Re: fedora-list Digest, Vol 8, Issue 358 (Out of office reply.)

Jon.Mansfield_at_outrightltd.com

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 19:37:13 +0100
To: <fedora-list@redhat.com>


-- 
 Markku Kolkka
 markku.kolkka@iki.fi
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 10:33:32 -0700
From: Adam Boettiger <adam.boettiger@pobox.com>
Subject: Linux builds for PowerPC?
To: fedora-list@redhat.com
Message-ID: <41827EEC.1060208@pobox.com>
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@simpaticus.com>
Subject: Re: Squid Performance - Default Options Tweak?
To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <1099071473.3370.2.camel@ip99.gt.factorrent.com>
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@simpaticus.com>
-------------- 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@dzr-web.com>
Subject: Firefox 1.0 RC1 in Fedora Extras?
To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <1099071775.25732.168.camel@excession.dzr>
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@dzr-web.com          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@dzr-web.com>
Subject: Re: Linux builds for PowerPC?
To: fedora-list@redhat.com
Message-ID: <1099072422.25732.179.camel@excession.dzr>
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@dzr-web.com          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@ps102.de>
Subject: Re: Need Help - Postfix, imap, pop, spamassissan, clamav,
	webmail
To: rick@workcity.ca,	For users of Fedora Core releases
	<fedora-list@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20041029200654.31b3d5a2@ariel.office.volker.de>
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@silkroad.ge>
Subject: java time
To: fedora-list@redhat.com
Message-ID: <418286B8.6090000@silkroad.ge>
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@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: Linux builds for PowerPC?
To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <41828646.10806@pobox.com>
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@wir-sind-cool.org>
Subject: Re: Firefox 1.0 RC1 in Fedora Extras?
To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20041029201216.5b06de96.fedora@wir-sind-cool.org>
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@redhat.com
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@nc.rr.com>
Subject: Re: About "How do I make XMMS play MP3s?" from a new comer
To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <1099073866.930.52.camel@lh2.linush.net>
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@nc.rr.com>
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 14:21:37 -0400
From: Ernie McCracken <holycrap@cavtel.net>
Subject: Re: java time
To: fedora-list@redhat.com
Message-ID: <20041029182136.GB16137@darkfish.net>
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@wir-sind-cool.org>
Subject: Re: About "How do I make XMMS play MP3s?" from a new comer
To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20041029202919.28461a2f.fedora@wir-sind-cool.org>
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@speakeasy.net>
Subject: Re:  java time
To: "For users of Fedora Core releases" <fedora-list@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <W7432130221204391099074504@webmail2>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ernie McCracken [mailto:holycrap@cavtel.net]
> Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 06:21 PM
> To: fedora-list@redhat.com
> 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@kjchome.homeip.net>
Subject: Re: java time
To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <41828BD6.1080107@kjchome.homeip.net>
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@rcn.com
cummings@kjchome.homeip.net
cummings@kjc386.framingham.ma.us
------------------------------
Message: 18
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 14:30:34 -0400
From: "Christopher K. Johnson" <ckjohnson@gwi.net>
Subject: Re: java time
To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <41828C4A.30302@gwi.net>
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@simpaticus.com>
Subject: Re: About "How do I make XMMS play MP3s?" from a new comer
To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <1099074653.3370.10.camel@ip99.gt.factorrent.com>
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 viestissÃ¤Ã¤n (lÃ¤hetysaika 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@simpaticus.com>
-------------- 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@tarun.homeip.net>
Subject: Re: Linux builds for PowerPC?
To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <5E054980-29D9-11D9-8E55-000A95BA634C@tarun.homeip.net>
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@dzr-web.com          www.dzr-web.com
>        Trying is the first step towards failure (Homer Simpson)
> =====================================================================
>
> -- 
> fedora-list mailing list
> fedora-list@redhat.com
> To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
>
------------------------------
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
End of fedora-list Digest, Vol 8, Issue 358
*******************************************
-- 
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list