Olivier FAURAX | 9 Sep 01:59 2007
Picon

Re: new urpmi messages

Pixel a écrit :
> Austin <austin.acton <at> utoronto.ca> writes:
> 
>> Adam Williamson wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2007-09-07 at 17:12 +0200, Pixel wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Now concerning having shorter lines, ... it's useless because you can have
>>>>> big packages names. So the user should icrease the width of his terminal
>>>>> ;) Now, if fixed lines are used, then you will have to put ellipses at the
>>>>> end of long name and make them be shorter.
>>>> already done (i've used character '*' to mean ellipsed)
>>> I suspect more people are used to and would be expecting...well...an
>>> ellipsis.
>>>
>>> For the non-English speakers out there, an ellipsis is "...".
>> Yes.  An asterix (*) has a very specific meaning in the computer world.
> 
> and here i think it's understandable:
> 
>   alsa-utils                     1.0.15       0.rc1.1mdv20* i586    
>   c2050                          0.4          4mdv2008.0    i586    
>   coreutils                      6.9          5mdv2008.0    i586    
> 
> we really can't use "..." which takes 3 characters.
> 
> i'm open to replace "*" with whatever character, but don't make it 3
> characters!

I propose :
   alsa-utils                     1.0.15       0.rc1.1mdv20» i586
(Continue reading)

Austin | 9 Sep 02:14 2007
Picon
Picon

Re: [hardware] Acer AL2016W

Austin wrote:
> no edid
> 
> H 30-81
> V 56-76
> best_resolution 1680x1050

Oh, that's a bit of a lie.  The mandriva monitor-get-edid returns 
nothing, but I was able to extract the edid using the NVidia setup utility.

[austin <at> localhost ~]$ monitor-parse-edid Desktop/edid.bin
Name: AL2016W
EISA ID: ACRada5
Screen size: 43.3 cm x 27.0 cm (20.09 inches, aspect ratio 16/10 = 1.60)
Gamma: 2.2
Digital signal
Max video bandwidth: 170 MHz

         HorizSync 31-83
         VertRefresh 56-75

         # Monitor preferred modeline (60.0 Hz vsync, 65.3 kHz hsync, 
ratio 16/10)
         ModeLine "1680x1050" 146.25 1680 1960 2136 2240 1050 1053 1059 
1089 +hsync -vsync

Austin | 9 Sep 01:08 2007
Picon
Picon

[hardware] Acer AL2016W

no edid

H 30-81
V 56-76
best_resolution 1680x1050

Adam Williamson | 9 Sep 02:39 2007

Re: legal status of bluez-firmware

On Sat, 2007-09-08 at 13:18 +0200, Olivier Blin wrote:
> Adam Williamson <awilliamson <at> mandriva.com> writes:
> 
> > I don't believe bluez-firmware should be in main. It claims 'GPL' as the
> > license but it really just contains a few proprietary firmware lumps,
> > neither of which comes with source, and which have distinctly non-free
> > license texts.
> >
> > Anyone disagree that it should be moved to non-free?
> 
> It's required by bluez-utils, you'd have to remove this, and adapt the
> rpmsrate and tools to install bluez-firmware

What if I changed it to a Suggests: ?

would that do the job? How are cross-repository Suggests: handled?
--

-- 
adamw

Adam Williamson | 9 Sep 01:56 2007

Re: new x11-driver-video-viaarena driver, conflict with x11-driver-video-via

On Fri, 2007-09-07 at 16:09 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-09-08 at 00:54 +0200, Olivier Blin wrote:
> > Adam Williamson <awilliamson <at> mandriva.com> writes:
> > 
> > > On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 11:41 +0200, Olivier Blin wrote:
> > >> Adam Williamson <awilliamson <at> mandriva.com> writes:
> > >> 
> > >> > Hi, guys.
> > >> >
> > >> > pcpa just introduced an 'x11-driver-video-viaarena' package which
> > >> > contains the official VIA driver for (uni)chrome graphics cards.
> > >> >
> > >> > I would like to modify ldetect-lst to use this driver for certain
> > >> > (chrome9) cards by default, as pcpa says it currently supports these
> > >> > better than openchrome does.
> > >> 
> > >> You can maybe rename the driver as viaarena_drv (and update the man
> > >> page).
> > >
> > > pcpa, could you possibly do this for me? I don't know the clean way to
> > > rename an X driver, but I'm sure you do. :) Thanks!
> > 
> > mv? :-)
> 
> There won't be anything internal to the driver that relies on the name?
> That's what I'm worried about. If not, I can handle it.

Okay, so I just went ahead and did it with 'mv'. The driver is now
installed with the name viaarena. I have also committed a new
ldetect-lst which adds a Cards+ definition for this driver and switches
(Continue reading)

Anssi Hannula | 9 Sep 02:48 2007

Re: legal status of bluez-firmware

Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-09-08 at 13:18 +0200, Olivier Blin wrote:
>> Adam Williamson <awilliamson <at> mandriva.com> writes:
>>
>>> I don't believe bluez-firmware should be in main. It claims 'GPL' as the
>>> license but it really just contains a few proprietary firmware lumps,
>>> neither of which comes with source, and which have distinctly non-free
>>> license texts.
>>>
>>> Anyone disagree that it should be moved to non-free?
>> It's required by bluez-utils, you'd have to remove this, and adapt the
>> rpmsrate and tools to install bluez-firmware
> 
> What if I changed it to a Suggests: ?
> 
> would that do the job? How are cross-repository Suggests: handled?

The suggests are installed by default if available. If they aren't on 
any of the enabled medias, the suggests are silently ignored.

--

-- 
Anssi Hannula

Adam Williamson | 9 Sep 02:42 2007

Re: avivo open source driver for ATI X1xxx series cards added to Cooker - please test

On Sun, 2007-08-12 at 17:11 +0200, Will wrote:

> I do agree.
> I open a tracking bug report shortly to collect working PCI IDs. 
> I will gave the PCI ID for my working avivo chipset too

Can I please have your PCI ID?
--

-- 
adamw

Adam Williamson | 9 Sep 02:53 2007

Re: legal status of bluez-firmware

On Sun, 2007-09-09 at 03:48 +0300, Anssi Hannula wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Sat, 2007-09-08 at 13:18 +0200, Olivier Blin wrote:
> >> Adam Williamson <awilliamson <at> mandriva.com> writes:
> >>
> >>> I don't believe bluez-firmware should be in main. It claims 'GPL' as the
> >>> license but it really just contains a few proprietary firmware lumps,
> >>> neither of which comes with source, and which have distinctly non-free
> >>> license texts.
> >>>
> >>> Anyone disagree that it should be moved to non-free?
> >> It's required by bluez-utils, you'd have to remove this, and adapt the
> >> rpmsrate and tools to install bluez-firmware
> > 
> > What if I changed it to a Suggests: ?
> > 
> > would that do the job? How are cross-repository Suggests: handled?
> 
> The suggests are installed by default if available. If they aren't on 
> any of the enabled medias, the suggests are silently ignored.

I rather meant by the installer, not by urpmi / rpmdrake. Or is that
what you were talking about?
--

-- 
adamw

Anssi Hannula | 9 Sep 02:56 2007

Re: legal status of bluez-firmware

Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-09-09 at 03:48 +0300, Anssi Hannula wrote:
>> Adam Williamson wrote:
>>> On Sat, 2007-09-08 at 13:18 +0200, Olivier Blin wrote:
>>>> Adam Williamson <awilliamson <at> mandriva.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> I don't believe bluez-firmware should be in main. It claims 'GPL' as the
>>>>> license but it really just contains a few proprietary firmware lumps,
>>>>> neither of which comes with source, and which have distinctly non-free
>>>>> license texts.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyone disagree that it should be moved to non-free?
>>>> It's required by bluez-utils, you'd have to remove this, and adapt the
>>>> rpmsrate and tools to install bluez-firmware
>>> What if I changed it to a Suggests: ?
>>>
>>> would that do the job? How are cross-repository Suggests: handled?
>> The suggests are installed by default if available. If they aren't on 
>> any of the enabled medias, the suggests are silently ignored.
> 
> I rather meant by the installer, not by urpmi / rpmdrake. Or is that
> what you were talking about?

Ah, no, it was not.

--

-- 
Anssi Hannula


Gmane