I am currently an annual leave please contact Paul Newman (Paul.Newman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) if your request is urgent. Thanks, Jon. >>> fedora-list 10/29/04 19:36 >>> Send fedora-list mailing list submissions to fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to fedora-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx You can reach the person managing the list at fedora-list-owner@xxxxxxxxxx When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of fedora-list digest..." Today's Topics: 1. patches for fglrx 4.3.0-3.14.1 (Jack Howarth) 2. Re: patches for fglrx 4.3.0-3.14.1 (Remi COLLET) 3. Re: patches for fglrx 4.3.0-3.14.1 (Remi COLLET) 4. Re: About "How do I make XMMS play MP3s?" from a new comer (Markku Kolkka) 5. Linux builds for PowerPC? (Adam Boettiger) 6. Re: Squid Performance - Default Options Tweak? (Rodolfo J. Paiz) 7. Firefox 1.0 RC1 in Fedora Extras? (D. D. Brierton) 8. Re: Linux builds for PowerPC? (D. D. Brierton) 9. Re: Need Help - Postfix, imap, pop, spamassissan, clamav, webmail (Volker Kindermann) 10. java time (Vano Beridze) 11. Re: Linux builds for PowerPC? (Adam Boettiger) 12. Re: Firefox 1.0 RC1 in Fedora Extras? (Michael Schwendt) 13. Re: About "How do I make XMMS play MP3s?" from a new comer (C. Linus Hicks) 14. Re: java time (Ernie McCracken) 15. Re: About "How do I make XMMS play MP3s?" from a new comer (Michael Schwendt) 16. Re: java time (Mike Markiw III) 17. Re: java time (Kevin J. Cummings) 18. Re: java time (Christopher K. Johnson) 19. Re: About "How do I make XMMS play MP3s?" from a new comer (Rodolfo J. Paiz) 20. Re: Linux builds for PowerPC? (Tarun Reddy) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 13:04:09 -0400 (EDT) From: howarth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Jack Howarth) Subject: patches for fglrx 4.3.0-3.14.1 To: fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx Message-ID: <20041029170409.2E92C1DC24E@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Are there any patches available yet to allow the kernel modules from the ATI non-free drivers (fglrx-4.3.0-3.14.1.i386.rpm) to be built on current Fedora Core 2? Thanks in advance for any information. Jack ps The site where I found the fc2 patches for the fglrx drivers doesn't have anything newer than patches for fglrx-4.3.0-3.9.0. ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 19:23:51 +0200 From: Remi COLLET <liste@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: patches for fglrx 4.3.0-3.14.1 To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> Message-ID: <41827CA7.1020109@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Jack Howarth a écrit : > Are there any patches available yet to allow the kernel > modules from the ATI non-free drivers (fglrx-4.3.0-3.14.1.i386.rpm) > to be built on current Fedora Core 2? Thanks in advance for any > information. > Jack > ps The site where I found the fc2 patches for the fglrx drivers > doesn't have anything newer than patches for fglrx-4.3.0-3.9.0. > Visit : http://www.stanford.edu/~fenn/linux/ You'll find a patch for lastest version. Remi. ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 19:27:59 +0200 From: Remi COLLET <liste@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: patches for fglrx 4.3.0-3.14.1 To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> Message-ID: <41827D9F.8060600@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Remi COLLET a écrit : > Jack Howarth a écrit : > >> Are there any patches available yet to allow the kernel >> modules from the ATI non-free drivers (fglrx-4.3.0-3.14.1.i386.rpm) >> to be built on current Fedora Core 2? Thanks in advance for any >> information. Jack >> ps The site where I found the fc2 patches for the fglrx drivers >> doesn't have anything newer than patches for fglrx-4.3.0-3.9.0. >> > > Visit : http://www.stanford.edu/~fenn/linux/ > > You'll find a patch for lastest version. > > Remi. > Ooooups. http://www.stanford.edu/~fenn/linux/fglrx-3.14.1-fc2.patch Or (i post here the one as use as it is very small) diff -Nru build_mod.orig/2.6.x/Makefile build_mod/2.6.x/Makefile --- build_mod.orig/2.6.x/Makefile 2004-08-05 23:06:07.709571464 +0200 +++ build_mod/2.6.x/Makefile 2004-08-05 23:06:35.673320328 +0200 @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ endif EXTRA_CFLAGS += \ - -Idrivers/char/drm/ \ + -I$(DRMINCLUDES) \ -D__AGP__ \ -DFGL \ -DFGL_LINUX \ diff -Nru build_mod.orig/make.sh build_mod/make.sh --- build_mod.orig/make.sh 2004-08-05 23:06:07.708571616 +0200 +++ build_mod/make.sh 2004-08-05 23:06:37.253080168 +0200 @@ -180,6 +180,11 @@ drmincludes=${linuxincludes}/../drivers/char/drm #drmincludes=/usr/local/src/dripkg/drm +# Fedora Core 2 work around +if [ ! -e "/usr/src/linux" ] && [ -d "/usr/src/linux-${uname_r}" ]; then + drmincludes=/usr/src/linux-${uname_r}/drivers/char/drm +fi + # since kernel 2.4.8 the X4.1.0 drm kernel module headers are part # of the kernel build environment - check dir and expected files. @@ -993,7 +998,7 @@ if [ $kernel_is_26x -gt 0 ]; then echo "doing Makefile based build for kernel 2.6.x and higher" | tee -a $logfile cd 2.6.x - make PAGE_ATTR_FIX=$PAGE_ATTR_FIX 2>&1 | tee -a $logfile + make PAGE_ATTR_FIX=$PAGE_ATTR_FIX DRMINCLUDES=$drmincludes 2>&1 | tee -a $logfile res=$? cd .. if [ $res -eq 0 ]; then ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 20:31:36 +0300 From: Markku Kolkka <markkukolkka@xxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: About "How do I make XMMS play MP3s?" from a new comer To: fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx Message-ID: <200410292031.36632.markkukolkka@xxxxxxxxxxx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" C. Linus Hicks kirjoitti viestissään (lähetysaika perjantai, 29. lokakuuta 2004 18:47): > I just noticed on the http://rpm.livna.org page this message: > > "The merger between Fedora.us and Red Hat necessitated the > removal of certain problematic packages (including but not > limited to mplayer, xine, videolan-client and xmms-mp3) due to > licensing issues or US software patent." Did you notice the next paragraph of text on the same site? The one that starts: "The open community of volunteers gathered in rpm.livna.org will continue to maintain those packages..." -- Markku Kolkka markku.kolkka@xxxxxx ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 10:33:32 -0700 From: Adam Boettiger <adam.boettiger@xxxxxxxxx> Subject: Linux builds for PowerPC? To: fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx Message-ID: <41827EEC.1060208@xxxxxxxxx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Is Linux Fedora compatible with the PowerPC? I have a G4 Mac Tibook with a 60G drive that I want to dual partition OSX with Linux. If Fedora is not PowerPC compatible, what are some other builds that are? Also, is there a site or list somewhere that lists all of the Linux builds and the number of software titles available for each or that ranks them by popularity or something? I know this is an open-ended question and choosing a build is very much a personal decision, but would be nice to know what others are installing with similar platforms. TIA, /AB ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 11:37:52 -0600 From: "Rodolfo J. Paiz" <rpaiz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: Squid Performance - Default Options Tweak? To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> Message-ID: <1099071473.3370.2.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Fri, 2004-10-29 at 18:22 +0700, Kh Linux wrote: > Dear all: > > I am installing Squid on RedHat 9 out of the Distro CDs on a Dell PowerEdge > 1300 Server, Pentium III RAM 256MB. I've been trying it out for 1 week now > with the default options. It seems very slow. > Don't install old software. Move to Fedora Core, and I suggest you move to Fedora Core 3 which will be released on November 8th. Note that everything you do will be slow if you are saturating 1 Mbps. Find out what is wrong with that first. Also, try not forwarding DNS queries to your ISP. Remember, the software you are using was declared at "End Of Life" more than six months ago. You are going to find it difficult to get help. Did you at least make sure to install *all* patches and upgrades available for your operating system? Cheers, -- Rodolfo J. Paiz <rpaiz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : /archives/fedora-list/attachments/20041029/d68006ef/attachment.bin ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 18:42:55 +0100 From: "D. D. Brierton" <darren@xxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Firefox 1.0 RC1 in Fedora Extras? To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> Message-ID: <1099071775.25732.168.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Content-Type: text/plain I can't seem to work out where the Fedora Extras mailing lists have been moved to. I was trying to find out what the status of the Firefox builds for FC2 was. Have they stopped because Firefox will be in FC3? The only discussion I could find was this bugzilla entry: https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=2032 the last comment on which was made on 3rd October. That bugzilla report concerns Firefox 1.0 PR1 which as far as I can tell never made it into stable because of various problems (extensions and themes not installing, plugins path, etc.). I'm still on 0.9.3. As I don't plan to upgrade to FC3 until it's been out for at least a month or so but am now using Firefox as my default browser for everything (browsing and development work) I certainly have an interest in seeing Firefox packages released for FC2. Any suggestions? Best, Darren P.S. I know I can download Firefox direct from Mozilla.org but I was interested in builds for FC that could be managed with yum. -- ===================================================================== D. D. Brierton darren@xxxxxxxxxxx www.dzr-web.com Trying is the first step towards failure (Homer Simpson) ===================================================================== ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 18:53:43 +0100 From: "D. D. Brierton" <darren@xxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: Linux builds for PowerPC? To: fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx Message-ID: <1099072422.25732.179.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Content-Type: text/plain On Fri, 2004-10-29 at 18:33, Adam Boettiger wrote: > Is Linux Fedora compatible with the PowerPC? There are builds of Fedora Core for PPC but I don't know how stable they are. Currently PPC is not an officially supported platform of FC. The package tree for PPC is here: http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/development/ppc/ I can't seem to find any ISOs you can dowload though. > I have a G4 Mac Tibook with a 60G drive that I want to dual partition > OSX with Linux. If Fedora is not PowerPC compatible, what are some other > builds that are? Yellow Dog Linux (you'll need to google that) is a port of Fedora Core to PPC. It seems to be well-regarded. I have recently heard very good reports of Ubuntu (Debian based distribution) on PPC. Here is a review of Ubuntu on Mac: http://www.ppcnerds.org/Article207.html You can download Ubuntu from here: http://www.ubuntulinux.org/download/ Best, Darren -- ===================================================================== D. D. Brierton darren@xxxxxxxxxxx www.dzr-web.com Trying is the first step towards failure (Homer Simpson) ===================================================================== ------------------------------ Message: 9 Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 20:06:54 +0200 From: Volker Kindermann <ml@xxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: Need Help - Postfix, imap, pop, spamassissan, clamav, webmail To: rick@xxxxxxxxxxx, For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> Message-ID: <20041029200654.31b3d5a2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Hi Rick, > I want to set up an e-mail server that can serve up the mail for multiple > domains. I was trying to install postfix with mysql, courier-imap, > spamassissin, clamav, and webmail support. there's a good documentation for OpenBSD online: http://www.flakshack.com/anti-spam/ It is not too hard to transform this to Fedora, I installed a similar system on Red Hat 9 some months ago. This tutorial will explain the postfix, spamassassin, clamav (addendum) part. For courier-imap I followed the documentation on the website, webmail is best done with sqwebmail (fits better with courier than other webmailpackages). If you have concrete problems by following the tutorial, feel free to ask again, if you prefer do it per private mail. -volker ------------------------------ Message: 10 Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 22:06:48 +0400 From: Vano Beridze <vano.beridze@xxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: java time To: fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx Message-ID: <418286B8.6090000@xxxxxxxxxxx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Hello I've got Fedora Core 2 kernel 2.6.8 if I run a command date it gives me the output Fri Oct 29 22:03:50 GEST 2004 but If I compile and run a simple java program (with jdk1.4.2 or jdk1.5) public class A { public static void main(String[] args) { System.out.println(new java.util.Date()); } } it gives me the output Fri Oct 29 23:03:50 GEST 2004 I'm sure it's a fedora problem, because I did not have that problems on Core 1 or previous releases. What should I do? Thank you -- Vano Beridze Software Developer Silk Road Group S.A. ------------------------------ Message: 11 Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 11:04:54 -0700 From: Adam Boettiger <adam.boettiger@xxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: Linux builds for PowerPC? To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> Message-ID: <41828646.10806@xxxxxxxxx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Thanks Darren. In doing research I saw that Debian (the core build) has a version that is PPC compatible. Is there any reason why I would not use Debian over Ubuntu? D. D. Brierton wrote: > to PPC. It seems to be well-regarded. I have recently heard very good > reports of Ubuntu (Debian based distribution) on PPC. ------------------------------ Message: 12 Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 20:12:16 +0200 From: Michael Schwendt <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: Firefox 1.0 RC1 in Fedora Extras? To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> Message-ID: <20041029201216.5b06de96.fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 18:42:55 +0100, D. D. Brierton wrote: > I can't seem to work out where the Fedora Extras mailing lists have been > moved to. fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list Unless announced otherwise in the future. > I was trying to find out what the status of the Firefox builds > for FC2 was. Have they stopped because Firefox will be in FC3? No. Firefox for FC2 remains an extra package. > The only > discussion I could find was this bugzilla entry: > > https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=2032 ... and it's flagged NEEDSWORK, which also means that help is more than welcome. Reading through the bugzilla comments should give a picture why the developers are not happy with their package or where they encountered problems. -- Fedora Core release 2 (Tettnang) - Linux 2.6.8-1.541 loadavg: 1.55 1.40 1.64 ------------------------------ Message: 13 Date: 29 Oct 2004 14:17:46 -0400 From: "C. Linus Hicks" <lhicks@xxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: About "How do I make XMMS play MP3s?" from a new comer To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> Message-ID: <1099073866.930.52.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Fri, 2004-10-29 at 13:31, Markku Kolkka wrote: > C. Linus Hicks kirjoitti viestissään (lähetysaika perjantai, 29. > lokakuuta 2004 18:47): > > I just noticed on the http://rpm.livna.org page this message: > > > > "The merger between Fedora.us and Red Hat necessitated the > > removal of certain problematic packages (including but not > > limited to mplayer, xine, videolan-client and xmms-mp3) due to > > licensing issues or US software patent." > > Did you notice the next paragraph of text on the same site? The > one that starts: "The open community of volunteers gathered in > rpm.livna.org will continue to maintain those packages..." Yeah, so I'm curious how they plan to resolve the obvious conflict between those two statements. The first statement says "necessitated the removal..." and if that's true, how do you then make available things that have been removed from their site? Are they planning on starting a new repository? However, if you look in their repository, xmms-mp3 is still there, so the first statement seems to be a lie. -- C. Linus Hicks <lhicks@xxxxxxxxx> ------------------------------ Message: 14 Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 14:21:37 -0400 From: Ernie McCracken <holycrap@xxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: java time To: fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx Message-ID: <20041029182136.GB16137@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 10:06:48PM +0400, Vano Beridze wrote: > if I run a command date > it gives me the output > Fri Oct 29 22:03:50 GEST 2004 > > but If I compile and run a simple java program (with jdk1.4.2 or jdk1.5) > > it gives me the output > Fri Oct 29 23:03:50 GEST 2004 > Is it just me, or are the output of both the "date" command and the java program exactly the same? :-) ------------------------------ Message: 15 Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 20:29:19 +0200 From: Michael Schwendt <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: About "How do I make XMMS play MP3s?" from a new comer To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> Message-ID: <20041029202919.28461a2f.fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII On 29 Oct 2004 14:17:46 -0400, C. Linus Hicks wrote: > > > I just noticed on the http://rpm.livna.org page this message: > > > > > > "The merger between Fedora.us and Red Hat necessitated the > > > removal of certain problematic packages (including but not > > > limited to mplayer, xine, videolan-client and xmms-mp3) due to > > > licensing issues or US software patent." > > > > Did you notice the next paragraph of text on the same site? The > > one that starts: "The open community of volunteers gathered in > > rpm.livna.org will continue to maintain those packages..." > > Yeah, so I'm curious how they plan to resolve the obvious conflict > between those two statements. The first statement says "necessitated the > removal..." and if that's true, how do you then make available things > that have been removed from their site? Are they planning on starting a > new repository? Not "their site", but fedora.us' site. You misunderstand the text. rpm.livna.org originated in fedora.us and continues to maintain packages which are not permitted to exist in Fedora Extras or Fedora Core. -- Fedora Core release 2 (Tettnang) - Linux 2.6.8-1.541 loadavg: 2.97 2.43 2.00 ------------------------------ Message: 16 Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 18:28:24 +0000 From: "Mike Markiw III" <mmarkiw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: java time To: "For users of Fedora Core releases" <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> Message-ID: <W7432130221204391099074504@webmail2> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > -----Original Message----- > From: Ernie McCracken [mailto:holycrap@xxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 06:21 PM > To: fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: java time > > On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 10:06:48PM +0400, Vano Beridze wrote: > > if I run a command date > > it gives me the output > > Fri Oct 29 22:03:50 GEST 2004 > > > > but If I compile and run a simple java program (with jdk1.4.2 or jdk1.5) > > > > it gives me the output > > Fri Oct 29 23:03:50 GEST 2004 > > > > Is it just me, or are the output of both the "date" command and the java > program exactly the same? :-) Close, but no cigar ;-) The hours are different by 1 (22 hundred hours vs. 23 hundred hours). I would check to see if the daylight savings time settings are the reason. With a difference of only one hour, it seems like a strange but possible culprit. Just a thought. -Mike ------------------------------ Message: 17 Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 14:28:38 -0400 From: "Kevin J. Cummings" <cummings@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: java time To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> Message-ID: <41828BD6.1080107@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Ernie McCracken wrote: > On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 10:06:48PM +0400, Vano Beridze wrote: > >>if I run a command date >>it gives me the output >>Fri Oct 29 22:03:50 GEST 2004 >> >>but If I compile and run a simple java program (with jdk1.4.2 or jdk1.5) >> >>it gives me the output >>Fri Oct 29 23:03:50 GEST 2004 >> > > > Is it just me, or are the output of both the "date" command and the java > program exactly the same? :-) Its just you, they were run exactly 1 hour apart. B^) -- Kevin J. Cummings kjchome@xxxxxxx cummings@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx cummings@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ------------------------------ Message: 18 Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 14:30:34 -0400 From: "Christopher K. Johnson" <ckjohnson@xxxxxxx> Subject: Re: java time To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> Message-ID: <41828C4A.30302@xxxxxxx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Ernie McCracken wrote: >On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 10:06:48PM +0400, Vano Beridze wrote: > > >>if I run a command date >>it gives me the output >>Fri Oct 29 22:03:50 GEST 2004 >> >>but If I compile and run a simple java program (with jdk1.4.2 or jdk1.5) >> >>it gives me the output >>Fri Oct 29 23:03:50 GEST 2004 >> >> >> > >Is it just me, or are the output of both the "date" command and the java >program exactly the same? :-) > > > > They differ by an hour. What does the java program source look like? -- ----------------------------------------------------------- "Spend less! Do more! Go Open Source..." -- Dirigo.net Chris Johnson, RHCE #807000448202021 ------------------------------ Message: 19 Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 12:30:53 -0600 From: "Rodolfo J. Paiz" <rpaiz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: About "How do I make XMMS play MP3s?" from a new comer To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> Message-ID: <1099074653.3370.10.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" On Fri, 2004-10-29 at 14:17 -0400, C. Linus Hicks wrote: > On Fri, 2004-10-29 at 13:31, Markku Kolkka wrote: > > C. Linus Hicks kirjoitti viestissään (lähetysaika perjantai, 29. > > lokakuuta 2004 18:47): > > > I just noticed on the http://rpm.livna.org page this message: > > > > > > "The merger between Fedora.us and Red Hat necessitated the > > > removal of certain problematic packages (including but not > > > limited to mplayer, xine, videolan-client and xmms-mp3) due to > > > licensing issues or US software patent." > > > > Did you notice the next paragraph of text on the same site? The > > one that starts: "The open community of volunteers gathered in > > rpm.livna.org will continue to maintain those packages..." > > Yeah, so I'm curious how they plan to resolve the obvious conflict > between those two statements. The first statement says "necessitated the > removal..." and if that's true, how do you then make available things > that have been removed from their site? Are they planning on starting a > new repository? > > However, if you look in their repository, xmms-mp3 is still there, so > the first statement seems to be a lie. > Quoted in full to keep context. Calling people liars is not going to make you any friends, especially when you're operating from ignorance. Notice the text is very clear: "The merger between Fedora.us and Red Hat" necessitated the removal of some packages from Fedora.us. Those packages were removed from Fedora.us. The fact that you saw this news item on a Livna.org page means nothing... Fedora.us had to remove some packages, and they did. Fedora.us has no relationship to Livna, which is in another country and not subject to the same laws. So Livna has no such need to remove those packages, and didn't. You'll find xmms-mp3 on Livna, where it's legal, and not on Fedora.us, where it's not. There are no lies... there is simply your inability to read and keep your facts straight. -- Rodolfo J. Paiz <rpaiz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : /archives/fedora-list/attachments/20041029/fa398742/attachment.bin ------------------------------ Message: 20 Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 12:35:54 -0600 From: Tarun Reddy <treddy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: Linux builds for PowerPC? To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> Message-ID: <5E054980-29D9-11D9-8E55-000A95BA634C@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed To install Fedora on PPC, check out http://www.bytebot.net/geekdocs/ibook/fedorappc.html Tarun On Oct 29, 2004, at 11:53 AM, D. D. Brierton wrote: > On Fri, 2004-10-29 at 18:33, Adam Boettiger wrote: >> Is Linux Fedora compatible with the PowerPC? > > There are builds of Fedora Core for PPC but I don't know how stable > they > are. Currently PPC is not an officially supported platform of FC. The > package tree for PPC is here: > > http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/development/ > ppc/ > > I can't seem to find any ISOs you can dowload though. > >> I have a G4 Mac Tibook with a 60G drive that I want to dual partition >> OSX with Linux. If Fedora is not PowerPC compatible, what are some >> other >> builds that are? > > Yellow Dog Linux (you'll need to google that) is a port of Fedora Core > to PPC. It seems to be well-regarded. I have recently heard very good > reports of Ubuntu (Debian based distribution) on PPC. > > Here is a review of Ubuntu on Mac: > > http://www.ppcnerds.org/Article207.html > > You can download Ubuntu from here: > > http://www.ubuntulinux.org/download/ > > Best, Darren > > -- > ===================================================================== > D. D. Brierton darren@xxxxxxxxxxx www.dzr-web.com > Trying is the first step towards failure (Homer Simpson) > ===================================================================== > > -- > fedora-list mailing list > fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list > ------------------------------ -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list End of fedora-list Digest, Vol 8, Issue 358 *******************************************
