC1 & RHEL3 WS on these boards without any problems. > > It should be something specific to my mobo then. Bad luck =( > > Thks for the ideas, > > Andre > > -- > Andre Oliveira da Costa > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 14 > Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 18:59:03 -0700 > From: Ow Mun Heng <ow.mun.heng@xxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: Directory Tree Listing > To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> > Message-ID: <1085104743.2258.155.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Content-Type: text/plain > > On Tue, 2004-05-18 at 20:30, Matthew Miller wrote: > > On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 07:35:07PM -0700, Ow Mun Heng wrote: > > > There's pstree. is there such a thing as tree command in linux? I just > > > want to have an overview of my Linux System's directory tree. > > > > Sure. In fact, it's called 'tree' and it's in the package named 'tree'. > > hmm.. I fee stupid > > THanks > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 15 > Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 20:33:58 -0600 > From: "Rodolfo J. Paiz" <rpaiz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: nvidia and FC2 > To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> > Message-ID: <6.1.0.6.0.20040520202631.02562408@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed > > At 10:43 5/20/2004, Rui Miguel Seabra wrote: > >They don't have to produce the drivers. Interested and capable > >developers only require information on how to talk to the hardware. > > OK, so you want them to release this information. > > >They're not doing you any favour, but that's still besides the point. > >They would spend far less resources by liberating info on how to talk to > >the hardware. > > OK, so you believe it would be cheaper for them to "liberate" the poor > information. > > >NVIDIA has already stated why they can't make > >the drivers free software: they have third party licensed software that > >they didn't do themselves. > > OK, so you understand that they have signed non-disclosure contracts and > are legally forbidden to disclose this information. Because they licensed > code someone else wrote, they have a binding legal obligation to keep that > code private. And yet you lambast them for not releasing that code, and you > tar and feather them for not opening up the code. > > From what I can see here, you think that they should save some dough and > make you happy by freely handing out information which they don't own and > are by contract obligated to keep private. > > I fail to see this as anything other than advice to be completely > unethical, breach their contracts and licenses, and dishonor their > commitments. Since I'm sure you'll claim virgin purity, perhaps you'll > enlighten me to which part of your exact words quoted above I may have misread? > > > -- > Rodolfo J. Paiz > rpaiz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://www.simpaticus.com > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 16 > Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 23:40:45 -0300 > From: Andre Costa <acosta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: Unofficial FAQ Updated for Fedora Core 2 > To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> > Message-ID: <20040520234045.36fbf3c0.acosta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > > I second that. I am still gearing up for a FC2 upgrade (still too many > scary stories going around... will wait until the dust settles), but > whenever I do it, your FAQ will be an invaluable source of help. > > Thks, > > Andre > > On Thu, 20 May 2004 14:38:57 +0200 > Alexander Dalloz <alexander.dalloz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Am Do, den 20.05.2004 schrieb Max K-A um 11:12: > > > > > With the efforts of Sindre Pedersen Bjordal and Gareth Russell, > > > combined with several hours of my editing and doing HTML stuff, we > > > now have an Unofficial FAQ for Fedora Core 2!! :-) > > > > > > You can see it in action at http://www.fedorafaq.org/ > > > > > -Max > > > > Congratulations Max - and many thanks! > > > > I like the new design of the FAQ page. > > > > Alexander > > > > > > -- > > Alexander Dalloz | Enger, Germany | GPG key 1024D/ED695653 1999-07-13 > > Fedora GNU/Linux Core 1 (Yarrow) on Athlon CPU kernel > > 2.4.22-1.2188.nptl Sirendipity 14:37:39 up 7 days, 12:22, load > > average: 0.33, 0.25, 0.55 > > [ __________ __'__________ - gnothi seauton ] > > my life is a planetarium - and you are the stars > > > > > -- > Andre Oliveira da Costa > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 17 > Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 22:36:10 -0400 > From: "M. Hakan Aksu" <hakan@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: reboots hanging. > To: fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx > Message-ID: <40AD6B1A.7040406@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed > > Hi- > > After a prolonged usage when rebooting FC2, it hangs and never finishes > the shutdown phase. > Usually the hang happens after it tries to unmount the filesystems. > Initially I thought this was a fluke but seeing it happening on 2 > different machines I am now afraid to reboot any FC2 box remotely. > Any suggestions? > thanks, > > -Hakan > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 18 > Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 22:47:56 -0400 > From: Aaron Gaudio <prothonotar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: XKB error after upgrade from FC1 to FC2 > To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> > Message-ID: <20040521024756.GC22166@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Behold, "Scot L. Harris" <webid@xxxxxxxxxx> hath decreed: > > Upgraded a FC1 system to FC2. After the upgrade I get the following > > error during login. > > > > > > Error activating XKB configuration. > > Probably internal X server problem. > > > > You need to edit /etc/X11/xorg.conf (or whatever config you're using > for X11) and change the setting for option "XkbRules" from "xfree86" to > "xorg".
