Discuss

discuss@lists.centos.org

5 participants
34752 discussions

Re: [CentOS] mplayer repository for CentOS
by Bryan J. Smith 22 May '05

22 May '05

That Red Hat exited the desktop market. -----Original Message----- From: Collins Richey Date: 05-5-21 17:34 To: CentOS mailing list Subj: Re: [CentOS] mplayer repository for CentOS On 5/21/05, Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith(a)ieee.org> wrote: [ snips ] > ...Red Hat marketing to try to repair a lot of the damage that eWeek's > mis-quotes of Michael Tiemann did back in 2003. > An what might these misquotes and this damage be? I've done a little googling with those keywords and found nothing of interest. I haven't a clue what you're talking about. -- Collins Head teachers of the world unite: you have nothing to lose but the Start button. _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS(a)centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

1 0

Re: Hi, Bryan; was: Re: pronunciation? <snip> -- don't shoot the messenger ...
by Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith＠ieee.org> 22 May '05

22 May '05

From: Johnny Hughes <mailing-lists(a)hughesjr.com> > IBM has since totally changed their thoughts with regards to GNU/Linux. Actually, their cut-off of Monterey had everything to do with their current change in strategy on Linux back in 2000+. Monterey was established before IBM's interest in GNU/Linux. After IBM realized that it could use an economical complement in Linux, it saw a Monterey/IA-64 version as a thread (this was before x86-64 established itself). Hence the result. > They (like RedHat) are still a business that needs to make money ... but > both they (and RedHat) are doing many things to make GNU/Linux much > better. But in actual "meat" -- HP, Red Hat and even Sun have done far more for GPL GNU/Linux. IBM's support has been sporadic, and heavily non-GPL. Now I _have_ noted a few of their kernel contributions, and their 500 patent donation actually made me rethink my stance. But still, in comparison to even Sun, they are anemic. Especially when they yanked support for Linux on their desktops and notebooks, even at the height of their involvement. HP and even Sun have expanded in comparison. Right now IBM's involvement has been limited to certain, enterprise-specific considerations. And even their Java has not been anywhere near GPL -- not even SWT. > Would they rather you buy their hardware and software, yes (ie, AIX). > Would they rather you ran Linux on their Hardware, if you were going to > run it (vice on HP), yes. But they are actually preventing clients from going with another vendor by contract. In reality, IBM is no better than what Caldera-SCO is now doing, and IBM has actually been the "master" in that approach. > But the fact remains that IBM is put more money into Linux than > anyone else. That's the "Linux Quiz Show" I'm talking about. You're tuning in for the money, not the substance. Maturing your own product line and not sharing your developments is what IBM is doing, not HP, Red Hat or even Sun. And in most cases, IBM's licenses are no better than Sun's -- let alone IBM has not even matched 1/10th of the GPL donations of HP, Red Hat or Sun. That's what I'm talking about. > IBM is a founding member and large donor to OSDL ( http://www.osdl.org > ) ... which employs Linus Torvalds and Andrew Morton (among others) to > do Linux kernel work exclusively. And that's one of the very few highlights of IBM. They have also helped out LPI tremendously. But when it comes to actual donations and endeavors, they are very, very, _very_ proprietary. IBM's entire solutions are built upon proprietary tiers with little-to-no standards, whereas HP and Sun are at least "open standard," and HP's frameworks are increasingly open source based (with heafty donations). What I'm trying to say here is that IBM is offering "vendor lock-in" no different than Microsoft from a solutions standpoint, which matches the fact that they are porting their proprietary software to Linux and leaving it proprietary. Other than some community endeavors like OSDL, support of LPI, their entire Linux effort is 98% proprietary, and most of the remaining 2% is not "GPL compatible." While I appreciate IBM's efforts, I really find it ironic that people don't hold IBM to the same standards as Sun or Red Hat. And when it comes to a leading R&D company that is also a tier-1 OEM, HP is far more of a community donator than IBM. IBM has only stood behind the GPL when it has favored them, like in the Caldera-SCO lawsuit (although I admit their legal team _does_ seem to "get" the GPL, and are using it well in the lawsuit). > They also employ Andrew Tridgell (samba creator). Where is Linux > without OSDL and IBM? Many companies are involved with OSDL. It's not just IBM. In fact, last time I checked, HP and Red Hat were also heavily involved. I know Sun is now participating (although I'm sure no where near the other 3). In fact, Red Hat has continually been the company that has solved many GPL issues when the have arisen, instead of just complaining about them. E.g., Qt/KDE -- instead of fighting it, they created GNOME. The new Java reliance on OpenOffice.org 2.0? Red Hat has been the catalyst for renewed GCJ development. > Whatever people want to talk about is fine with me :) Same here. But I don't want people complaining about my posting factual information in response to snide comments. They can ignore it if they don't like it. If you embrace it, I think you'll find why I get a lot of the work I do as a Linux architect all over the US. Because I don't demonize companies and products with 1-liners. I explain their strategies and their technologies in a very technical and legal way. Trust me, I don't know how many times I've gone into a client and the one business developer or mid-executive who has veto'ed every other consultant finally gives his approval to the technical leads. Because he knows I'm not going to take the company down a religious-based solution. I'm going to architect a solution that is about mitigating risk, and factoring in the vendor interests into minimizing that risk. -- Bryan J. Smith mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org

2 1

Re: mplayer repository for CentOS
by Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith＠ieee.org> 21 May '05

21 May '05

From: William Warren <hescominsoon(a)emmanuelcomputerconsulting.com> > considering the FUD fedora talks about mixing repositories. It's not FUD, it's an issue with Debian as well. >From what I've seen, for the most part, as long as you pick one or the other repository, you're okay. E.g., either DAG or FE+Lorg. One of the reasons for the greater Fedora Project (outside of the Fedora Core name change and trademark issues) was the continued sprawling of repositories. Fedora Extras was supposed to address this, but even I'll admit that it seemed a little too much "you're on your own" in the first 18 months of its existance. I.e., the former U of Hawaii Fedora Project didn't do much to help anyone but their own, existing project set, and the new Livna.ORG repository fork (for legal reasons). But as of this year, there is now a formal submittal process. And being a software engineer myself with a lot of experience in formal lifecycle and testing, I kinda prefer the quality I see out of Red Hat's regression and other testing. Maybe it's because I had horrors with FreshRPMS before I switched to Fedora.US (before Red Hat's involvement), and instantly saw many issues go away. But FE/Lorg seems to have everything I want. Only a couple times have I tapped DAG, and then I only did it temporarily in my APT/YUM files to avoid "repository mixing" issues anytime I did an upgrade later. BTW, just so everyone know, this e-mail was _not_ to argue the merits of "which repository is better / sucks." I was just interested in finding out if anyone is like me, tapping FE/Lorg, or if most everyone is just using DAG. That's all. I might try a few systems under test and see how it all goes. -- Bryan J. Smith mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org

6 7

Software RAID CentOS4
by Gerald Waugh 21 May '05

21 May '05

Hi, I have a system with two IDE controllers running RAID1. As a test I powered down, removed one drive (hdc), and powered back up. System came up fine, so powered down installed a new drive (hdc) And powered back up. /proc/mdstat indicatd RAID1 active with hda only. I thought it would Auto add the new hdc drive... Also when I removed the new drive and added The original hdc, the swap partitions were active hda and hdc but only hda on the other partitions. I has to add the other hdc partitions with mdadm -a. My mdadm.conf looks like; # mdadm.conf written out by anaconda DEVICE partitions MAILADDR root ARRAY /dev/md1 super-minor=1 ARRAY /dev/md0 super-minor=0 ARRAY /dev/md3 super-minor=3 ARRAY /dev/md2 super-minor=2 Shouldn't there be more information for mdadm to work with? How do you replace a failed drive and have it auto-configured? TIA Gerald

3 3

[Out of Office] Re: CentOS Digest, Vol 4, Issue 20
by alex＠parallaxsystems.com.au 21 May '05

21 May '05

I am on annual leave until Monday 23rd May, 2005. If you have an urgent support matter, please log in to the helpdesk site with your support agreement ID and create a ticket.

2 1

Firefox 1.04?
by Matt Bottrell 21 May '05

21 May '05

Just curious if we're likely to see Firefox 1.04 coming out shortly!? 1.03 has some *nasty* vulnerabilities.... and it would be nice to get a new build of 1.04. yeah yeah... I know... wait for the upstream *rant* Geez.... they are dragging there feet on this one. :-(

8 11

Promise FastTrak series
by Steven Moix - Axianet.ch 21 May '05

21 May '05

Hello, In some weeks I'm going to reinstall some old RedHat9 based servers with Promise FastTrak TX2000 "semi-hardware" RAID1 controllers. I just tried to install CentOS 4.0 on a computer with a spare card and as usual both HDD attached to the RAID1 controller are seen separately by the installer because the specific driver for the TX2000 wasn't loaded. Nothing new here, it was always like this on every distro as far as I know. Now I googeled a bit and have some questions: 1. In some forums I could read that the FastTrak series in RAID mode wasn't supported anymore in the 2.6 kernel (was PDCRAID module in the later 2.4 kernels). Quoted apparently from the linux kernel mailing list: >>In 2.6, Promise software RAID support does not exist. In conversations >>with Promise, we all agreed to encourage and support the standard Linux >>RAID, md. So does this mean that I have to use software RAID in linux if I don't want to load the drivers provided by Promise (see question 2)? 2. On the other hand Promise provides the partial source code for their driver, but there is a silly problem with this...I want to install my OS directly on the RAID array :) So I guess that I would have to: - Install CentOS on another computer, compile the driver provided by Promise, make a driver disk (don't ask me how). - Boot CentOS on the server with the controller and type "linux dd" to load this driver disk. - Pray and correct bugs for the next 2 weeks. Is this the right way to go? Any feedback with FastTrak TX2000 or TX4000 controllers would be very welcome, let me know which solution you choosed. Thanks Steven

3 3

Car Performance Tuning
by Alex White 21 May '05

21 May '05

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 List, I googled on this, and despite getting some hits (due more to the terms performance and tuning I think than anything) I was unable to locate useful links for actual software. I'm seeking software that will run on CentOS (or really any linux install period) that will assist me in testing and tuning my vehicle. I'm involved in import racing and would like to glean as much information from my car as possible while making modifications. Any ideas? Sincerely - -- Alex White prata(a)kuei-jin.org Fingerprint = 58DC 9199 CE73 74E8 B2C1 442E ACF5 92E0 E068 C46C gpg key location: http://www.kuei-jin.org/GPG-KEY-PRATA ~From the withered tree, a flower blooms --Zen Proverb -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Red Hat - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFCiywArPWS4OBoxGwRAiE/AKCSk3uaSRjGhXwcPGV11n/bkZay6ACbBv0X LrZqrQsV06sIOPMeWBQDF5Q= =hCiK -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 3

CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 3, Issue 11
by centos-announce-request＠centos.org 21 May '05

21 May '05

Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to centos-announce(a)centos.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to centos-announce-request(a)centos.org You can reach the person managing the list at centos-announce-owner(a)centos.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of CentOS-announce digest..." Today's Topics: 1. CEBA-2005:xxx CentOS 3 ia64 - lot of updates for U5 (Pasi Pirhonen) 2. CESA-2005:294 CentOS 3 i386 kernel - updated package (Tru Huynh) 3. CESA-2005:294 CentOS 3 x86_64 kernel - updated package (Tru Huynh) 4. CESA-2005:256 CentOS Low 3 i386 glibc - security update (Tru Huynh) 5. CESA-2005:256 CentOS Low 3 x86_64 glibc - security update (Tru Huynh) 6. CESA-2005:106 CentOS Low 3 i386 openssh - security update (Tru Huynh) 7. CESA-2005:106 CentOS Low 3 x86_64 openssh - security update (Tru Huynh) 8. CESA-2005:074 CentOS Low 3 x86_64 rsh - security update (Tru Huynh) 9. CESA-2005:074 CentOS Low 3 i386 rsh - security update (Tru Huynh) 10. CESA-2005:238 CentOS Low 3 x86_64 evolution - security update (Tru Huynh) 11. CESA-2005:238 CentOS Low 3 i386 evolution - security update (Tru Huynh) 12. CEBA-2005:xxx CentOS 3 s390(x) - lot of updates for U5 (Pasi Pirhonen) 13. CESA-2005:256 CentOS 3 Low i386 glibc - security update (Tru Huynh) 14. CESA-2005:256 CentOS 3 Low x86_64 glibc - security update (Tru Huynh) 15. CESA-2005:106 CentOS 3 Low i386 openssh - security update (Tru Huynh) 16. CESA-2005:106 CentOS 3 Low x86_64 openssh - security update (Tru Huynh) 17. CESA-2005:074 CentOS 3 Low x86_64 rsh - security update (Tru Huynh) 18. CESA-2005:074 CentOS 3 Low i386 rsh - security update (Tru Huynh) 19. CESA-2005:238 CentOS 3 Low x86_64 evolution - security update (Tru Huynh) 20. CESA-2005:238 CentOS 3 Low i386 evolution - security update (Tru Huynh) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 16:05:42 +0300 From: Pasi Pirhonen <upi(a)iki.fi> Subject: [CentOS-announce] CEBA-2005:xxx CentOS 3 ia64 - lot of updates for U5 To: centos-announce(a)centos.org Message-ID: <20050520130542.GA1929(a)core.upi.iki.fi> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" CentOS Errata and Security Advisory CEBA-2005:xxx https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/rhel3as-errata.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: lot of files. Should be rest of the U5-batch. updates/ia64/RPMS/MyODBC-2.50.39-12.1.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/am-utils-6.0.9-2.4.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/anaconda-9.1.5.8-1.RHEL.1.centos.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/anaconda-runtime-9.1.5.8-1.RHEL.1.centos.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/autofs-4.1.3-130.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/bash-2.05b-41.4.centos.0.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/bzip2-1.0.2-11.EL3.1.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/bzip2-devel-1.0.2-11.EL3.1.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/bzip2-libs-1.0.2-11.EL3.1.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/cdda2wav-2.01.0.a32-0.EL3.2.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/cdrecord-2.01.0.a32-0.EL3.2.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/cdrecord-devel-2.01.0.a32-0.EL3.2.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/chkconfig-1.3.13.2-0.3.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/control-center-2.2.0.1-15.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/devlabel-0.48.03-10.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/dos2unix-3.1-15.EL.22.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/dump-0.4b37-1E.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/dvd+rw-tools-5.21.4.10.8-0.EL3.2.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/elinks-0.4.2-8.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/gdm-2.4.1.6-10.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/gedit-2.2.2-4.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/gnome-applets-2.2.2-2.1E.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/gnome-media-2.2.1.1-4.3.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/gnome-vfs2-2.2.5-2E.3.2.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/gnome-vfs2-devel-2.2.5-2E.3.2.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/grep-2.5.1-24.4.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/hotplug-2002_04_01-20.4.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/httpd-2.0.46-46.ent.centos.1.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/httpd-devel-2.0.46-46.ent.centos.1.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/hwdata-0.101.17-1.noarch.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/initscripts-7.31.22.EL-2.centos.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/iscsi-initiator-utils-3.6.2-7.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/jpackage-utils-1.5.38-1jpp_5rh.noarch.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/kernel-utils-2.4-8.37.12.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/kudzu-1.1.22.11-1.centos.0.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/kudzu-devel-1.1.22.11-1.centos.0.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/laus-0.1-70RHEL3.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/laus-devel-0.1-70RHEL3.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/laus-libs-0.1-70RHEL3.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/libwnck-2.2.3-1.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/libwnck-devel-2.2.3-1.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/lsof-4.63-4.1.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/lvm-1.0.8-12.2.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/mailx-8.1.1-31.EL3.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/man-pages-ja-20041215-1.EL3.noarch.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/mikmod-3.1.6-21.3.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/mikmod-devel-3.1.6-21.3.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/mkinitrd-3.5.13.3-1.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/mkisofs-2.01.0.a32-0.EL3.2.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/mktemp-1.5-18.2.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/mod_auth_mysql-20030510-2.ent.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/mod_ssl-2.0.46-46.ent.centos.1.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/net-snmp-5.0.9-2.30E.15.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/net-snmp-devel-5.0.9-2.30E.15.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/net-snmp-libs-5.0.9-2.30E.15.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/net-snmp-perl-5.0.9-2.30E.15.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/net-snmp-utils-5.0.9-2.30E.15.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/net-tools-1.60-20E.7.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/netdump-0.7.7-2.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/netdump-server-0.7.7-2.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/nss_ldap-207-15.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/ntsysv-1.3.13.2-0.3.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/pam_krb5-1.75-1.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/procps-2.0.17-13.7.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/psacct-6.3.2-31.rhel3.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/psmisc-21.3-2.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/pstack-1.2-3.EL.2.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/quota-3.10-7.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/raidtools-1.00.3-8.EL3.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/redhat-config-httpd-1.1.0-4.30.2.noarch.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/redhat-config-users-1.1.18-5.noarch.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/rmt-0.4b37-1E.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/shadow-utils-4.0.3-23.08.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/squid-2.5.STABLE3-6.3E.9.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/strace-4.5.9-2.EL3.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/sysklogd-1.4.1-26_EL3.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/sysreport-1.3.7.2-4.noarch.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/unix2dos-2.2-19.EL.25.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/usermode-1.68-5E.3.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/usermode-gtk-1.68-5E.3.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/vixie-cron-3.0.1-76_EL3.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/ypbind-1.12-5.21.6.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/ypserv-2.8-13.ia64.rpm updates/ia64/RPMS/zsh-4.0.7-1.EL.2.ia64.rpm -- Pasi Pirhonen - upi(a)iki.fi - http://iki.fi/upi/

1 0

Re: [CentOS] mplayer repository for CentOS
by Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith＠ieee.org> 21 May '05

21 May '05

From: Adrian Coman <adi.coman(a)gmail.com> > Is there a CentOS yum repository for mplayer&dependencies? From: Ralph Angenendt <ra+centos(a)br-online.de> > http://dag.wieers.com/home-made/apt/> I'm kinda curious. I'm typically tapping the Livna.ORG archives for RHEL3Ux/CentOS3.x (Fedora Core 1 repository) and RHEL4Ux/CentOS4.x (Fedora Core 3 repository) for MPlayer and a number of other programs that Livna.ORG provides. Nothing against DAG, but I typically like to use Fedora Extras/Livna.ORG first, unless I can't find something or have an issue. Does anyone else do this as well, or is DAG the preferred option among most? -- Bryan J. Smith mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org

6 5

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Discuss