On Friday 31 October 2008 12:53:06 pm Cristian Rodríguez wrote:

Alberto Passalacqua escribió:

...

Hello,

could we know why RealPlayer was dropped from openSUSE? Are there legal reasons behind this, or it is just an arbitrary decision to reduce the number of packages?

Would have to pay to distribute newer versions of RealPlayer, that is, of course, a no go.

I don't think there is a cost: 2. What are the requirements for distributing the RealPlayer or RealJukebox on my CD? Complete the on-line registration form, agree to the terms in the license agreement and submit your registration. Once your registration is approved you will be given the location where you can download a RealPlayer/RealJukebox specifically for distribution. Granting of a license to distribute the RealPlayer/RealJukebox is subject to RealNetworks' approval for quality assurance and appropriateness of material and software bundle. Granting of a license is also subject to all United States laws and trade policies. 3. How much does it cost to distribute the RealPlayer/RealJukebox on my CD? Distributing the RealPlayer is free for Windows, Mac and available Unix platforms. That's from: http://www.real.com/licensing/faq.html But you do have to sign up for a license to distribute. On another note, I am glad Novell dropped them, but I also think they should have mentioned it on news.opensuse.org, on the mailing list or somewhere, also giving the reason why. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

You missed that - "available Unix platforms" That doesn't say Linux.

You missed that Linux is grouped under UNIX platforms on their site. Check the download page. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Alberto Passalacqua:

Could you elaborate on why it is better to drop it, if it's not something that sounds "let's go foss at all costs"? Frankly I don't see a real advantage in that, and I see a disadvantage for some users.

Two-part quanswer: a) Novell/opensuse apparently dropped it because Real turned out to be the greedy optimists they set out to be from day 1 of their operation. Which effectively puts them *out* of business. RIP. b) Imagine Microsoft releasing a linux version of Windows Media Player. Remember, Real is already bridging their codecs in. Should linux distributions embrace that? Wolfgang -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Rajko M.:

You can have RealPlayer for free from their web site. http://www.real.com/linux There are rpm and deb packages also.

Just because you're not charged the moment you download something doesn't make it "for free". Look at their business model. While it is of course ok to try and make money the customer will ask him/herself: Is the product useful? Is it worth the money? In Real's case this would be "No" and "No". Wofgang -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 05:46:58PM -0500, Alberto Passalacqua wrote:

Hi Christian,

no the reasons is not the cost:

http://www.benkevan.com/blog/realplayer-dropped-from-opensuse-heres-why/#com...

They simply didn't ask for permission, it seems. If that's true, it's not a good move imho.

You consider us stupid? Thanks, time to unsubscribe... Ciao, Marcus -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

You consider us stupid?

Thanks, time to unsubscribe...

Frankly I don't understand your reaction. It seems to me I put some "if" in the sentence, and I was _asking_. If there is an associate cost with the distribution, just say that. It is not written on the Real site. I simply summed up what appear to be the facts, supported by Real distribution guidelines. Of course this discussion could have been avoided with a simple notice when the player was dropped. We should be a community, after all. Regards, Alberto -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 09:26:55PM -0500, Alberto Passalacqua wrote:

...

You consider us stupid?

Thanks, time to unsubscribe...

Frankly I don't understand your reaction.

It seems to me I put some "if" in the sentence, and I was _asking_.

Ah, then I misunderstood.

If there is an associate cost with the distribution, just say that. It is not written on the Real site. I simply summed up what appear to be the facts, supported by Real distribution guidelines.

And I understand hat you assumed that our contract reading folks did not talk to Reals contract folks. They did talk to each other. I do not know the contract, or the real result, but was told to me is that it would cost us per-copy royalties. So the decision was made not to ship it.

Of course this discussion could have been avoided with a simple notice when the player was dropped. We should be a community, after all.

And I guess the same discussion would have happend afterwards. Not sure, but I think we now pull in the fluendo GST plugin for mp3 decoding via online update... Ciao, Marcus -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Marcus Meissner:

They did talk to each other. I do not know the contract, or the real result, but was told to me is that it would cost us per-copy royalties.

So the decision was made not to ship it.

Do I understand you right that if Real would have been less greedy opensuse would have happily kept on shipping this piece of last- century/phone-home/let's-squeeze-some-ads-in-there crap and associating .mp3 and .ogg and what-not to it? So that when Real realizes that their legal department sucks even more than their software and therefore reconfigures its business model opensuse will jump back on board? Ok, so the default realplayer conf has the phone-home stuff off. Big Thank You. Ouch. So big a bad Ouch like she never been ouched before. When I saw RealPlayer pop up as the default opensuse11 player the first time around I gave my cup of tea a hard suspicious stare. Then I called my anger management person and she cheered me up by saying "You've got to let go", and, whispering, "Can you help me with this windows-pedia-slayer3000 update here?" When I woke up I saw a light. It had a nice voice, too. It said "... RealPlayer66beta6 installation requires your attention. We will now guide you through the process of evaluating your media-consumption competence, funds and security upgrades compliance history. Make sure to wear your RealWristband at all times for unprecedented and interminable media pleasure ..." It felt right to click "I accept. Thank you." The other options were "Wow. Yes." and "I'm not sure, what would you do?" But those were kind of hard to reach underneath that transparent RealDesktop which pretty much lets me do anything anyway. Worries are over and that's what we all want, right? Wolfgang -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Dave Plater wrote:

I banned Real from my system, way back when, when I saw what it did to and with my windows 98se system.

Many of us in England would like to, but our (generally) great BBC has chosen to supply its huge volume of 'listen again' and live feeds only in Real and/or MS formats. To access them from a browser is just too painful unless via the RealPlayer mozilla plug-in - the only reason I have it installed. As someone else on this thread noted, at least the Linux version is rather less invasive than that for MS. My only issue with dropping it is how we present this to a new user when they try to follow a link like these BBC ones - if we can catch it and suggest that they head over to Real's site to get and install the RPM I'm not too unhappy. Just a bald error message is *NOT* good enough for something like this. Further, and maybe veering OT, I know that other players (e.g. Kaffeine) can utilise the codecs, but it's a real fiddle to acquire the relevant URL to hand to them from e.g. the BBC 'listen again' pages. Unless anyone knows something I don't? BTW - the Kaffeine plug-in breaks the RealPlayer one if both are installed! -- Cheers Richard (MQ) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Richard (MQ) wrote:

Dave Plater wrote:

...

I banned Real from my system, way back when, when I saw what it did to and with my windows 98se system.

Many of us in England would like to, but our (generally) great BBC has chosen to supply its huge volume of 'listen again' and live feeds only in Real and/or MS formats. To access them from a browser is just too painful unless via the RealPlayer mozilla plug-in - the only reason I have it installed.something like this.

Further, and maybe veering OT, I know that other players (e.g. Kaffeine) can utilise the codecs, but it's a real fiddle to acquire the relevant URL to hand to them from e.g. the BBC 'listen again' pages. Unless anyone knows something I don't?

BTW - the Kaffeine plug-in breaks the RealPlayer one if both are installed!

Here is e.g. the BBC Radio 3 link: rtsp://rmlive.bbc.co.uk/bbc-rbs/rmlive/ev7/live24/radio3/live/r3_dsat_g2.ra This one you may play in VLC, Kaffeine, MPlayer .... The way you find it out: Open the BBC player in firefox -> CTRL-U -> a few HTML lines pop up. Close to the bottom line you'll find: p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/ram/r3g2.ram">Click here</a> to launch BBC Radio 3 in Real Player.</p> Enter the following command: "mplayer -dumpstream http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/ram/r3g2.ram" and now: "cat stream.dump" will show you: rtsp://rmlive.bbc.co.uk/bbc-rbs/rmlive/ev7/live24/radio3/live/r3_dsat_g2.ra?BBC-UID=6439e06e2b970a635edc8a605060a3f146b95fecb0c0d1b424efd95f750851fe_n&SSO2-UID= Forget the "cookie stuff" and use: rtsp://rmlive.bbc.co.uk/bbc-rbs/rmlive/ev7/live24/radio3/live/r3_dsat_g2.ra and off you go without UnRealPlayer. With: "mplayer -dumpstream -dumpfile BBC_RADIO3.ram rtsp://rmlive.bbc.co.uk/bbc-rbs/rmlive/ev7/live24/radio3/live/r3_dsat_g2.ra" you may even record the live session for later listening, converting, burning, you name it. FMF -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Frank-Michael Fischer wrote:

Richard (MQ) wrote:

...

Further, and maybe veering OT, I know that other players (e.g. Kaffeine) can utilise the codecs, but it's a real fiddle to acquire the relevant URL to hand to them from e.g. the BBC 'listen again' pages. Unless anyone knows something I don't?

Here is e.g. the BBC Radio 3 link:

rtsp://rmlive.bbc.co.uk/bbc-rbs/rmlive/ev7/live24/radio3/live/r3_dsat_g2.ra

This one you may play in VLC, Kaffeine, MPlayer ....

The way you find it out:

Open the BBC player in firefox -> CTRL-U -> a few HTML lines pop up. Close to the bottom line you'll find:

p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/ram/r3g2.ram">Click here</a> to launch BBC Radio 3 in Real Player.</p>

Enter the following command: "mplayer -dumpstream http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/ram/r3g2.ram"

and now: "cat stream.dump" will show you:

rtsp://rmlive.bbc.co.uk/bbc-rbs/rmlive/ev7/live24/radio3/live/r3_dsat_g2.ra?BBC-UID=6439e06e2b970a635edc8a605060a3f146b95fecb0c0d1b424efd95f750851fe_n&SSO2-UID=

Forget the "cookie stuff" and use:

rtsp://rmlive.bbc.co.uk/bbc-rbs/rmlive/ev7/live24/radio3/live/r3_dsat_g2.ra

and off you go without UnRealPlayer.

With: "mplayer -dumpstream -dumpfile BBC_RADIO3.ram rtsp://rmlive.bbc.co.uk/bbc-rbs/rmlive/ev7/live24/radio3/live/r3_dsat_g2.ra" you may even record the live session for later listening, converting, burning, you name it.

Frank-Michael, Yes, thanks - I do already use the techniques that you quote, especially if I want to save a stream to disc, but I think that your post supports very well my assertion that it's a "real fiddle". I was wondering if there was any way to do all this *without* all this cutting and pasting? My programming skills are rather weak as well as rusty, but this doesn't look too difficult to do... BTW - this method still requires the Realplayer codecs of course. The only way AFAIK to obtain the latest ones legitimately is to download and install their player :-( -- Cheers Richard (MQ) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Frank-Michael Fischer wrote:

Richard (MQ) wrote:

...

Frank-Michael Fischer wrote:

...

Richard (MQ) wrote:

...

...

Further, and maybe veering OT, I know that other players (e.g. Kaffeine) can utilise the codecs, but it's a real fiddle to acquire the relevant URL to hand to them from e.g. the BBC 'listen again' pages. Unless anyone knows something I don't?

This is what mplayer uses to play this stream:

========================================================================== Forced audio codec: mad Opening audio decoder: [ffmpeg] FFmpeg/libavcodec audio decoders AUDIO: 44100 Hz, 2 ch, s16le, 64.1 kbit/4.54% (ratio: 8010->176400) Selected audio codec: [ffcook] afm: ffmpeg (FFmpeg COOK audio decoder) ==========================================================================

ffmpeg is not illegal anywhere (AFAIK). No UnRealPlayer codec needed.

I stand corrected! Good to see that there _is_ a way round this. -- Cheers Richard (MQ) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Vahis wrote:

Richard (MQ) wrote:

...

I stand corrected! Good to see that there _is_ a way round this.

Is this the page in question? http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/progs/listenagain.shtml I clicked just randomly some links there with Firefox/VLC plugin.

They played just fine :)

Yes, for me too ;-) However, the listen-again is only part of it, there's also the listen-live e.g. http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/radio4fm from BBC home page / radio frame (centre) These work in VLC when driven from CLI but (for me at least) not via the vlc-mozilla plugin. -- Cheers Richard -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Vahis wrote:

Richard (MQ) wrote: ...

...

However, the listen-again is only part of it, there's also the listen-live e.g. http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/radio4fm from BBC home page / radio frame (centre)

These work in VLC when driven from CLI but (for me at least) not via the vlc-mozilla plugin.

Two playable links there, both play here, I think it was Six O'Clock News... openSUSE 11.0, Firefox, VLC plugin, everything in today's level.

Vahis, Strange, they don't work for me on either of my two 11.0 systems (both fully up to date) or my 11.1 b4 / factory box - all 3 report e.g."To play please first install Real Player." If I right-click and copy the link then paste into Konsole I can play this using vlc <url> - so its only the plugin that's not right. Can we confirm that the links that work for you are in the form http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/radio4fm (this is a live one) and not like this (a listen-again) - these work for me too. http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00f4s8f/Jazz_on_3_27102008/ BTW I'm using VLC 0.9.5 "Grishenko" from the OSL VideoLAN repo Thanks for any further help... -- Cheers Richard (MQ) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Vahis wrote:

Mine is from the openSUSE 11.0 community reposity videolan. pin 0.38 - package info for vlc

------------------------------------------------------------------ *** rpm info ------------------------------------------------------------------

Name : vlc Relocations: (not relocatable) Version : 0.9.5 Vendor: VideoLAN Project (http://www.videolan.org) Release : 1.1 Build Date: Sat Oct 25 03:35:59 2008 Install Date: Sun Oct 26 18:49:22 2008 Build Host: messiah Group : Productivity/Multimedia/Video/Players Source RPM: vlc-0.9.5-1.1.src.rpm Size : 1282588 License: GPL Signature : DSA/SHA1, Sat Oct 25 03:37:08 2008, Key ID 33de8fb7c8da93d2 Packager : Dominique Leuenberger Summary : VLC - Video Lan Client (preview of the upcoming version) Description : VLC media player is a highly portable multimedia player for various audio and video formats (MPEG-1, MPEG-2, MPEG-4, DivX, mp3, ogg, ...) as well as DVDs, VCDs, and various streaming protocols. It can also be used as a server to stream in unicast or multicast in IPv4 or IPv6 on a high-bandwidth network. Distribution: VideoLAN / 11.0

Hmm, I seem to have a slightly different version - 0.9.5-1.4, built Thu Oct 30 00:19:08 2008 same as your plugin. Possibly there is a regression between these versions? I did have Realplayer installed but then removed it, as far as I know there's no traces left... I previously thought that the listen-again links were working using VLC but have since realised that they're using Flash, if I disable that plug-in they stop working too... I'm very frustrated by this but have now got definitely OT so I will give up for a bit. -- Cheers Richard (MQ) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Alberto Passalacqua escribió:

They simply didn't ask for permission, it seems. If that's true, it's not a good move imho.

there are associated costs on **distributing** realplayer with Windows media support.. sorry, I won't comment on legal issues.. that's a topic for lawyers.. ;-) -- "Good, Fast, Cheap: Pick any two (you can't have all three)." Cristian Rodríguez R. Platform/OpenSUSE - Core Services SUSE LINUX Products GmbH Research & Development http://www.opensuse.org/

Am Samstag, 1. November 2008 07:16:52 schrieb Stephan Kulow:

Am Samstag 01 November 2008 schrieb Cristian Rodríguez:

...

Alberto Passalacqua escribió:

...

They simply didn't ask for permission, it seems. If that's true, it's not a good move imho.

there are associated costs on **distributing** realplayer with Windows media support.. sorry, I won't comment on legal issues.. that's a topic for lawyers.. ;-)

That's right. And it's the only reason. Just because real says it's free, doesn't mean it has no costs. Just none you pay to real.

Thanx for this clear and short explanation This discussion had many blabla! Why there wasn't given this explanation in one short answer instead of supposes in the other thread trees? If I do not know something really i do not post anything! Daniel -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Hi, Stephan Kulow schrieb:

Dropping packages (from distro and from DVD) is our daily business. RealPlayer might be different - but I have no idea in what way.

RealPlayer is not really different but it shows once again that the process of dropping packages from the distribution is not transparent enough to the community. Usually package drops are not really announced in public and one has to stumble about it and then starts the discussion about the why. I know that the reasons for dropping packages are recorded internally but why isn't that public accessible data? Wolfgang -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Sat, Nov 01, 2008 at 10:44:32AM +0100, Stephan Kulow wrote:

Am Samstag 01 November 2008 schrieb Wolfgang Rosenauer:

...

Hi,

Stephan Kulow schrieb:

...

Dropping packages (from distro and from DVD) is our daily business. RealPlayer might be different - but I have no idea in what way.

RealPlayer is not really different but it shows once again that the process of dropping packages from the distribution is not transparent enough to the community. Usually package drops are not really announced in public and one has to stumble about it and then starts the discussion about the why. I know that the reasons for dropping packages are recorded internally but why isn't that public accessible data?

Moving that package database to the outside is basically the only missing piece for the "distribution building in the open" project. It's been worked on, but currently there are more important issues ;(

But here is the list of packages that were on the 11.0 DVD and that aren't on the 11.1-B4 DVD (or the nonoss addon). Perhaps you find some more interesting, or even bugs. But note that we dropped quite some for space reasons or just due to renames.

Greetings, Stephan

java-1_6_0-sun java-1_6_0-sun-alsa java-1_6_0-sun-devel java-1_6_0-sun-jdbc java-1_6_0-sun-plugin

Quite a number of Java programs rely on Java (1.)6 and SUN extensions, which are not available in openjdk (java-1_6_0-openjdk*) due to 3rd party software, not relicensed by SUN for obvious reasons. Any chance to make these Java packages also available for openSUSE 11.1? Best regards, Stefan Public Key available ------------------------------------------------------ Stefan Dirsch (Res. & Dev.) SUSE LINUX Products GmbH Tel: 0911-740 53 0 Maxfeldstraße 5 FAX: 0911-740 53 479 D-90409 Nürnberg http://www.suse.de Germany ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) ----------------------------------------------------------------- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Sat, Nov 01, 2008 at 11:29:27AM +0100, Stephan Kulow wrote:

Am Samstag 01 November 2008 schrieb Stefan Dirsch:

...

...

java-1_6_0-sun java-1_6_0-sun-alsa java-1_6_0-sun-devel java-1_6_0-sun-jdbc java-1_6_0-sun-plugin

Quite a number of Java programs rely on Java (1.)6 and SUN extensions, which are not available in openjdk (java-1_6_0-openjdk*) due to 3rd party software, not relicensed by SUN for obvious reasons. Any chance to make these Java packages also available for openSUSE 11.1?

As it's in openSUSE:Factory:NonFree, it's most likely just an oversight that it's not on the non-oss addon. Just file a bug.

done. Bug #440824 Best regards, Stefan Public Key available ------------------------------------------------------ Stefan Dirsch (Res. & Dev.) SUSE LINUX Products GmbH Tel: 0911-740 53 0 Maxfeldstraße 5 FAX: 0911-740 53 479 D-90409 Nürnberg http://www.suse.de Germany ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) ----------------------------------------------------------------- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Christian Boltz escribió:

Re-reading your mail, it sounds like these packages won't be on the DVD (which one? Download edition? Boxed edition?) anymore.

I guess in the download DVD.

Well, I'll miss php5 for sure - but as long as I can download it, it isn't a real problem for me.

at the time of the release, you will most likely want PHP5 from YOU ;-) because it is very likely that 5.2.7 wont make on the final DVD. I initially wanted to include 5.3 but looking at the progress and all the politics around this new release,**sigh** it is going to take some more time... -- "Good, Fast, Cheap: Pick any two (you can't have all three)." Cristian Rodríguez R. Platform/OpenSUSE - Core Services SUSE LINUX Products GmbH Research & Development http://www.opensuse.org/

2008/11/1 Kevin Dupuy :

Why was agfa-fonts dropped?

Without this package, the font Sans used by the desktops (at least GNOME) for all text in windows, icons, menus, etc. looks really horrible (think Ubuntu).

In previous versions, when installing from the DVD this package would be installed by default.

This one was reported: http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-factory/2008-09/msg00538.html Apparently Liberation Fonts (http://www.press.redhat.com/2007/05/09/liberation-fonts/) are seen like a good enough open alternative (I have not even tested them, but I believe openSUSE). -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

(Sent as reply to Willie by accident...resending)  Gotta admit, "TrackMyHead" would definitely grab the attention of anyone window-shopping their repositories. "Hmm... what the heck is that?" :-) Bryen On Sat, 2008-11-01 at 19:13 -0500, Kevin Dupuy wrote:

On Sat, 2008-11-01 at 19:30 +0100, Cristian Morales Vega wrote:

...

This one was reported: http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-factory/2008-09/msg00538.html Apparently Liberation Fonts (http://www.press.redhat.com/2007/05/09/liberation-fonts/) are seen like a good enough open alternative (I have not even tested them, but I believe openSUSE).

I've just downloaded and tested them out, and they're less than adaquate as a replacement for the agfa-font's Sans as a font for the interface. In particular to me, the spacing seems off (too close together) and the bold font (as used on the window title bar) doesn't look right.

Is there anyway to bring back agfa-fonts at least until the Liberation Sans are good enough as a drop-in replacement? -- Kevin "Yeaux" Dupuy - openSUSE Member Public Mail: Meet Bob Barr - Libertarian for President - http://www.BobBarr2008.com/

-- Bryen Yunashko openSUSE Board Member -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

2008/11/2 Kevin Dupuy :

On Sat, 2008-11-01 at 19:30 +0100, Cristian Morales Vega wrote:

...

This one was reported: http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-factory/2008-09/msg00538.html Apparently Liberation Fonts (http://www.press.redhat.com/2007/05/09/liberation-fonts/) are seen like a good enough open alternative (I have not even tested them, but I believe openSUSE).

I've just downloaded and tested them out, and they're less than adaquate as a replacement for the agfa-font's Sans as a font for the interface. In particular to me, the spacing seems off (too close together) and the bold font (as used on the window title bar) doesn't look right.

Is there anyway to bring back agfa-fonts at least until the Liberation Sans are good enough as a drop-in replacement?

Looking at the liberation-fonts package from openSUSE:Factory OBS project I see the package uses version 0.1. Looking at https://fedorahosted.org/releases/l/i/liberation-fonts/ seems the latest stable version is 1.04... I know *nothing* about fonts, but if the 0.1 is the first version from the RedHat announcement they lack any hinting information. If there is really a problem (now OBS has the latest versions, true?) I would also look at /etc/fonts/suse-post-user.conf from fontconfig package. This file disables antialias and autohinting for a list of know good fonts... *perhaps* liberation fonts should be added (perhaps they are already here, I'm not using Factory). I could open a bug report, but I would hit against the version freeze. I suppose coolo is the one that could authorize an exception, but someone with a better understanding of the situation should look at it first. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Am Sonntag 02 November 2008 schrieb Kevin Dupuy:

On Sun, 2008-11-02 at 02:06 +0100, Cristian Morales Vega wrote:

...

2008/11/2 Kevin Dupuy :

...

On Sat, 2008-11-01 at 19:30 +0100, Cristian Morales Vega wrote:

...

This one was reported: http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-factory/2008-09/msg00538.html Apparently Liberation Fonts (http://www.press.redhat.com/2007/05/09/liberation-fonts/) are seen like a good enough open alternative (I have not even tested them, but I believe openSUSE).

I've just downloaded and tested them out, and they're less than adaquate as a replacement for the agfa-font's Sans as a font for the interface. In particular to me, the spacing seems off (too close together) and the bold font (as used on the window title bar) doesn't look right.

Is there anyway to bring back agfa-fonts at least until the Liberation Sans are good enough as a drop-in replacement?

Looking at the liberation-fonts package from openSUSE:Factory OBS project I see the package uses version 0.1. Looking at https://fedorahosted.org/releases/l/i/liberation-fonts/ seems the latest stable version is 1.04... I know *nothing* about fonts, but if the 0.1 is the first version from the RedHat announcement they lack any hinting information.

If there is really a problem (now OBS has the latest versions, true?) I would also look at /etc/fonts/suse-post-user.conf from fontconfig package. This file disables antialias and autohinting for a list of know good fonts... *perhaps* liberation fonts should be added (perhaps they are already here, I'm not using Factory).

I could open a bug report, but I would hit against the version freeze. I suppose coolo is the one that could authorize an exception, but someone with a better understanding of the situation should look at it first.

The version of Liberation Fonts in Factory right now is liberation-fonts-0.1-122.3. Hmm, this looks like something that should not be. Please file a bug.

Unfortunately, adding Liberation Sans to suse-post-user.conf'slist of autohinting and antialiasing-disabled fonts does nothing to help, at least to my eyes.

Even if Liberation Fonts are going to be used, there are still two issues: (please note I use GNOME, so this is a GNOME-centric list). 1. Liberation fonts are not installed by default from the DVD as agfa-fonts were. This looks like a bug too ;(

2. Instead of replacing the bad-looking default Sans, Liberation adds it's own Liberation Sans font. The downside to this is that GNOME & GDM are set by default to use Sans, so the better Liberation font is not chosen by default. What does "fc-match sans" say?

I'd open a bug report against the fact that Liberation Sans isn't up to par with agfa-font Sans yet, and shouldn't be considered as a replacement, if we can determine that that's what's needed.

agfa-fonts will be removed in any case (the decision to go with a clear DVD EULA is set and agfa-fonts license does not allow ftp distribution). The question is only about what the default should be. Please note that the 11.0 live cds and ftp installations didn't have agfa-fonts either and I'm not aware of any complaints. Greetings, Stephan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sunday, 2008-11-02 at 09:28 +0100, Stephan Kulow wrote:

Am Sonntag 02 November 2008 schrieb Stephan Kulow:

...

...

The version of Liberation Fonts in Factory right now is liberation-fonts-0.1-122.3.

Hmm, this looks like something that should not be. Please file a bug. In the time being, check out home:/thomas-schraitle/openSUSE_Factory/noarch/liberation-fonts-1.04-5.30.noarch.rpm

Factory repo contains version 0.1-122.3, and it is not installed by default. Agfa fonts are not available in the repo. I wonder what gnome uses by default on factory? - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkkNiQ8ACgkQtTMYHG2NR9XK4QCeLEPh46IekP+MDFrrTI0mfAu3 PmkAn3wreXZX9LNojwr7mYcVUO/KH3cr =GIUO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On 2008/11/02 12:07 (GMT+0100) Stephan Kulow composed:

Am Sonntag 02 November 2008 schrieb Carlos E. R.:

...

I wonder what gnome uses by default on factory?

dejavu is our default, but I use liberation-fonts 1.04 now and I have to say the difference to the arial webfont I used before is not noticable to my font blind eyes :)

Excerpt from /etc/fonts/suse-post-user.conf: <alias> <family>sans-serif</family> <prefer> <family>Arial</family> <family>Albany AMT</family> <family>Verdana</family> <family>DejaVu Sans</family> <family>Liberation Sans</family> <family>SUSE Sans</family> <family>Bitstream Vera Sans</family> <family>Nimbus Sans L</family> <family>Luxi Sans</family> Considering that list starts with two metric equivalents of each other that more closely match Liberation, I'd say Liberation needs to get moved above the larger Verdana & DejaVu, if the Liberation in the repo gets updated to latest version. Also, it makes no sense that anything falls in between DejaVu & Vera, since there's probably no closer metric match on the planet. Maybe Mike Fabian knows some reason. -- "Love is not easily angered. Love does not demand its own way." 1 Corinthians 13:5 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Am Montag 03 November 2008 schrieb Marc Ensenbach:
> Stephan Kulow schrieb:
> > dejavu is our default, but I use liberation-fonts 1.04 now and I have to
> > say the difference to the arial webfont I used before is not noticable to
> > my font blind eyes :)
>
> "font blind eyes" may be a part of the problem. Is someone with thorough
> typographical knowledge involved in the decision process on fonts?
Mike is the expert, we base 99.9% of our decisions on his say.
>
> As someone with strong interest in typography and fonts, I can say that
> for me the look of the fonts on the screen was not only once the reason
> for me not to upgrade the system. (Mostly because of this, I still use
> SuSE 10.0 at work, since the look of fonts there is much superior
> compared to openSUSE 11.0.) I think, it would beneficial for the user
> experience of openSUSE, if the look of fonts (on the screen) would
> stronger be taken into account.
That doesn't sound like a constructive suggestion. Let me give you the
facts:
 - we won't put agfa-fonts back on our media, the decision to go "nice EULA"
   is set. Some may love commercial software, but it's a pain in the neck and
   we (the openSUSE "managers") decided to leave that past behind us
 - if you have a good suggestion of the free available fonts to become the
   default, then please file a bug (just as it was done with the
   liberation-fonts)
 - if you dislike the way free software renders free fonts, then I'm afraid
   you need to get involved in these projects and provide patches or
   constructive feedback. openSUSE is for most parts only a user of these
   free parts.

Greetings, Stephan

-- 
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Monday 03 November 2008 04:04:29 am Michael Loeffler wrote:

On Monday 03 November 2008, Stephan Kulow wrote: ...

...

 - we won't put agfa-fonts back on our media, the decision to go "nice EULA" is set. Some may love commercial software, but it's a pain in the neck and we (the openSUSE "managers") decided to leave

yes, agfa-fonts would stop us providing a redistributable licence with 11.1 and agfa-fonts come at cost. There's always tension between a free downlaodable Linux distro and useful proprietary software which comes with a $ sign on top. M

If that means going to their web site, like in the case of RealPlayer, than it is still fine. In another OS that is the way in any case. Though, it would be fine if you can publish the price tag for retail version that will include that kind of $oftware, and the one without. -- Regards, Rajko -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Sun, 2008-11-02 at 09:28 +0100, Stephan Kulow wrote:

Am Sonntag 02 November 2008 schrieb Stephan Kulow:

...

...

The version of Liberation Fonts in Factory right now is liberation-fonts-0.1-122.3.

Hmm, this looks like something that should not be. Please file a bug. In the time being, check out home:/thomas-schraitle/openSUSE_Factory/noarch/liberation-fonts-1.04-5.30.noarch.rpm

I just did, and they don't look much different, at least the Liberation Sans doesn't. Overall, I think most people could live with them. They don't look as professional as agfa-fonts Sans does, which is a downer, but if we must go with them they probably won't be that much of a problem. -- Kevin "Yeaux" Dupuy - openSUSE Member Public Mail: Meet Bob Barr - Libertarian for President - http://www.BobBarr2008.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On 2008/11/02 14:14 (GMT-0600) Kevin Dupuy composed:

On Sun, 2008-11-02 at 09:28 +0100, Stephan Kulow wrote:

...

In the time being, check out home:/thomas-schraitle/openSUSE_Factory/noarch/liberation-fonts-1.04-5.30.noarch.rpm

I just did, and they don't look much different, at least the Liberation Sans doesn't. Overall, I think most people could live with them. They don't look as professional as agfa-fonts Sans does, which is a downer, but if we must go with them they probably won't be that much of a problem.

To fully assess differences requires a lot more inspection than you might to think. Similarity varies as size, hinting, anti-alias & byte code interplay is varied, added or removed. Take a look at http://fm.no-ip.com/auth/Font/fonts-comps-amtlibms.html & http://fm.no-ip.com/auth/Font/fonts-face-samples-libvar.html while varying the contents of ~.fonts.conf. Font tastes vary considerably. I use only KDE. The results I like best happen when that file contains only the following: <?xml version="1.0"?> <!DOCTYPE fontconfig SYSTEM "fonts.dtd"> <fontconfig> <match target="font" > <edit mode="assign" name="antialias" > <bool>true</bool> </edit> </match> <match target="font" > <edit name="autohint" > <bool>true</bool> </edit> </match> </fontconfig> Note that I use high resolution, with browser default font size set to 24px. -- "Love is not easily angered. Love does not demand its own way." 1 Corinthians 13:5 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Sat, 2008-11-01 at 19:30 +0100, Cristian Morales Vega wrote:

This one was reported: http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-factory/2008-09/msg00538.html

Apparently this discussion took place while I was still trying to wrangle openSUSE onto my new laptop and I missed it, but could this explain why I had to go and manually install Flash and MP3 support, even though I installed Beta 2 from the DVD (the last DVD I installed from, I've done Factory since then)? If so, I'm not impressed that we would rather make it *more* difficult for new users to use the music and websites they're used to. And if it's a bug or for some other reason, then let's get it fixed. -- Kevin "Yeaux" Dupuy - openSUSE Member Public Mail: Meet Bob Barr - Libertarian for President - http://www.BobBarr2008.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Saturday 01 November 2008 01:16:52 am Stephan Kulow wrote:

Am Samstag 01 November 2008 schrieb Cristian Rodríguez:

...

Alberto Passalacqua escribió:

...

They simply didn't ask for permission, it seems. If that's true, it's not a good move imho.

there are associated costs on **distributing** realplayer with Windows media support.. sorry, I won't comment on legal issues.. that's a topic for lawyers.. ;-)

That's right. And it's the only reason. Just because real says it's free, doesn't mean it has no costs. Just none you pay to real.

OK. So, what was the problem. Real Player is not high on my list on any platform, and it will take some time until I can notice that it is missing, but those that do, should be treated as individuals that can understand explanation. If you can't comment on legal stuff, is there any of lawyers that can do that. It is not first time that legal problems jump in the mix adversely affecting performance of distribution without remedy for end users. I don't consider software that is legal in some jurisdictions as a good solution. Fluendo way of individual license purchase and software installation is advancement, but still somewhat complicated comparing to installation of whole distribution, and more important there is no guarantee that shiny new codecs will actually work. On the other side codecs are minor quantity of software that cost is set disproportionally high, compared to boxed version of openSUSE. I skipped Linuxant drivers just because that small piece of code was priced $20.- . How much should cost whole distro with thousands of drivers and applications? The same problem I see with codecs. -- Regards, Rajko -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

On Sunday 02 November 2008 02:22:37 pm Cristian Rodríguez wrote:

Rajko M. escribió: ...

...

is there any of lawyers that can do that.

Lawyers do so, but usually only in a client/attorney relationship, that's the way it works.

While mostly it works that way, Novell is a company and they need someone that is able to answer questions like this about RealPlayer. There is nothing to hide if Real doesn't offer free redistribution license. It's fine when they did, it's OK if they can't/want to do that further. Confusing part is that they offer the same thing for free from their web site. -- Regards, Rajko -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Cristian Rodríguez:

Rajko M. escribió:

...

If you can't comment on legal stuff,

We _may_ be able to, as a _personal_ opinion on the topic but techies generally lack of legal training and when we do so, our mailing list post will appear almost always quoted grossly out of context at some of the opensource "gossip & conspiracy theories" sites out there, that makes us no favor ;-)

The one fundamental asset of IT companies is technology. If they fail there they're doomed. No marketing, no legal department has ever saved an IT company that had made bad technological decisions. People like you are the asset. If the techies back down on what they think are sane decisions and let lawyers do the steering the ship is doomed. Plus, in my experience, sane and sound technological moves are being well appreciated in most places. In the long run products (from the open source angle) succeed because of good technology. Not because of smart legal moves. Wolfgang -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org

Gerald Pfeifer:

The converse is also true: No technology has ever saved an IT company that made bad legal (or to a lesser degree, possibly, marketing) choices.

The most prominent example to prove you wrong was Apple (between Jobs). They survived some pretty questionable legal and marketing decisions. I think they did because their core asset (a deep-rooted in-house techie culture) was rock solid.

Openess and Open Source are cornerstones of openSUSE and I have full expectation of the core openSUSE distribution heading more and more towards a fully Open Source solution.

While this sounds sweet I fail to see how Novell/opensuse wants to help the process when they choose RealPlayer for its default music player like they did for opensuse 11.

At the same time, we surely can (and should) make sure proprietary add-ons like fonts, Flash, RealPlayer, Java,... are enabled and easily consumable for those that want to leverage those.

Ok, given you don't agree to lock-in, inferior technology etc. Which you're almost always forced to do with proprietary stuff. I think instead of chasing proprietary add-ons (you'll never fully get it anyway) key distributions should put way more time and energy into coming up with original concepts. Wolfgang -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org