February 2006 - openSUSE Users - openSUSE Mailing Lists

WLAN-driver repository.
by Sven Burmeister 28 Feb '06

28 Feb '06

Hello! I have read announcements and basic descriptions of the build service, smart and of a new concept of kernel modules, so maybe my idea is already in those new concepts. Apart from the discussion around GPL or binary, I thought it might be very nice for the user, if there was an easy way to get WLAN working. There is currently yet another discussion about binary on the kernel-mailinglist due to intel's announcement of their new chipset's driver, so it seems that it becomes more and more difficult for a normal user to get its existing hardware to work. Further there is no site on opensuse, that has detailed, complete and reliable data on which chipsets will be natively supported in 10.1 and newer. One way or another, justified or not, the user will blame SuSE, if the hardware cannot be made working easily. So I want to ask, whether it would be feasible to have a "WLAN-repository", which can be used by a user without searching the web for the chipset used by one's card or getting any hints from somebody that is more familiar with that matter. Of course one should not be forced to install the driver again after each Kernel-update or have to compile anything. The only thing needed should be a hint during installation that the WLAN-card is not supported because of the drivers not being open source and that one should start "install-wlan-driver" after the installation has finished. That tool would give access to the WLAN-repository, which is fed as packman is. Since there are only a handlful chipsets, it should be possible to provide drivers for each, including a list of wlan-cards that use them. The user could either search for a chipset, or the name of the wlan-card and simply install the driver. For those cards that use a firmware, it wold be very helpful to have a script bundled with the driver that is executed by the tool and installs and renames the files needed, as YOU currently does, or maybe by searching the manufacturer's driver-cd. Please do not make this a discussion about whether GPLed-drivers would be the solution, since that will not happen, at least not until 10.1. Further there seem to be some legal issues that force companies to have at least some part of their drivers in binary, which might make not sense, yet companies like Intel simply have to comply the law, no matter whether it makes sense or not. http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/32620 Sven

7 10

SUSE 9.2 & OpenOffice 2.0.1 RPM
by Lake-Wind 28 Feb '06

28 Feb '06

Has anyone here had success with installing openoffice 2.0.1 on SUSE 9.2? I am trying but have an unresolved dependency of: libpython2.4so.1.0. A search for a package that provides libpython2.4so.1.0 is turning up nothing. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks!

2 2

HP Photosmart 8700
by Fred A. Miller 28 Feb '06

28 Feb '06

Is anyone using this printer with SUSE 10.0? If so, your impressions? Problems? Thanks, Fred

1 0

Evolution bug:[Fwd: Reasons not to mess with children......]
by Digvijoy Chatterjee 28 Feb '06

28 Feb '06

Hi List, Please take a look at this forwarded message in evolution ,when i recieved this , The scroll bar always came down to the end of the PAGE where the animation is displayed in it ,i was never able to read the start of the mail.Any reasons ?? -- Thanks and Regards Digvijoy Chatterjee Please Visit http://indra/LiMS and start your Linux Journey **************** CAUTION - Disclaimer ***************** This e-mail contains PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION intended solely for the use of the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by e-mail and delete the original message. Further, you are not to copy, disclose, or distribute this e-mail or its contents to any other person and any such actions are unlawful. This e-mail may contain viruses. Infosys has taken every reasonable precaution to minimize this risk, but is not liable for any damage you may sustain as a result of any virus in this e-mail. You should carry out your own virus checks before opening the e-mail or attachment. Infosys reserves the right to monitor and review the content of all messages sent to or from this e-mail address. Messages sent to or from this e-mail address may be stored on the Infosys e-mail system. ***INFOSYS******** End of Disclaimer ********INFOSYS***

1 0

Bacula
by LDB 28 Feb '06

28 Feb '06

Is anyone on the list using Bacula and have configured it? I keep getting the same ol' error no matter what .. utility:/etc/bacula # rm /backups/bacula/backups/archive ; btape -c /etc/bacula/bacula-sd.conf /backups/bacula/backups/archive Tape block granularity is 1024 bytes. btape: butil.c:258 Using device: "/backups/bacula/backups" for writing. btape: btape.c:335 open_dev /backups/bacula/backups OK *test === Write, rewind, and re-read test === I'm going to write 1000 records and an EOF then write 1000 records and an EOF, then rewind, and re-read the data to verify that it is correct. This is an *essential* feature ... btape: btape.c:786 Wrote 1000 blocks of 64412 bytes. btape: btape.c:465 Wrote 1 EOF to /backups/bacula/backups btape: btape.c:802 Wrote 1000 blocks of 64412 bytes. btape: btape.c:465 Wrote 1 EOF to /backups/bacula/backups btape: btape.c:811 Rewind OK. 1000 blocks re-read correctly. 1000 blocks re-read correctly. === Test Succeeded. End Write, rewind, and re-read test === === Write, rewind, and position test === I'm going to write 1000 records and an EOF then write 1000 records and an EOF, then rewind, and position to a few blocks and verify that it is correct. This is an *essential* feature ... btape: btape.c:898 Wrote 1000 blocks of 64412 bytes. btape: btape.c:465 Wrote 1 EOF to /backups/bacula/backups btape: btape.c:914 Wrote 1000 blocks of 64412 bytes. btape: btape.c:465 Wrote 1 EOF to /backups/bacula/backups btape: btape.c:923 Rewind OK. Reposition to file:block 0:4 26-Feb 18:35 btape: btape Error: block.c:264 Volume data error at 0:4! Wanted ID: "BB02", got "". Buffer discarded. btape: btape.c:979 Read block 5 failed! file=0 blk=4. ERR=Input/output error btape: btape.c:989 This may be because the tape drive block size is not set to variable blocking as normally used by Bacula. Please see the Tape Testing chapter in the manual and look for using mt with defblksize and setoptions If your tape drive block size is correct, then perhaps your SCSI driver is *really* stupid and does not correctly report the file:block after a FSF. In this case try setting: Fast Forward Space File = no in your Device resource.

2 1

Gnucash 1.8.9 +Suse 10.0
by Art Fore 28 Feb '06

28 Feb '06

I realize the Invoicing features in gnucash suck, but I need to use it or go back to windows which I do not want to do. I have two questions maybe someone can answer. I have some invoices already done and posted. Is there any way I can copy these invoices and change the invoicing date and due date and repost as a new invoice? I have a number of inoices that are the same each month and it is a PITA to redo each invoice every month just for a date change. Takes about 4 times longer that Quicken Small Business in Windows. (I average about 11 or 12 invoices a month) Is there any way to add charge type categories to the pull down selections? I need to add some horses names. Adding as a job does not work as some customers have more than one horse and that would require two invoices which is ridiculus. Art

1 0

OpenSUSE Forums
by Joseph M. Gaffney 27 Feb '06

27 Feb '06

Since this discussion has come up again, I've decided to sum up my reasons for supporting a forum, as well as how I see this forum existing within the community. In support of a forum: * Knowing it isn't going anywhere - Now don't get me wrong, I really doubt suseforums.net and suselinuxsupport.de are going anywhere, but one of the very big things I like about an official forum is that its here to stay. Its not going to be sold off, be replaced by advertising, or forgotten about by the owner. I have recently (and not so recently) experienced this on too many forums to list here; several of which being major forums for major F/LOSS software and several being completely unrelated, but the result was the same. The site was sold, and because of the popularity, became a place for advertisers to easily get links and prominent google results, or the new owner really didn't care and was only interested in advertising revenue, and the site went downhill, etc, etc. Knowing that an official forum exists means knowing this will never happen to the official forum. * openSUSE is the community, and an openSUSE forum shows a more linked community. - There are people who go on mailing lists, people who go on newsgroups, people who go on forums, so on, and so on. Sometimes they go on several of these. The fact is, many new users are very familiar with forums, and know that if these forums exist, they are there to support them in some way. Not having an official forum, imho, does not show us to be a contiguous community, but more of what we seem today - scattered, uncommunicative, and disinterested in cooperation. * openSUSE.org is the known hub for SUSE now - SUSE & openSUSE as a community has been all over the prominent Linux magazines as of late, and openSUSE.org is the first place people end up going. Knowing this, and knowing the desire to get new users involved in more than just downloading or just keeping the torrent up, openSUSE.org must be the place to grab their attention and maintain it. The revised main page is a start toward this, but there needs to be a variety of options for new users to communicate directly on there. Yes, there is a list of forums now, but people will tend to think "but which is the one I'm supposed to join", or "which one has the guy who maintains xyz package", etc, etc. An official forum is a first step - even if a maintainer stays over at suselinuxsupport.de, by joining the official openSUSE forum, one of the members of this list (or of the existing forums who is on both), will be able to guide the new user where they need to go. The fact is, new users are familiar with forums, and it would be good to be able to get them right into one. * The evils of DRM, patents, etc, will have more visibility - I think its beneficial to say "We can't answer that question here, because it would be illegal. Read <link> for more information. There are other forums you can find this information at." I think it will help expose (as titled) the evils of DRM, patents, HDCP, etc, etc. Other examples are posted on the opensuse wiki at http://en.opensuse.org/Forum-discussion-results Against a Forum: * Angering existing forum maintainers - This is the only reason I'd have against a forum, and I don't believe its a good reason either. I don't believe they should be angry honestly, because I don't think an attempt at unifying our community into a cohesive whole could possibly be something to be against. How an official forum would work within the existing community: * Act as a central place of discussion - Bugs, packaging problems, wishlist items, etc, etc all pop up all over the existing forums. If the maintainers of those forums post on the official forum about the topic, there is only one place developers, maintainers, wiki guys, etc need to look. Theres no reason to have to monitor (yes, I know its basically 2 - but there are smaller ones elsewhere) multiple forums if theres one place for these topics to be reviewed. * Another means for direct interaction and discussion - As was seen from this discussion on the list, theres a number of people out there who are very influential within the community, and will post to forums, but have little or no interest in ever being a part of a mailing list. Since we've obviously had various areas of breakdown in communication, this will provide another (while not perfect, it is quite visible) means of interaction. Discussions on the list which continue on the forums, and vice-versa, will allow messages to be easily forwarded to and from the list and the forums. Again, not a perfect solution, but quite better than what there is now. There is definitely a feeling among users not on the list that there is a small group deciding the who/what/when/where/why of openSUSE, and this could be a start to bridging that gap. * Current moderators and administrators, perhaps along with additional moderators and administrators, will cooperatively form the staff of the official forum - Obviously, there are many who are experienced within the openSUSE community who would make ideal administrators and moderators for an official forum. As part of their job with the official forum, these existing moderators and administrators responsibilities should include the management of the information across their current forum and an official forum. Cross-posting, forwarding to the list as well, etc. * Single sign-on - The current openSUSE wiki (and thus, Novell site) logins should be the same as the forums. By doing so, new registrants to an official openSUSE forum could be told of how they can contribute to the wiki as well. Many posters will do lengthy tutorials, complicated packaging information, etc, and all this information is extremely valuable and welcomed as documentation on the wiki. * openSUSE project integration - Forums could be dedicated to specific projects, and perhaps even limited in posting vs. visibility; ie: a member of Better Desktop, SUPER, SLICK, JackLab, etc projects can post to their specific subforum, while all members will be able to view the posts. New members could then opt to contact project maintainers and get involved in the various subprojects, allowing these to grow as well. The project participants can post updates, and start a thread in a general forum outside of their specific subforum, noting to community members of significant updates. These types of updates may then be noted on some sort of news update on the wiki (pending main page redesign). Well, I think that about sums up my position. Imho, there are scores of benefits, but I tried to list what I felt to be the major ones here. I'm not exactly sure what the precise final answer is about what was discussed about FOSDEM, but if its technical ability, I think we should discuss how the final decision will be made. If the decision was made, then I believe we should begin discussing the incorporation of the community, and what should be happening with official openSUSE forums. Joseph M. Gaffney aka CuCullin

8 11

FOSDEM conclusions & thoughts
by Wolfgang Koller 27 Feb '06

27 Feb '06

Hi! As maybe some of you I was at the FOSDEM too. I hade the pleasure to meet the openSUSE staff and can just say that they are at least as friendly as they are over IRC :). But now enough of the honey, here are some conclusions to the things I heard at the FOSDEM: .) Forums: The never ending story. At the FOSDEM it was announced that there will be an official forum (I hope I can say that here, but as you said it in public at the FOSDEM I assume it is ready to be heard by anyone). Although I'm not too happy with that decision I can somehow understand it, at least it will bring the discussion to a rest (and IMO there wouldn't have been a solution everyone is happy with anyway). The only thing I do not really like is that you told us to host a discussion at our board (suselinuxsupport.de) but then suddenly decided that there will be web-forums - next time maybe tell us straight-forward what is planned :). Anyway that's it from me on topic forums. .) Houghi's XML-Yast repository idea: Unfortunately you weren't there today in the evening when I wanted to talk with you. I think this is actually a great idea, and even though the openSUSE staff is a bit worried about legal issues I think this could be easily done using a YaST module (yes I heard the YaST module tutorial too :)). I think the best way to make this easy to distribute is to let a community member do it and then just include it. The argument that it might be abused for including repositories with illegal content is nonsene IMO - just because it CAN be abused it isn't illegal, because else you wouldn't be able to include webbrowser too, since those can be used for downloading illegal software too :). For those who weren't there at the FOSDEM and have no clue what I'm talking about - don't worry houghi will setup a wiki page soon :). .) Build-Service: I think the build service is definately a great idea . I was really impressed by what it can do so far - but yet there is more to come :). For me as a software developer this will definately help to provide more up to date RPMs for various distributions. Here is my only comment: keep up the great work and gimme an account to start producing RPMs :). .) General comment: actually all talks were really great, the content was well selected and there was almost no boring talk to here - next time just don't be that nervous - we won't bite you - there is really no need to be nervous :) Right now I can't think of anything else to comment on :). Special thanks also go to Pascal, he was always very friendly and helpful - yes and of course to the openSUSE staff - who made the FOSDEM weekend really a very nice experience for me :). Mfg, Wolfgang Koller alias Viras PS: I'm an Admin at suselinuxsupport.de, I mention that so that I don't get flamed :) -- Nothing than Linux counts http://wiki.suselinuxsupport.de/ http://forums.suselinuxsupport.de/

15 52

Fwd: Re: [SLE] KDE Print manager - CUPS initialization
by Kobus 27 Feb '06

27 Feb '06

Alfredo Cole-Tuckler On Monday 27 February 2006 20:30, Alfredo Cole wrote: > Alfredo Cole-Tuckler Thanks a mil - it worked! Now I can print again. (By the way I installed a new Brother DCP 110C - working fine. Regards

1 0

[SLE] LCD monitor and suse 8.2 and suse 10.0
by Art Ruszkowski 27 Feb '06

27 Feb '06

I have new ViewSonic LCD monitor VP2130 and during suse 10.0 new installation at the point when suse starts graphical interface the monitor gives massage 'Out of Range' referring to too high frequency (75 Hz instead 60 Hz) and I can't continue. Initially I considered this only as a suse 8.2 problem, but now it looks as more serious. Any ideas ?

3 2