FireFox broken, is SuSE Pro becoming a test bed like Fedora?
I've been watching the happenings on the message boards recently with regards to SuSE 9.3. It seems like it's more bleeding edge and unstable than usual. And now I get a Firefox YOU update where my bookmarks and profile are broken. I can still get to my bookmarks, but I have to select "Bookmarks > Manage Bookmarks" then my bookmarks appear after having disappeared. They disappear next time I start Firefox back up. On top of that it doesn't properly recognize my profile, i.e. Firefox looks different than it should. Different X to close down tabs, etc. What is going on with Novell quality control? I'm a little concerned. In the short term I want Firefox to work again. In the long term I want to know that YOU isn't going to thrash my desktop for daily use. I can get that with Fedora if I want. Preston
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 08:59 -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
I've been watching the happenings on the message boards recently with regards to SuSE 9.3. It seems like it's more bleeding edge and unstable than usual. And now I get a Firefox YOU update where my bookmarks and profile are broken. I can still get to my bookmarks, but I have to select "Bookmarks > Manage Bookmarks" then my bookmarks appear after having disappeared. They disappear next time I start Firefox back up. On top of that it doesn't properly recognize my profile, i.e. Firefox looks different than it should. Different X to close down tabs, etc.
What is going on with Novell quality control? I'm a little concerned. In the short term I want Firefox to work again. In the long term I want to know that YOU isn't going to thrash my desktop for daily use. I can get that with Fedora if I want.
Preston
I haven't had these same issues. I don't know what to tell you. Jack
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 11:10 -0500, Jack Brooks wrote:
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 08:59 -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
I've been watching the happenings on the message boards recently with regards to SuSE 9.3. It seems like it's more bleeding edge and unstable than usual. And now I get a Firefox YOU update where my bookmarks and profile are broken. I can still get to my bookmarks, but I have to select "Bookmarks > Manage Bookmarks" then my bookmarks appear after having disappeared. They disappear next time I start Firefox back up. On top of that it doesn't properly recognize my profile, i.e. Firefox looks different than it should. Different X to close down tabs, etc.
What is going on with Novell quality control? I'm a little concerned. In the short term I want Firefox to work again. In the long term I want to know that YOU isn't going to thrash my desktop for daily use. I can get that with Fedora if I want.
Preston
I haven't had these same issues. I don't know what to tell you.
Jack
With regards to Firefox specifically, though, did you upgrade recently via YOU? What version of SuSE are you running. I'm running 9.2 and the latest YOU upgrade is horribly broken. I fixed it by uninstalling and rolling back to a previous patch in the place where patches are kept, but it's kind of silly. I shouldn't have to do that. Novell should be testing patches before releasing them. That's my point. If they're not going to bother testing them, why shouldn't I use Fedora or something else bleeding edge? Preston
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 09:19 -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
With regards to Firefox specifically, though, did you upgrade recently via YOU? What version of SuSE are you running. I'm running 9.2 and the latest YOU upgrade is horribly broken. I fixed it by uninstalling and rolling back to a previous patch in the place where patches are kept, but it's kind of silly. I shouldn't have to do that. Novell should be testing patches before releasing them. That's my point. If they're not going to bother testing them, why shouldn't I use Fedora or something else bleeding edge?
Preston
I'm running 9.3. I did update via YOU. Sometimes they do issue patches that don't quite work but they usually get fixed fairly quickly once they start getting reports of the problem. At least that seems to have been the case in my experience. Of course, if you'd like, I suppose you could try downloading firefox from the ftp.gwdg.de repositories. That might help. Pure speculation on my part. Jack
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 11:46 -0500, Jack Brooks wrote:
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 09:19 -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
With regards to Firefox specifically, though, did you upgrade recently via YOU? What version of SuSE are you running. I'm running 9.2 and the latest YOU upgrade is horribly broken. I fixed it by uninstalling and rolling back to a previous patch in the place where patches are kept, but it's kind of silly. I shouldn't have to do that. Novell should be testing patches before releasing them. That's my point. If they're not going to bother testing them, why shouldn't I use Fedora or something else bleeding edge?
Preston
I'm running 9.3. I did update via YOU. Sometimes they do issue patches that don't quite work but they usually get fixed fairly quickly once they start getting reports of the problem. At least that seems to have been the case in my experience.
Of course, if you'd like, I suppose you could try downloading firefox from the ftp.gwdg.de repositories. That might help. Pure speculation on my part.
Jack
It's disturbing, though, to see them miss the mark so badly on such a vital piece of software. I've seen bad YOU updates before. But they don't usually involve such a vital piece of software as your web browser. Yes, I've seen a bad kernel update in my time, but these should be the exception. Seems like I've seen more lately. I hope this gets fixed soon. If not I'm going to have to start looking around. Preston
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 08:59:19 -0700, you wrote:
I've been watching the happenings on the message boards recently with regards to SuSE 9.3. It seems like it's more bleeding edge and unstable than usual.
Then you haven't been paying attention. It's 'bleeding edge and unstable' if you choose to disregard common sense. I've got it on 2 systems so far, including a production email server. One relatively minor problem, to which the solution was already posted here. The performance improvement over 9.1 and 9.2 is fantastic! I'm actually looking forward to upgrading my file server. 8-)> Of course, I've never tried to 'update' a system - I follow the conventional wisdom (based on my own experiences) of doing a clean install of ANY operating system upgrade, whether it's windows, OS/2, linux, or DOS.
And now I get a Firefox YOU update where my bookmarks and profile are broken. I can still get to my bookmarks, but I have to select "Bookmarks > Manage Bookmarks" then my bookmarks appear after having disappeared. They disappear next time I start Firefox back up. On top of that it doesn't properly recognize my profile, i.e. Firefox looks different than it should. Different X to close down tabs, etc.
You should probably be asking this question of the mozilla/firefox team, since the exact same thing happened to me when I upgraded (manually) from 1.0.2 to 1.0.3 on a SuSE 9.2 system, and a bit of investigation showed that it was because of a bug in 1.0.2 that 1.0.3 corrected...
What is going on with Novell quality control? I'm a little concerned. In the short term I want Firefox to work again. In the long term I want to know that YOU isn't going to thrash my desktop for daily use. I can get that with Fedora if I want.
As far as I can see, if you pay attention to what's going on you should be fine. If you want to be oblivious, I suggest windows. Mike- -- Mornings: Evolution in action. Only the grumpy will survive. -- Please note - Due to the intense volume of spam, we have installed site-wide spam filters at catherders.com. If email from you bounces, try non-HTML, non-encoded, non-attachments.
On 4/27/05, Michael W Cocke <cocke@catherders.com> wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 08:59:19 -0700, you wrote:
I've been watching the happenings on the message boards recently with regards to SuSE 9.3. It seems like it's more bleeding edge and unstable than usual.
Then you haven't been paying attention. It's 'bleeding edge and unstable' if you choose to disregard common sense. I've got it on 2 systems so far, including a production email server. One relatively minor problem, to which the solution was already posted here. The performance improvement over 9.1 and 9.2 is fantastic! I'm actually looking forward to upgrading my file server. 8-)>
Of course, I've never tried to 'update' a system - I follow the conventional wisdom (based on my own experiences) of doing a clean install of ANY operating system upgrade, whether it's windows, OS/2, linux, or DOS.
And now I get a Firefox YOU update where my bookmarks and profile are broken. I can still get to my bookmarks, but I have to select "Bookmarks > Manage Bookmarks" then my bookmarks appear after having disappeared. They disappear next time I start Firefox back up. On top of that it doesn't properly recognize my profile, i.e. Firefox looks different than it should. Different X to close down tabs, etc.
You should probably be asking this question of the mozilla/firefox team, since the exact same thing happened to me when I upgraded (manually) from 1.0.2 to 1.0.3 on a SuSE 9.2 system, and a bit of investigation showed that it was because of a bug in 1.0.2 that 1.0.3 corrected...
What is going on with Novell quality control? I'm a little concerned. In the short term I want Firefox to work again. In the long term I want to know that YOU isn't going to thrash my desktop for daily use. I can get that with Fedora if I want.
As far as I can see, if you pay attention to what's going on you should be fine. If you want to be oblivious, I suggest windows.
Mike-
-- Mornings: Evolution in action. Only the grumpy will survive. --
Please note - Due to the intense volume of spam, we have installed site-wide spam filters at catherders.com. If email from you bounces, try non-HTML, non-encoded, non-attachments.
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
Sorry Mike but I think his problems started with a YOU update not an upgrade. YOU updates should really be stable. -- Take care. Kevan Farmer 34 Hill Street Cheslyn Hay Staffordshire WS6 7HR
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 19:28 +0100, Kevanf1 wrote:
On 4/27/05, Michael W Cocke <cocke@catherders.com> wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 08:59:19 -0700, you wrote:
Sorry Mike but I think his problems started with a YOU update not an upgrade. YOU updates should really be stable.
-- Take care. Kevan Farmer I have just updated two 9.2 machines and both gave a Firefox error after the update. In both cases I closed and restarted the session and all I then had to do was add the Firefox application button back onto the task bar. This may or may not be related to the original problem of this thread but might save someone from a fright. Regards Roger
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Roger Beever wrote:
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 19:28 +0100, Kevanf1 wrote:
On 4/27/05, Michael W Cocke <cocke@catherders.com> wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 08:59:19 -0700, you wrote:
Sorry Mike but I think his problems started with a YOU update not an upgrade. YOU updates should really be stable.
-- Take care. Kevan Farmer I have just updated two 9.2 machines and both gave a Firefox error after the update. In both cases I closed and restarted the session and all I then had to do was add the Firefox application button back onto the task bar. This may or may not be related to the original problem of this thread but might save someone from a fright. Regards Roger
I didn't get any explicit error. Firefox just didn't work right. Closing and starting the session did nothing for me. I'll try launching Firefox from the command line, perhaps, but I'm not sure if that will help. Preston
On Wednesday 27 April 2005 11:53 am, Roger Beever wrote:
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 19:28 +0100, Kevanf1 wrote:
On 4/27/05, Michael W Cocke <cocke@catherders.com> wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 08:59:19 -0700, you wrote:
Sorry Mike but I think his problems started with a YOU update not an upgrade. YOU updates should really be stable.
-- Take care. Kevan Farmer
I have just updated two 9.2 machines and both gave a Firefox error after the update. In both cases I closed and restarted the session and all I then had to do was add the Firefox application button back onto the task bar. This may or may not be related to the original problem of this thread but might save someone from a fright. Regards Roger
I just installed the Firefox update on 9.1. I got the same error and after I closed the session and readded theicon mine also worked. -- Russ
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Kevanf1 wrote:
Sorry Mike but I think his problems started with a YOU update not an upgrade. YOU updates should really be stable.
Indeed. This is what happened. And they should be stable. Preston
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 12:14:46PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Kevanf1 wrote:
Sorry Mike but I think his problems started with a YOU update not an upgrade. YOU updates should really be stable.
Indeed. This is what happened. And they should be stable.
Preston
Before this gets out of hand: Features, hardware support, and stability, are three things and none of them are related. If you want features to make it rival Windows, don't expect stability. If you want good hardware support, same thing, new hardwre can't work unless it isn't tested as much. If you spend all the time testing for bugs it doesn't get released. SUSE is the only distro onn earth that I've ever seen mix these all together without being unstable. Look at the most stable OSs in the World: BSD Solaris AIX Slackware Now when is the last time you saw any of those have flashy new features? SUSE can easily stay up, I've never had it crash and I use FTP, HTTP, and a million things on it and the box isn't even near the RAM it should have. It doesn't crash. Firefox is a flash new browser, if you want stability instead, use Netcat.
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 22:07:11 -0400, you wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 12:14:46PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Kevanf1 wrote:
Sorry Mike but I think his problems started with a YOU update not an upgrade. YOU updates should really be stable.
Indeed. This is what happened. And they should be stable.
Preston
Before this gets out of hand:
Features, hardware support, and stability, are three things and none of them are related. If you want features to make it rival Windows, don't expect stability. If you want good hardware support, same thing, new hardwre can't work unless it isn't tested as much. If you spend all the time testing for bugs it doesn't get released.
SUSE is the only distro onn earth that I've ever seen mix these all together without being unstable.
Look at the most stable OSs in the World:
BSD
Solaris
AIX
Slackware
Now when is the last time you saw any of those have flashy new features?
SUSE can easily stay up, I've never had it crash and I use FTP, HTTP, and a million things on it and the box isn't even near the RAM it should have. It doesn't crash.
Firefox is a flash new browser, if you want stability instead, use Netcat.
I'm going to stop after this - the point I apparently failed to make was that the same problem happened to my firefox installation, which was not installed nor upgraded via YOU, YAST, or anything but me and an RPM. The problem had nothing to do with YOU or SuSE. Mike- -- Mornings: Evolution in action. Only the grumpy will survive. -- Please note - Due to the intense volume of spam, we have installed site-wide spam filters at catherders.com. If email from you bounces, try non-HTML, non-encoded, non-attachments.
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 23:31 -0400, Michael W Cocke wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 22:07:11 -0400, you wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 12:14:46PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Kevanf1 wrote:
Sorry Mike but I think his problems started with a YOU update not an upgrade. YOU updates should really be stable.
Indeed. This is what happened. And they should be stable.
Preston
Before this gets out of hand:
Features, hardware support, and stability, are three things and none of them are related. If you want features to make it rival Windows, don't expect stability. If you want good hardware support, same thing, new hardwre can't work unless it isn't tested as much. If you spend all the time testing for bugs it doesn't get released.
SUSE is the only distro onn earth that I've ever seen mix these all together without being unstable.
Look at the most stable OSs in the World:
BSD
Solaris
AIX
Slackware
Now when is the last time you saw any of those have flashy new features?
SUSE can easily stay up, I've never had it crash and I use FTP, HTTP, and a million things on it and the box isn't even near the RAM it should have. It doesn't crash.
Firefox is a flash new browser, if you want stability instead, use Netcat.
I'm going to stop after this - the point I apparently failed to make was that the same problem happened to my firefox installation, which was not installed nor upgraded via YOU, YAST, or anything but me and an RPM. The problem had nothing to do with YOU or SuSE.
Mike-
It IS a SuSE problem, though, because they released it broken. They should have not released it. They should have tested it first. Preston
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 21:45:01 -0700, you wrote:
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 23:31 -0400, Michael W Cocke wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 22:07:11 -0400, you wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 12:14:46PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Kevanf1 wrote:
Sorry Mike but I think his problems started with a YOU update not an upgrade. YOU updates should really be stable.
Indeed. This is what happened. And they should be stable.
Preston
Before this gets out of hand:
Features, hardware support, and stability, are three things and none of them are related. If you want features to make it rival Windows, don't expect stability. If you want good hardware support, same thing, new hardwre can't work unless it isn't tested as much. If you spend all the time testing for bugs it doesn't get released.
SUSE is the only distro onn earth that I've ever seen mix these all together without being unstable.
Look at the most stable OSs in the World:
BSD
Solaris
AIX
Slackware
Now when is the last time you saw any of those have flashy new features?
SUSE can easily stay up, I've never had it crash and I use FTP, HTTP, and a million things on it and the box isn't even near the RAM it should have. It doesn't crash.
Firefox is a flash new browser, if you want stability instead, use Netcat.
I'm going to stop after this - the point I apparently failed to make was that the same problem happened to my firefox installation, which was not installed nor upgraded via YOU, YAST, or anything but me and an RPM. The problem had nothing to do with YOU or SuSE.
Mike-
It IS a SuSE problem, though, because they released it broken. They should have not released it. They should have tested it first.
Preston
Firefox is not a SuSE product! It comes from a completely separate organization! Never mind - Preston's obviously either a net.nit or a troll. Mike- -- Mornings: Evolution in action. Only the grumpy will survive. -- Please note - Due to the intense volume of spam, we have installed site-wide spam filters at catherders.com. If email from you bounces, try non-HTML, non-encoded, non-attachments.
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Michael W Cocke wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 21:45:01 -0700, you wrote:
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 23:31 -0400, Michael W Cocke wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 22:07:11 -0400, you wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 12:14:46PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Kevanf1 wrote:
Sorry Mike but I think his problems started with a YOU update not an upgrade. YOU updates should really be stable.
Indeed. This is what happened. And they should be stable.
Preston
Before this gets out of hand:
Features, hardware support, and stability, are three things and none of them are related. If you want features to make it rival Windows, don't expect stability. If you want good hardware support, same thing, new hardwre can't work unless it isn't tested as much. If you spend all the time testing for bugs it doesn't get released.
SUSE is the only distro onn earth that I've ever seen mix these all together without being unstable.
Look at the most stable OSs in the World:
BSD
Solaris
AIX
Slackware
Now when is the last time you saw any of those have flashy new features?
SUSE can easily stay up, I've never had it crash and I use FTP, HTTP, and a million things on it and the box isn't even near the RAM it should have. It doesn't crash.
Firefox is a flash new browser, if you want stability instead, use Netcat.
I'm going to stop after this - the point I apparently failed to make was that the same problem happened to my firefox installation, which was not installed nor upgraded via YOU, YAST, or anything but me and an RPM. The problem had nothing to do with YOU or SuSE.
Mike-
It IS a SuSE problem, though, because they released it broken. They should have not released it. They should have tested it first.
Preston
Firefox is not a SuSE product! It comes from a completely separate organization!
Never mind - Preston's obviously either a net.nit or a troll.
Mike-
I think I already covered this, but it's fun to pile on, so if it makes you feel better. I'm not a troll. I'm a loyal SuSE user concerned by a few quality control issues. Nothing more. Is discussion about the distribution that might not be glowing, not allowed here? If so, I guess I misunderstand the point of this list. It didn't used to be this way. Preston
Preston Crawford wrote:
<snip>
Firefox is not a SuSE product! It comes from a completely separate organization!
Never mind - Preston's obviously either a net.nit or a troll.
Mike-
I think I already covered this, but it's fun to pile on, so if it makes you feel better.
I'm not a troll. I'm a loyal SuSE user concerned by a few quality control issues. Nothing more. Is discussion about the distribution that might not be glowing, not allowed here? If so, I guess I misunderstand the point of this list. It didn't used to be this way.
Preston
In many respects, I agree with Preston and also promote SuSE whenever the opprotuinity arises. Version 9.3 has not been as good as 9.0, 9.1 and 9.2. I am having problems with 9.3 which were not an issue with previous versions. Sudhir
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 22:07 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 12:14:46PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Kevanf1 wrote:
Sorry Mike but I think his problems started with a YOU update not an upgrade. YOU updates should really be stable.
Indeed. This is what happened. And they should be stable.
Preston
Before this gets out of hand:
Features, hardware support, and stability, are three things and none of them are related. If you want features to make it rival Windows, don't expect stability. If you want good hardware support, same thing, new hardwre can't work unless it isn't tested as much. If you spend all the time testing for bugs it doesn't get released.
SUSE is the only distro onn earth that I've ever seen mix these all together without being unstable.
Look at the most stable OSs in the World:
BSD
Solaris
AIX
Slackware
Now when is the last time you saw any of those have flashy new features?
SUSE can easily stay up, I've never had it crash and I use FTP, HTTP, and a million things on it and the box isn't even near the RAM it should have. It doesn't crash.
Firefox is a flash new browser, if you want stability instead, use Netcat.
Oh please. #1 - This isn't the first time YOU has broken something recently. I had it break a kernel on my once recently because the mirror was bad. Ridiculous. #2 - Firefox is a pretty basic piece of software. I don't see why they shouldn't test it before releasing it. I've been using Linux solely as a home OS for over 4 years and have rarely if ever had a problem with the web browser. Not on SuSE, at least. Preston
#1 - This isn't the first time YOU has broken something recently. I had it break a kernel on my once recently because the mirror was bad. Ridiculous.
#2 - Firefox is a pretty basic piece of software. I don't see why they shouldn't test it before releasing it. I've been using Linux solely as a home OS for over 4 years and have rarely if ever had a problem with the web browser. Not on SuSE, at least.
Preston
You know, You've been ranting about this issue for over a 1000 e-mails. Send an e-mail to the SUSE developers and an bug track report. All software on a PC will more then likely face a breaking at some point. The more software you have installed, the higher the chance you take??? New,Old,Bleeding edge. It doesn't matter because there is always that one piece of code that clips it from another program that causes a breaking. Case and point! Ever run Windows???? It's real common on that platform to have everything break. No O.S. is 1000% stable. It's always a good idea to back up data and have some E-Plan to fix it. JD
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 09:48:17PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 22:07 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 12:14:46PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Kevanf1 wrote:
Sorry Mike but I think his problems started with a YOU update not an upgrade. YOU updates should really be stable.
Indeed. This is what happened. And they should be stable.
Preston
Before this gets out of hand:
Features, hardware support, and stability, are three things and none of them are related. If you want features to make it rival Windows, don't expect stability. If you want good hardware support, same thing, new hardwre can't work unless it isn't tested as much. If you spend all the time testing for bugs it doesn't get released.
SUSE is the only distro onn earth that I've ever seen mix these all together without being unstable.
Look at the most stable OSs in the World:
BSD
Solaris
AIX
Slackware
Now when is the last time you saw any of those have flashy new features?
SUSE can easily stay up, I've never had it crash and I use FTP, HTTP, and a million things on it and the box isn't even near the RAM it should have. It doesn't crash.
Firefox is a flash new browser, if you want stability instead, use Netcat.
Oh please.
#1 - This isn't the first time YOU has broken something recently. I had it break a kernel on my once recently because the mirror was bad. Ridiculous.
#2 - Firefox is a pretty basic piece of software. I don't see why they shouldn't test it before releasing it. I've been using Linux solely as a home OS for over 4 years and have rarely if ever had a problem with the web browser. Not on SuSE, at least.
No browser is basic, if you truely believe that, quit your day job, and buy a big calculator. That's one of the most retarded things I've ever seen on this list. And that last reply you made, the guy said he didn't even update with YAST and you said "But it IS a SUSE problem"....*Sigh*.
Preston
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 03:40 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 09:48:17PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 22:07 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 12:14:46PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Kevanf1 wrote:
Sorry Mike but I think his problems started with a YOU update not an upgrade. YOU updates should really be stable.
Indeed. This is what happened. And they should be stable.
Preston
Before this gets out of hand:
Features, hardware support, and stability, are three things and none of them are related. If you want features to make it rival Windows, don't expect stability. If you want good hardware support, same thing, new hardwre can't work unless it isn't tested as much. If you spend all the time testing for bugs it doesn't get released.
SUSE is the only distro onn earth that I've ever seen mix these all together without being unstable.
Look at the most stable OSs in the World:
BSD
Solaris
AIX
Slackware
Now when is the last time you saw any of those have flashy new features?
SUSE can easily stay up, I've never had it crash and I use FTP, HTTP, and a million things on it and the box isn't even near the RAM it should have. It doesn't crash.
Firefox is a flash new browser, if you want stability instead, use Netcat.
Oh please.
#1 - This isn't the first time YOU has broken something recently. I had it break a kernel on my once recently because the mirror was bad. Ridiculous.
#2 - Firefox is a pretty basic piece of software. I don't see why they shouldn't test it before releasing it. I've been using Linux solely as a home OS for over 4 years and have rarely if ever had a problem with the web browser. Not on SuSE, at least.
No browser is basic, if you truely believe that, quit your day job, and buy a big calculator. That's one of the most retarded things I've ever seen on this list.
Oh come on. You know what I meant. I didn't mean basic like it's simple. I meant basic as in basic functionality to the distro. It's a basic part of any OS these days. It's highly important, commonly used, etc.
And that last reply you made, the guy said he didn't even update with YAST and you said "But it IS a SUSE problem"....*Sigh*.
Oh please. Don't you understand what I'm trying to say? The bug is in Firefox. I get that. But SUSE should have some level of quality control. So in so far as they released untested and broken software it IS their problem. I pay them $80 per release so they can bundle and provide me with solid stable updates. If they fail to do this, that's their problem. There are hundreds of distros that are just slapped together where I can download the latest Firefox. Heck, I can do that on my own. But my time is valuable, so I pay SUSE so they only drop software like Firefox into YOU when it's stable and ready to go. If I'm doing the testing of all the software, why should I bother using SUSE again? Preston
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 12:52:41AM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 03:40 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 09:48:17PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 22:07 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 12:14:46PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Kevanf1 wrote:
Sorry Mike but I think his problems started with a YOU update not an upgrade. YOU updates should really be stable.
Indeed. This is what happened. And they should be stable.
Preston
Before this gets out of hand:
Features, hardware support, and stability, are three things and none of them are related. If you want features to make it rival Windows, don't expect stability. If you want good hardware support, same thing, new hardwre can't work unless it isn't tested as much. If you spend all the time testing for bugs it doesn't get released.
SUSE is the only distro onn earth that I've ever seen mix these all together without being unstable.
Look at the most stable OSs in the World:
BSD
Solaris
AIX
Slackware
Now when is the last time you saw any of those have flashy new features?
SUSE can easily stay up, I've never had it crash and I use FTP, HTTP, and a million things on it and the box isn't even near the RAM it should have. It doesn't crash.
Firefox is a flash new browser, if you want stability instead, use Netcat.
Oh please.
#1 - This isn't the first time YOU has broken something recently. I had it break a kernel on my once recently because the mirror was bad. Ridiculous.
#2 - Firefox is a pretty basic piece of software. I don't see why they shouldn't test it before releasing it. I've been using Linux solely as a home OS for over 4 years and have rarely if ever had a problem with the web browser. Not on SuSE, at least.
No browser is basic, if you truely believe that, quit your day job, and buy a big calculator. That's one of the most retarded things I've ever seen on this list.
Oh come on. You know what I meant. I didn't mean basic like it's simple. I meant basic as in basic functionality to the distro. It's a basic part of any OS these days. It's highly important, commonly used, etc.
And that last reply you made, the guy said he didn't even update with YAST and you said "But it IS a SUSE problem"....*Sigh*.
Oh please.
Don't you understand what I'm trying to say? The bug is in Firefox. I get that. But SUSE should have some level of quality control. So in so far as they released untested and broken software it IS their problem. I pay them $80 per release so they can bundle and provide me with solid stable updates. If they fail to do this, that's their problem. There are hundreds of distros that are just slapped together where I can download the latest Firefox. Heck, I can do that on my own. But my time is valuable, so I pay SUSE so they only drop software like Firefox into YOU when it's stable and ready to go. If I'm doing the testing of all the software, why should I bother using SUSE again?
So because they released a browser fix that you alone seem to be having... Wait I forgot, all those usenet news sites saying the same things.... So all of it is untested and buggy? Yea, that's logical... I've watched you sit and whine about how your browser is all broken and then threaten to use Fedora.... Lol, have you ever actually USED Fedora? My God, you couldn't get up2date to download the updates without it freezing... You have to download like 10 at a time so it doesn't freeze up on you and then you have to sart it again hoping it won't freeze again. Lol, you go install Fedora and tell me it's as unstable as SUSE is. I've never used a Linux distro as bad as Fedora. The updates in SUSE are what you're whining about, and after 9000 times you won't email SUSE, you know, the people who can do something about this? EMAIL THEM ALREADY. How can they fix something they don't know? While you wait, install Fedora. Then try and update the whole system at once like you can with SUSE and Slackware, and come back and tell us it was worse. I have almost 100 OSs, everything from DOS to Windows to Unix to Linux, SUSE remains my top, with Slackware in second place. Free BSD may catch up with Slackware some day when they realise people don't all use a common set of hardware and actually support more hardware. A
Preston
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 03:58 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 12:52:41AM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 03:40 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 09:48:17PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 22:07 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 12:14:46PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Kevanf1 wrote:
> Sorry Mike but I think his problems started with a YOU update not an > upgrade. YOU updates should really be stable.
Indeed. This is what happened. And they should be stable.
Preston
Before this gets out of hand:
Features, hardware support, and stability, are three things and none of them are related. If you want features to make it rival Windows, don't expect stability. If you want good hardware support, same thing, new hardwre can't work unless it isn't tested as much. If you spend all the time testing for bugs it doesn't get released.
SUSE is the only distro onn earth that I've ever seen mix these all together without being unstable.
Look at the most stable OSs in the World:
BSD
Solaris
AIX
Slackware
Now when is the last time you saw any of those have flashy new features?
SUSE can easily stay up, I've never had it crash and I use FTP, HTTP, and a million things on it and the box isn't even near the RAM it should have. It doesn't crash.
Firefox is a flash new browser, if you want stability instead, use Netcat.
Oh please.
#1 - This isn't the first time YOU has broken something recently. I had it break a kernel on my once recently because the mirror was bad. Ridiculous.
#2 - Firefox is a pretty basic piece of software. I don't see why they shouldn't test it before releasing it. I've been using Linux solely as a home OS for over 4 years and have rarely if ever had a problem with the web browser. Not on SuSE, at least.
No browser is basic, if you truely believe that, quit your day job, and buy a big calculator. That's one of the most retarded things I've ever seen on this list.
Oh come on. You know what I meant. I didn't mean basic like it's simple. I meant basic as in basic functionality to the distro. It's a basic part of any OS these days. It's highly important, commonly used, etc.
And that last reply you made, the guy said he didn't even update with YAST and you said "But it IS a SUSE problem"....*Sigh*.
Oh please.
Don't you understand what I'm trying to say? The bug is in Firefox. I get that. But SUSE should have some level of quality control. So in so far as they released untested and broken software it IS their problem. I pay them $80 per release so they can bundle and provide me with solid stable updates. If they fail to do this, that's their problem. There are hundreds of distros that are just slapped together where I can download the latest Firefox. Heck, I can do that on my own. But my time is valuable, so I pay SUSE so they only drop software like Firefox into YOU when it's stable and ready to go. If I'm doing the testing of all the software, why should I bother using SUSE again?
So because they released a browser fix that you alone seem to be having... Wait I forgot, all those usenet news sites saying the same things.... So all of it is untested and buggy?
I didn't say all of it. Once again, you're going off the deep end. I'm simply saying I've read of problems with 9.3. And then when I personally see crucial components being released as untested and buggy I look at the big picture and I start to worry. The kind of response I was hoping for was "don't worry, SUSE is on top of it" or "those are aberrations still". Something to let me know that I'm wrong. Something beyond just hurling insults and calling me names.
Yea, that's logical... I've watched you sit and whine about how your browser is all broken and then threaten to use Fedora.... Lol, have you ever actually USED Fedora? My God, you couldn't get up2date to download the updates without it freezing... You have to download like 10 at a time so it doesn't freeze up on you and then you have to sart it again hoping it won't freeze again.
I've used FC before. Used it for a year without problems. My little brother still uses FC1 and he's a Linux noob.
Lol, you go install Fedora and tell me it's as unstable as SUSE is. I've never used a Linux distro as bad as Fedora. The updates in SUSE are what you're whining about, and after 9000 times you won't email SUSE, you know,
It's up to 9000 times now?
the people who can do something about this? EMAIL THEM ALREADY. How can they fix something they don't know?
My... um... 9000 emails aren't about SuSE making a fix. I'll wait for the fix. My... uh... 9000 emails are a discussion about the relative stability of SuSE at this point. The fact that rather than joining in this discussion or choosing not to join it, you choose to insult me, tells me something about you. Me, I fixed the problem a long time ago. I'm just concerned about SuSE as someone who has used them almost solely since 8.0 (minus that year where I used Fedora also).
While you wait, install Fedora. Then try and update the whole system at once like you can with SUSE and Slackware, and come back and tell us it was worse.
*sigh*
I have almost 100 OSs, everything from DOS to Windows to Unix to Linux, SUSE remains my top, with Slackware in second place. Free BSD may catch up with Slackware some day when they realise people don't all use a common set
okay.... Argument ended. I can't argue with that. You proved me wrong across the board. Email 10000 over. Preston
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 01:11:20AM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 03:58 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 12:52:41AM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 03:40 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 09:48:17PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 22:07 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 12:14:46PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote: > > > On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Kevanf1 wrote: > > > Sorry Mike but I think his problems started with a YOU update not an > > upgrade. YOU updates should really be stable. > > Indeed. This is what happened. And they should be stable. > > Preston
Before this gets out of hand:
Features, hardware support, and stability, are three things and none of them are related. If you want features to make it rival Windows, don't expect stability. If you want good hardware support, same thing, new hardwre can't work unless it isn't tested as much. If you spend all the time testing for bugs it doesn't get released.
SUSE is the only distro onn earth that I've ever seen mix these all together without being unstable.
Look at the most stable OSs in the World:
BSD
Solaris
AIX
Slackware
Now when is the last time you saw any of those have flashy new features?
SUSE can easily stay up, I've never had it crash and I use FTP, HTTP, and a million things on it and the box isn't even near the RAM it should have. It doesn't crash.
Firefox is a flash new browser, if you want stability instead, use Netcat.
Oh please.
#1 - This isn't the first time YOU has broken something recently. I had it break a kernel on my once recently because the mirror was bad. Ridiculous.
#2 - Firefox is a pretty basic piece of software. I don't see why they shouldn't test it before releasing it. I've been using Linux solely as a home OS for over 4 years and have rarely if ever had a problem with the web browser. Not on SuSE, at least.
No browser is basic, if you truely believe that, quit your day job, and buy a big calculator. That's one of the most retarded things I've ever seen on this list.
Oh come on. You know what I meant. I didn't mean basic like it's simple. I meant basic as in basic functionality to the distro. It's a basic part of any OS these days. It's highly important, commonly used, etc.
And that last reply you made, the guy said he didn't even update with YAST and you said "But it IS a SUSE problem"....*Sigh*.
Oh please.
Don't you understand what I'm trying to say? The bug is in Firefox. I get that. But SUSE should have some level of quality control. So in so far as they released untested and broken software it IS their problem. I pay them $80 per release so they can bundle and provide me with solid stable updates. If they fail to do this, that's their problem. There are hundreds of distros that are just slapped together where I can download the latest Firefox. Heck, I can do that on my own. But my time is valuable, so I pay SUSE so they only drop software like Firefox into YOU when it's stable and ready to go. If I'm doing the testing of all the software, why should I bother using SUSE again?
So because they released a browser fix that you alone seem to be having... Wait I forgot, all those usenet news sites saying the same things.... So all of it is untested and buggy?
I didn't say all of it. Once again, you're going off the deep end. I'm simply saying I've read of problems with 9.3. And then when I personally see crucial components being released as untested and buggy I look at the big picture and I start to worry. The kind of response I was hoping for was "don't worry, SUSE is on top of it" or "those are aberrations still". Something to let me know that I'm wrong. Something beyond just hurling insults and calling me names.
And I look at the fact when 9.2 came out the SAME things were said. and you knwo what? When 9.1 came out, SAME stuff (Oh this is terrible everything is buggy and look what they did!")... I hear it every time a new release comes out. Don't tell me you would not get tired of it. It happens every 6 months for a month, meaning after you finally stop I only have 5 months until it happens again.
Yea, that's logical... I've watched you sit and whine about how your browser is all broken and then threaten to use Fedora.... Lol, have you ever actually USED Fedora? My God, you couldn't get up2date to download the updates without it freezing... You have to download like 10 at a time so it doesn't freeze up on you and then you have to sart it again hoping it won't freeze again.
I've used FC before. Used it for a year without problems. My little brother still uses FC1 and he's a Linux noob.
After 200 installs ( and for once I'm not beng sarcastic) up2date was about as stable as Windows ME.
Lol, you go install Fedora and tell me it's as unstable as SUSE is. I've never used a Linux distro as bad as Fedora. The updates in SUSE are what you're whining about, and after 9000 times you won't email SUSE, you know,
It's up to 9000 times now?
Open up a dictionary. Turn to the pages that hold meanings for satyricon, and sarcasm.
the people who can do something about this? EMAIL THEM ALREADY. How can they fix something they don't know?
My... um... 9000 emails aren't about SuSE making a fix. I'll wait for the fix. My... uh... 9000 emails are a discussion about the relative stability of SuSE at this point. The fact that rather than joining in this discussion or choosing not to join it, you choose to insult me, tells me something about you. Me, I fixed the problem a long time ago. I'm just concerned about SuSE as someone who has used them almost solely since 8.0 (minus that year where I used Fedora also).
While you wait, install Fedora. Then try and update the whole system at once like you can with SUSE and Slackware, and come back and tell us it was worse.
*sigh*
I have almost 100 OSs, everything from DOS to Windows to Unix to Linux, SUSE remains my top, with Slackware in second place. Free BSD may catch up with Slackware some day when they realise people don't all use a common set
okay.... Argument ended. I can't argue with that. You proved me wrong across the board.
Or maybe you do know what sarcasm means.
Email 10000 over.
You went from 9,000 to 10,000 in one message? Wow I think I know why you have stability issues.
Preston
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 04:24 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 01:11:20AM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 03:58 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 12:52:41AM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 03:40 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 09:48:17PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 22:07 -0400, Allen wrote: > On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 12:14:46PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Kevanf1 wrote: > > > > > Sorry Mike but I think his problems started with a YOU update not an > > > upgrade. YOU updates should really be stable. > > > > Indeed. This is what happened. And they should be stable. > > > > Preston > > Before this gets out of hand: > > Features, hardware support, and stability, are three things and none of > them are related. If you want features to make it rival Windows, don't > expect stability. If you want good hardware support, same thing, new > hardwre can't work unless it isn't tested as much. If you spend all the > time testing for bugs it doesn't get released. > > SUSE is the only distro onn earth that I've ever seen mix these all > together without being unstable. > > Look at the most stable OSs in the World: > > BSD > > Solaris > > AIX > > Slackware > > Now when is the last time you saw any of those have flashy new features? > > SUSE can easily stay up, I've never had it crash and I use FTP, HTTP, and a > million things on it and the box isn't even near the RAM it should have. It > doesn't crash. > > > > Firefox is a flash new browser, if you want stability instead, use Netcat.
Oh please.
#1 - This isn't the first time YOU has broken something recently. I had it break a kernel on my once recently because the mirror was bad. Ridiculous.
#2 - Firefox is a pretty basic piece of software. I don't see why they shouldn't test it before releasing it. I've been using Linux solely as a home OS for over 4 years and have rarely if ever had a problem with the web browser. Not on SuSE, at least.
No browser is basic, if you truely believe that, quit your day job, and buy a big calculator. That's one of the most retarded things I've ever seen on this list.
Oh come on. You know what I meant. I didn't mean basic like it's simple. I meant basic as in basic functionality to the distro. It's a basic part of any OS these days. It's highly important, commonly used, etc.
And that last reply you made, the guy said he didn't even update with YAST and you said "But it IS a SUSE problem"....*Sigh*.
Oh please.
Don't you understand what I'm trying to say? The bug is in Firefox. I get that. But SUSE should have some level of quality control. So in so far as they released untested and broken software it IS their problem. I pay them $80 per release so they can bundle and provide me with solid stable updates. If they fail to do this, that's their problem. There are hundreds of distros that are just slapped together where I can download the latest Firefox. Heck, I can do that on my own. But my time is valuable, so I pay SUSE so they only drop software like Firefox into YOU when it's stable and ready to go. If I'm doing the testing of all the software, why should I bother using SUSE again?
So because they released a browser fix that you alone seem to be having... Wait I forgot, all those usenet news sites saying the same things.... So all of it is untested and buggy?
I didn't say all of it. Once again, you're going off the deep end. I'm simply saying I've read of problems with 9.3. And then when I personally see crucial components being released as untested and buggy I look at the big picture and I start to worry. The kind of response I was hoping for was "don't worry, SUSE is on top of it" or "those are aberrations still". Something to let me know that I'm wrong. Something beyond just hurling insults and calling me names.
And I look at the fact when 9.2 came out the SAME things were said. and you knwo what? When 9.1 came out, SAME stuff (Oh this is terrible everything is buggy and look what they did!")... I hear it every time a new release comes out. Don't tell me you would not get tired of it. It happens every 6 months for a month, meaning after you finally stop I only have 5 months until it happens again.
So don't read the emails. That's simple enough. I don't have the bandwidth to read this list all the time. So I only pop on once in a while to check the pulse of the community or to see why something is going wrong and if I'm alone. I wouldn't stay on here, read it all, then fly of the handle at people, as you seem prone to doing.
Yea, that's logical... I've watched you sit and whine about how your browser is all broken and then threaten to use Fedora.... Lol, have you ever actually USED Fedora? My God, you couldn't get up2date to download the updates without it freezing... You have to download like 10 at a time so it doesn't freeze up on you and then you have to sart it again hoping it won't freeze again.
I've used FC before. Used it for a year without problems. My little brother still uses FC1 and he's a Linux noob.
After 200 installs ( and for once I'm not beng sarcastic) up2date was about as stable as Windows ME.
Well, that's your experience. And since you're so quick to call my experience irrelevant then why should I give any more credence to your experience?
Lol, you go install Fedora and tell me it's as unstable as SUSE is. I've never used a Linux distro as bad as Fedora. The updates in SUSE are what you're whining about, and after 9000 times you won't email SUSE, you know,
It's up to 9000 times now?
Open up a dictionary. Turn to the pages that hold meanings for satyricon, and sarcasm.
I know what sarcasm is. I know that's what you're "attempting" to do. But usually sarcasm is funny. Not just mean and rude. Mean and rude are just that, mean and rude.
the people who can do something about this? EMAIL THEM ALREADY. How can they fix something they don't know?
My... um... 9000 emails aren't about SuSE making a fix. I'll wait for the fix. My... uh... 9000 emails are a discussion about the relative stability of SuSE at this point. The fact that rather than joining in this discussion or choosing not to join it, you choose to insult me, tells me something about you. Me, I fixed the problem a long time ago. I'm just concerned about SuSE as someone who has used them almost solely since 8.0 (minus that year where I used Fedora also).
While you wait, install Fedora. Then try and update the whole system at once like you can with SUSE and Slackware, and come back and tell us it was worse.
*sigh*
I have almost 100 OSs, everything from DOS to Windows to Unix to Linux, SUSE remains my top, with Slackware in second place. Free BSD may catch up with Slackware some day when they realise people don't all use a common set
okay.... Argument ended. I can't argue with that. You proved me wrong across the board.
Or maybe you do know what sarcasm means.
I know what sarcasm is. You're just rude.
Email 10000 over.
You went from 9,000 to 10,000 in one message? Wow I think I know why you have stability issues.
I was just beating you to the punch. Can we end this now? Or do you have more of your trademarked sarcasm for me? Preston
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 01:33:52AM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 04:24 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 01:11:20AM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 03:58 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 12:52:41AM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 03:40 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 09:48:17PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote: > On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 22:07 -0400, Allen wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 12:14:46PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Kevanf1 wrote: > > > > > > > Sorry Mike but I think his problems started with a YOU update not an > > > > upgrade. YOU updates should really be stable. > > > > > > Indeed. This is what happened. And they should be stable. > > > > > > Preston > > > > Before this gets out of hand: > > > > Features, hardware support, and stability, are three things and none of > > them are related. If you want features to make it rival Windows, don't > > expect stability. If you want good hardware support, same thing, new > > hardwre can't work unless it isn't tested as much. If you spend all the > > time testing for bugs it doesn't get released. > > > > SUSE is the only distro onn earth that I've ever seen mix these all > > together without being unstable. > > > > Look at the most stable OSs in the World: > > > > BSD > > > > Solaris > > > > AIX > > > > Slackware > > > > Now when is the last time you saw any of those have flashy new features? > > > > SUSE can easily stay up, I've never had it crash and I use FTP, HTTP, and a > > million things on it and the box isn't even near the RAM it should have. It > > doesn't crash. > > > > > > > > Firefox is a flash new browser, if you want stability instead, use Netcat. > > Oh please. > > #1 - This isn't the first time YOU has broken something recently. I had > it break a kernel on my once recently because the mirror was bad. > Ridiculous. > > #2 - Firefox is a pretty basic piece of software. I don't see why they > shouldn't test it before releasing it. I've been using Linux solely as a > home OS for over 4 years and have rarely if ever had a problem with the > web browser. Not on SuSE, at least.
No browser is basic, if you truely believe that, quit your day job, and buy a big calculator. That's one of the most retarded things I've ever seen on this list.
Oh come on. You know what I meant. I didn't mean basic like it's simple. I meant basic as in basic functionality to the distro. It's a basic part of any OS these days. It's highly important, commonly used, etc.
And that last reply you made, the guy said he didn't even update with YAST and you said "But it IS a SUSE problem"....*Sigh*.
Oh please.
Don't you understand what I'm trying to say? The bug is in Firefox. I get that. But SUSE should have some level of quality control. So in so far as they released untested and broken software it IS their problem. I pay them $80 per release so they can bundle and provide me with solid stable updates. If they fail to do this, that's their problem. There are hundreds of distros that are just slapped together where I can download the latest Firefox. Heck, I can do that on my own. But my time is valuable, so I pay SUSE so they only drop software like Firefox into YOU when it's stable and ready to go. If I'm doing the testing of all the software, why should I bother using SUSE again?
So because they released a browser fix that you alone seem to be having... Wait I forgot, all those usenet news sites saying the same things.... So all of it is untested and buggy?
I didn't say all of it. Once again, you're going off the deep end. I'm simply saying I've read of problems with 9.3. And then when I personally see crucial components being released as untested and buggy I look at the big picture and I start to worry. The kind of response I was hoping for was "don't worry, SUSE is on top of it" or "those are aberrations still". Something to let me know that I'm wrong. Something beyond just hurling insults and calling me names.
And I look at the fact when 9.2 came out the SAME things were said. and you knwo what? When 9.1 came out, SAME stuff (Oh this is terrible everything is buggy and look what they did!")... I hear it every time a new release comes out. Don't tell me you would not get tired of it. It happens every 6 months for a month, meaning after you finally stop I only have 5 months until it happens again.
So don't read the emails. That's simple enough. I don't have the bandwidth to read this list all the time. So I only pop on once in a while to check the pulse of the community or to see why something is going wrong and if I'm alone. I wouldn't stay on here, read it all, then fly of the handle at people, as you seem prone to doing.
I was waiting for you to finally say that. I set you up to say that, and finally you do. Now, if you don't think I should read the mails, why on Earth are you bothering with mine? In 2 hours I've gotten you to reply to my every mail, say something I was waiting for you to say, and then hopefully, make you realise how pointless it was. Don't read my emails. It's THAT simple. If you don't have the bandwidth, why reply to me each time? You are compelled lol.
Yea, that's logical... I've watched you sit and whine about how your browser is all broken and then threaten to use Fedora.... Lol, have you ever actually USED Fedora? My God, you couldn't get up2date to download the updates without it freezing... You have to download like 10 at a time so it doesn't freeze up on you and then you have to sart it again hoping it won't freeze again.
I've used FC before. Used it for a year without problems. My little brother still uses FC1 and he's a Linux noob.
After 200 installs ( and for once I'm not beng sarcastic) up2date was about as stable as Windows ME.
Well, that's your experience. And since you're so quick to call my experience irrelevant then why should I give any more credence to your experience?
I really don't care if you do or not.
Lol, you go install Fedora and tell me it's as unstable as SUSE is. I've never used a Linux distro as bad as Fedora. The updates in SUSE are what you're whining about, and after 9000 times you won't email SUSE, you know,
It's up to 9000 times now?
Open up a dictionary. Turn to the pages that hold meanings for satyricon, and sarcasm.
I know what sarcasm is. I know that's what you're "attempting" to do. But usually sarcasm is funny. Not just mean and rude. Mean and rude are just that, mean and rude.
That's your opinion.
the people who can do something about this? EMAIL THEM ALREADY. How can they fix something they don't know?
My... um... 9000 emails aren't about SuSE making a fix. I'll wait for the fix. My... uh... 9000 emails are a discussion about the relative stability of SuSE at this point. The fact that rather than joining in this discussion or choosing not to join it, you choose to insult me, tells me something about you. Me, I fixed the problem a long time ago. I'm just concerned about SuSE as someone who has used them almost solely since 8.0 (minus that year where I used Fedora also).
While you wait, install Fedora. Then try and update the whole system at once like you can with SUSE and Slackware, and come back and tell us it was worse.
*sigh*
I have almost 100 OSs, everything from DOS to Windows to Unix to Linux, SUSE remains my top, with Slackware in second place. Free BSD may catch up with Slackware some day when they realise people don't all use a common set
okay.... Argument ended. I can't argue with that. You proved me wrong across the board.
Or maybe you do know what sarcasm means.
I know what sarcasm is. You're just rude.
There you are calling me names again. You're rude.
Email 10000 over.
You went from 9,000 to 10,000 in one message? Wow I think I know why you have stability issues.
I was just beating you to the punch.
Can we end this now? Or do you have more of your trademarked sarcasm for me?
Rarely do I use any decent sarcasm here. Way to many people here don't have a sense of humor as it is.
Preston
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 04:44 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 01:33:52AM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 04:24 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 01:11:20AM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 03:58 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 12:52:41AM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 03:40 -0400, Allen wrote: > On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 09:48:17PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote: > > On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 22:07 -0400, Allen wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 12:14:46PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Kevanf1 wrote: > > > > > > > > > Sorry Mike but I think his problems started with a YOU update not an > > > > > upgrade. YOU updates should really be stable. > > > > > > > > Indeed. This is what happened. And they should be stable. > > > > > > > > Preston > > > > > > Before this gets out of hand: > > > > > > Features, hardware support, and stability, are three things and none of > > > them are related. If you want features to make it rival Windows, don't > > > expect stability. If you want good hardware support, same thing, new > > > hardwre can't work unless it isn't tested as much. If you spend all the > > > time testing for bugs it doesn't get released. > > > > > > SUSE is the only distro onn earth that I've ever seen mix these all > > > together without being unstable. > > > > > > Look at the most stable OSs in the World: > > > > > > BSD > > > > > > Solaris > > > > > > AIX > > > > > > Slackware > > > > > > Now when is the last time you saw any of those have flashy new features? > > > > > > SUSE can easily stay up, I've never had it crash and I use FTP, HTTP, and a > > > million things on it and the box isn't even near the RAM it should have. It > > > doesn't crash. > > > > > > > > > > > > Firefox is a flash new browser, if you want stability instead, use Netcat. > > > > Oh please. > > > > #1 - This isn't the first time YOU has broken something recently. I had > > it break a kernel on my once recently because the mirror was bad. > > Ridiculous. > > > > #2 - Firefox is a pretty basic piece of software. I don't see why they > > shouldn't test it before releasing it. I've been using Linux solely as a > > home OS for over 4 years and have rarely if ever had a problem with the > > web browser. Not on SuSE, at least. > > No browser is basic, if you truely believe that, quit your day job, and buy > a big calculator. That's one of the most retarded things I've ever seen on > this list.
Oh come on. You know what I meant. I didn't mean basic like it's simple. I meant basic as in basic functionality to the distro. It's a basic part of any OS these days. It's highly important, commonly used, etc.
> And that last reply you made, the guy said he didn't even update with YAST > and you said "But it IS a SUSE problem"....*Sigh*.
Oh please.
Don't you understand what I'm trying to say? The bug is in Firefox. I get that. But SUSE should have some level of quality control. So in so far as they released untested and broken software it IS their problem. I pay them $80 per release so they can bundle and provide me with solid stable updates. If they fail to do this, that's their problem. There are hundreds of distros that are just slapped together where I can download the latest Firefox. Heck, I can do that on my own. But my time is valuable, so I pay SUSE so they only drop software like Firefox into YOU when it's stable and ready to go. If I'm doing the testing of all the software, why should I bother using SUSE again?
So because they released a browser fix that you alone seem to be having... Wait I forgot, all those usenet news sites saying the same things.... So all of it is untested and buggy?
I didn't say all of it. Once again, you're going off the deep end. I'm simply saying I've read of problems with 9.3. And then when I personally see crucial components being released as untested and buggy I look at the big picture and I start to worry. The kind of response I was hoping for was "don't worry, SUSE is on top of it" or "those are aberrations still". Something to let me know that I'm wrong. Something beyond just hurling insults and calling me names.
And I look at the fact when 9.2 came out the SAME things were said. and you knwo what? When 9.1 came out, SAME stuff (Oh this is terrible everything is buggy and look what they did!")... I hear it every time a new release comes out. Don't tell me you would not get tired of it. It happens every 6 months for a month, meaning after you finally stop I only have 5 months until it happens again.
So don't read the emails. That's simple enough. I don't have the bandwidth to read this list all the time. So I only pop on once in a while to check the pulse of the community or to see why something is going wrong and if I'm alone. I wouldn't stay on here, read it all, then fly of the handle at people, as you seem prone to doing.
I was waiting for you to finally say that. I set you up to say that, and finally you do. Now, if you don't think I should read the mails, why on Earth are you bothering with mine?
Because I was trying to pose questions about the state of SUSE and you insist on insulting me. I think I'm allowed to defend myself when insulted.
In 2 hours I've gotten you to reply to my every mail, say something I was waiting for you to say, and then hopefully, make you realise how pointless it was.
Yes. I fell into your brilliant trap...?
Don't read my emails. It's THAT simple. If you don't have the bandwidth, why reply to me each time? You are compelled lol.
I don't appreciate being insulted in a public forum. Especially when you could have easily taken this offline. You're immature. You're rude and you aren't funny, nor clever. You're just a bully.
Lol, you go install Fedora and tell me it's as unstable as SUSE is. I've never used a Linux distro as bad as Fedora. The updates in SUSE are what you're whining about, and after 9000 times you won't email SUSE, you know,
It's up to 9000 times now?
Open up a dictionary. Turn to the pages that hold meanings for satyricon, and sarcasm.
I know what sarcasm is. I know that's what you're "attempting" to do. But usually sarcasm is funny. Not just mean and rude. Mean and rude are just that, mean and rude.
That's your opinion.
Not just mine, judging from the SuSE mailing list archives.
the people who can do something about this? EMAIL THEM ALREADY. How can they fix something they don't know?
My... um... 9000 emails aren't about SuSE making a fix. I'll wait for the fix. My... uh... 9000 emails are a discussion about the relative stability of SuSE at this point. The fact that rather than joining in this discussion or choosing not to join it, you choose to insult me, tells me something about you. Me, I fixed the problem a long time ago. I'm just concerned about SuSE as someone who has used them almost solely since 8.0 (minus that year where I used Fedora also).
While you wait, install Fedora. Then try and update the whole system at once like you can with SUSE and Slackware, and come back and tell us it was worse.
*sigh*
I have almost 100 OSs, everything from DOS to Windows to Unix to Linux, SUSE remains my top, with Slackware in second place. Free BSD may catch up with Slackware some day when they realise people don't all use a common set
okay.... Argument ended. I can't argue with that. You proved me wrong across the board.
Or maybe you do know what sarcasm means.
I know what sarcasm is. You're just rude.
There you are calling me names again. You're rude.
No. I'm speaking the truth about how you treat people.
Email 10000 over.
You went from 9,000 to 10,000 in one message? Wow I think I know why you have stability issues.
I was just beating you to the punch.
Can we end this now? Or do you have more of your trademarked sarcasm for me?
Rarely do I use any decent sarcasm here. Way to many people here don't have a sense of humor as it is.
Maybe these people you run into with no sense of humor actually DO have a sensor of humor, but you're just rude and insulting. Did that ever occur to you? Night. Preston
On Thursday 28 April 2005 08:52, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 03:40 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 09:48:17PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 22:07 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 12:14:46PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Kevanf1 wrote:
Sorry Mike but I think his problems started with a YOU update not an upgrade. YOU updates should really be stable.
Indeed. This is what happened. And they should be stable.
Preston
Before this gets out of hand:
Features, hardware support, and stability, are three things and none of them are related. If you want features to make it rival Windows, don't expect stability. If you want good hardware support, same thing, new hardwre can't work unless it isn't tested as much. If you spend all the time testing for bugs it doesn't get released.
SUSE is the only distro onn earth that I've ever seen mix these all together without being unstable.
Look at the most stable OSs in the World:
BSD
Solaris
AIX
Slackware
Now when is the last time you saw any of those have flashy new features?
SUSE can easily stay up, I've never had it crash and I use FTP, HTTP, and a million things on it and the box isn't even near the RAM it should have. It doesn't crash.
Firefox is a flash new browser, if you want stability instead, use Netcat.
Oh please.
#1 - This isn't the first time YOU has broken something recently. I had it break a kernel on my once recently because the mirror was bad. Ridiculous.
#2 - Firefox is a pretty basic piece of software. I don't see why they shouldn't test it before releasing it. I've been using Linux solely as a home OS for over 4 years and have rarely if ever had a problem with the web browser. Not on SuSE, at least.
No browser is basic, if you truely believe that, quit your day job, and buy a big calculator. That's one of the most retarded things I've ever seen on this list.
Oh come on. You know what I meant. I didn't mean basic like it's simple. I meant basic as in basic functionality to the distro. It's a basic part of any OS these days. It's highly important, commonly used, etc.
And that last reply you made, the guy said he didn't even update with YAST and you said "But it IS a SUSE problem"....*Sigh*.
Oh please.
Don't you understand what I'm trying to say? The bug is in Firefox. I get that. But SUSE should have some level of quality control. So in so far as they released untested and broken software it IS their problem. I pay them $80 per release so they can bundle and provide me with solid stable updates. If they fail to do this, that's their problem. There are hundreds of distros that are just slapped together where I can download the latest Firefox. Heck, I can do that on my own. But my time is valuable, so I pay SUSE so they only drop software like Firefox into YOU when it's stable and ready to go. If I'm doing the testing of all the software, why should I bother using SUSE again?
Preston
IF you want stable then can firefox if it aint stable stop whinging about it . i use Mozilla1.8a6 it is rock solid and has never crashed until i updated accroread soon sorted . I must admit it seems that 9.3 is something to avoid like it's got something nasty i have run suse now since 5.2 but think 9.2 is the plce to stay for a while . Also why on earth do you use YOU so much it completely frells things so often it is untrue learn to be a little more choosey about what you install dont do a windBloZe and just say yes to the lot look at it and see if you actually use what is bieng suggested i see many times where YOU wants to install stuff i aint got installed that would completely frell the system . NOTE ALL SOFTWARE IS BETA , That includes windBloZe (get it right thats ALPHA ) you want stable dont use a computer ever althou Linux beats the hell out of BloZe any day on all fronts . Pete . -- If Bill Gates had gotten LAID at High School do YOU think there would be a Microsoft ? Of course NOT ! You gotta spend a lot of time at your school Locker stuffing underware up your ass to think , I am going to take on the worlds Computer Industry -------:heard on Cyber Radio.:-------
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 10:16 +0100, Peter Nikolic wrote:
On Thursday 28 April 2005 08:52, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 03:40 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 09:48:17PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 22:07 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 12:14:46PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Kevanf1 wrote: > Sorry Mike but I think his problems started with a YOU update not > an upgrade. YOU updates should really be stable.
Indeed. This is what happened. And they should be stable.
Preston
Before this gets out of hand:
Features, hardware support, and stability, are three things and none of them are related. If you want features to make it rival Windows, don't expect stability. If you want good hardware support, same thing, new hardwre can't work unless it isn't tested as much. If you spend all the time testing for bugs it doesn't get released.
SUSE is the only distro onn earth that I've ever seen mix these all together without being unstable.
Look at the most stable OSs in the World:
BSD
Solaris
AIX
Slackware
Now when is the last time you saw any of those have flashy new features?
SUSE can easily stay up, I've never had it crash and I use FTP, HTTP, and a million things on it and the box isn't even near the RAM it should have. It doesn't crash.
Firefox is a flash new browser, if you want stability instead, use Netcat.
Oh please.
#1 - This isn't the first time YOU has broken something recently. I had it break a kernel on my once recently because the mirror was bad. Ridiculous.
#2 - Firefox is a pretty basic piece of software. I don't see why they shouldn't test it before releasing it. I've been using Linux solely as a home OS for over 4 years and have rarely if ever had a problem with the web browser. Not on SuSE, at least.
No browser is basic, if you truely believe that, quit your day job, and buy a big calculator. That's one of the most retarded things I've ever seen on this list.
Oh come on. You know what I meant. I didn't mean basic like it's simple. I meant basic as in basic functionality to the distro. It's a basic part of any OS these days. It's highly important, commonly used, etc.
And that last reply you made, the guy said he didn't even update with YAST and you said "But it IS a SUSE problem"....*Sigh*.
Oh please.
Don't you understand what I'm trying to say? The bug is in Firefox. I get that. But SUSE should have some level of quality control. So in so far as they released untested and broken software it IS their problem. I pay them $80 per release so they can bundle and provide me with solid stable updates. If they fail to do this, that's their problem. There are hundreds of distros that are just slapped together where I can download the latest Firefox. Heck, I can do that on my own. But my time is valuable, so I pay SUSE so they only drop software like Firefox into YOU when it's stable and ready to go. If I'm doing the testing of all the software, why should I bother using SUSE again?
Preston
IF you want stable then can firefox if it aint stable stop whinging about it . i use Mozilla1.8a6 it is rock solid and has never crashed until i updated accroread soon sorted .
Sadly it WAS stable prior to this update.
Also why on earth do you use YOU so much it completely frells things so often it is untrue learn to be a little more choosey about what you install dont do a windBloZe and just say yes to the lot look at it and see if you actually use what is bieng suggested i see many times where YOU wants to install stuff i aint got installed that would completely frell the system .
I am choosy. But I assumed SuSE did their homework and tested Firefox. Why not? They usually do a good job. Preston
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 10:16:03AM +0100, Peter Nikolic wrote:
Also why on earth do you use YOU so much it completely frells things so often it is untrue
I have been running SuSE since 7.3 (at work and at home) and run YOU at least weekly, and more usually daily. I have never had this experience. -- Anthony Edwards anthony.edwards@uk.easynet.net
Anthony Edwards wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 10:16:03AM +0100, Peter Nikolic wrote:
Also why on earth do you use YOU so much it completely frells things so often it is untrue
I have been running SuSE since 7.3 (at work and at home) and run YOU at least weekly, and more usually daily. I have never had this experience.
Likewise, this is the first time I've had YOU do any damage. dave -- David C. Johanson Linux Counter # 116410 Powered by SuSE Linux 7.3 People who behold a phenomenon will often extend their thinking beyond it; people who merely hear about the phenomenon will not be moved to think at all. -- Goethe
On April Thursday 2005 6:51 pm, David Johanson wrote:
Anthony Edwards wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 10:16:03AM +0100, Peter Nikolic wrote:
Also why on earth do you use YOU so much it completely frells things so often it is untrue
I have been running SuSE since 7.3 (at work and at home) and run YOU at least weekly, and more usually daily. I have never had this experience.
Likewise, this is the first time I've had YOU do any damage.
And for that we are all sympathetic ... but someone usually is the first one to have some bizare happening on each release.. guess you just got a pass for the next few, huh? <wink> Still, I´ll send you some Extra Karma points, since you probably burned thru a few w/ more than one nasty word or thought whilst you dealt w/ your problems , no? <g> j
jfweber@bellsouth.net wrote:
On April Thursday 2005 6:51 pm, David Johanson wrote:
<snip>
Likewise, this is the first time I've had YOU do any damage taking out firefox and thunderbird completly!
And for that we are all sympathetic ... but someone usually is the first one to have some bizare happening on each release.. guess you just got a pass for the next few, huh? <wink>
I sure hope so. ;-)
Still, I´ll send you some Extra Karma points, since you probably burned thru a few w/ more than one nasty word or thought whilst you dealt w/ your problems , no? <g> j
Here is my solution, inelegant as it is, but it got the mail delivered. O.K., now here is the story so far. After the disastrous YOU update, I uninstalled both thunderbird and firefox, and then re-installed mozilla. That gave me back the browser function - via mozilla, NOT firefox - but no email either via mozilla (even with mozilla mail installed) or thunderbird. Next I did a new YOU update just for mozilla as it was shown yesterday, one day after the disaster, as a brand new security update. My mozilla self-install listed mozilla as 1.72 and the latest YOU update advanced it to 1.77, but neither provided the mail function. I next installed gtk-qt 0.6. I then did a new download of thunderbird and performed the command line install of that. All that appears to have provided was a huge amount of stuff in the chrome directory, but no new executable files. ;-( Don't ask why, I'm not sure other than to say that I like poking around, but I went back to the previously used directory with the thunderbird install and tried running that again. And what do you know, it runs. I have no idea what step of the way fixed the broken thunderbird, but it now runs just fine. Next I'll play with firefox, but the big crisis has been averted. If you have any idea as to what might have fixed the problem I'd be delighted to know. It's not TOTALLY repaired, as I still get the following gecko errors if I start from the command line, but ONLY if I start from the command line: (Gecko:16073): GdkPixbuf-CRITICAL **: file gdk-pixbuf.c: line 415 (gdk_pixbuf_get_n_channels): assertion `pixbuf != NULL' failed (Gecko:16073): GdkPixbuf-CRITICAL **: file gdk-pixbuf.c: line 447 (gdk_pixbuf_get_bits_per_sample): assertion `pixbuf != NULL' failed (Gecko:16073): GdkPixbuf-CRITICAL **: file gdk-pixbuf.c: line 481 (gdk_pixbuf_get_width): assertion `pixbuf != NULL' failed (Gecko:16073): GdkPixbuf-CRITICAL **: file gdk-pixbuf.c: line 497 (gdk_pixbuf_get_height): assertion `pixbuf != NULL' failed (Gecko:16073): GdkPixbuf-CRITICAL **: file gdk-pixbuf.c: line 514 (gdk_pixbuf_get_rowstride): assertion `pixbuf != NULL' failed (Gecko:16073): GLib-GObject-CRITICAL **: file gobject.c: line 1579 (g_object_unref): assertion `G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed (Gecko:16073): Gdk-CRITICAL **: file gdkpixbuf-drawable.c: line 1228 (gdk_pixbuf_get_from_drawable): assertion `gdk_window_is_viewable (src)' failed dave -- David C. Johanson Linux Counter # 116410 Powered by SuSE Linux 7.3 People who behold a phenomenon will often extend their thinking beyond it; people who merely hear about the phenomenon will not be moved to think at all. -- Goethe
In my experience these errors mostly refer to the active Qt theme and some complications in using them with Gtk for one reason or another. If I use the Plastik theme, all is well. If I use Liquid or Baghira, Firefox will crash (not yet tried with 1.0.3). This is very annoying. In (k)Ubuntu this doesn't happen, probably because there is no integration with Qt taking place. I have also had certain Firefox themes crash the browser regardles of Qt theme. As I said, I haven't tried yet on 1.0.3, but it was very apparent with the Firefox delivered originally. /Martin. On 4/30/05, David Johanson <dcjohan@patriot.net> wrote:
jfweber@bellsouth.net wrote:
On April Thursday 2005 6:51 pm, David Johanson wrote:
<snip>
Likewise, this is the first time I've had YOU do any damage taking out firefox and thunderbird completly!
And for that we are all sympathetic ... but someone usually is the first one to have some bizare happening on each release.. guess you just got a pass for the next few, huh? <wink>
I sure hope so. ;-)
Still, I´ll send you some Extra Karma points, since you probably burned thru a few w/ more than one nasty word or thought whilst you dealt w/
your
problems , no? <g> j
Here is my solution, inelegant as it is, but it got the mail delivered.
O.K., now here is the story so far. After the disastrous YOU update, I uninstalled both thunderbird and firefox, and then re-installed mozilla. That gave me back the browser function - via mozilla, NOT firefox - but no email either via mozilla (even with mozilla mail installed) or thunderbird.
Next I did a new YOU update just for mozilla as it was shown yesterday, one day after the disaster, as a brand new security update. My mozilla self-install listed mozilla as 1.72 and the latest YOU update advanced it to 1.77, but neither provided the mail function.
I next installed gtk-qt 0.6.
I then did a new download of thunderbird and performed the command line install of that. All that appears to have provided was a huge amount of stuff in the chrome directory, but no new executable files. ;-(
Don't ask why, I'm not sure other than to say that I like poking around, but I went back to the previously used directory with the thunderbird install and tried running that again. And what do you know, it runs.
I have no idea what step of the way fixed the broken thunderbird, but it now runs just fine. Next I'll play with firefox, but the big crisis has been averted.
If you have any idea as to what might have fixed the problem I'd be delighted to know. It's not TOTALLY repaired, as I still get the following gecko errors if I start from the command line, but ONLY if I start from the command line:
(Gecko:16073): GdkPixbuf-CRITICAL **: file gdk-pixbuf.c: line 415 (gdk_pixbuf_get_n_channels): assertion `pixbuf != NULL' failed
(Gecko:16073): GdkPixbuf-CRITICAL **: file gdk-pixbuf.c: line 447 (gdk_pixbuf_get_bits_per_sample): assertion `pixbuf != NULL' failed
(Gecko:16073): GdkPixbuf-CRITICAL **: file gdk-pixbuf.c: line 481 (gdk_pixbuf_get_width): assertion `pixbuf != NULL' failed
(Gecko:16073): GdkPixbuf-CRITICAL **: file gdk-pixbuf.c: line 497 (gdk_pixbuf_get_height): assertion `pixbuf != NULL' failed
(Gecko:16073): GdkPixbuf-CRITICAL **: file gdk-pixbuf.c: line 514 (gdk_pixbuf_get_rowstride): assertion `pixbuf != NULL' failed
(Gecko:16073): GLib-GObject-CRITICAL **: file gobject.c: line 1579 (g_object_unref): assertion `G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed
(Gecko:16073): Gdk-CRITICAL **: file gdkpixbuf-drawable.c: line 1228 (gdk_pixbuf_get_from_drawable): assertion `gdk_window_is_viewable (src)' failed
dave
-- David C. Johanson Linux Counter # 116410 Powered by SuSE Linux 7.3
People who behold a phenomenon will often extend their thinking beyond it; people who merely hear about the phenomenon will not be moved to think at all. -- Goethe
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Michael W Cocke wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 08:59:19 -0700, you wrote:
I've been watching the happenings on the message boards recently with regards to SuSE 9.3. It seems like it's more bleeding edge and unstable than usual.
Then you haven't been paying attention. It's 'bleeding edge and unstable' if you choose to disregard common sense. I've got it on 2
What does that mean? I'm just reading the Usenet group and the message boards and reading about all kinds of problems. It's anecdotal, but come on. Not everyone who has a bug with SuSE is an idiot. Sometimes the system is actually at fault.
systems so far, including a production email server. One relatively minor problem, to which the solution was already posted here. The performance improvement over 9.1 and 9.2 is fantastic! I'm actually looking forward to upgrading my file server. 8-)>
That's good to hear. However, I'm going to wait and see. Like I said, what I'm reading isn't good. Especially with regards to problems with OpenOffice 2.0 (which last I heard is still beta). Putting major versions of software like this into the distro when their beta seems like a bad idea. And people are having problems with it.
Of course, I've never tried to 'update' a system - I follow the conventional wisdom (based on my own experiences) of doing a clean install of ANY operating system upgrade, whether it's windows, OS/2, linux, or DOS.
I didn't do an update. I updated Firefox via YOU.
And now I get a Firefox YOU update where my bookmarks and profile are broken. I can still get to my bookmarks, but I have to select "Bookmarks > Manage Bookmarks" then my bookmarks appear after having disappeared. They disappear next time I start Firefox back up. On top of that it doesn't properly recognize my profile, i.e. Firefox looks different than it should. Different X to close down tabs, etc.
You should probably be asking this question of the mozilla/firefox team, since the exact same thing happened to me when I upgraded (manually) from 1.0.2 to 1.0.3 on a SuSE 9.2 system, and a bit of investigation showed that it was because of a bug in 1.0.2 that 1.0.3 corrected...
YOU totally bi-passed 1.0.2 I believe. I don't find it in the RPM cache, at least. So this is something to do with the current update.
What is going on with Novell quality control? I'm a little concerned. In the short term I want Firefox to work again. In the long term I want to know that YOU isn't going to thrash my desktop for daily use. I can get that with Fedora if I want.
As far as I can see, if you pay attention to what's going on you should be fine. If you want to be oblivious, I suggest windows.
Oh please. I don't want oblivious. I can admin a Linux box. I can admin a FreeBSD box. I could do it all from source if I wanted to. But I'm a web and Java developer. I need my system to "just work". And that's why I pay SuSE the money. So it "just works". So excuse me if that's my expectation. It's not because I'm stupid or lazy. It's because there's a reason I pay for SuSE. And if they fall down on the job, then I could just run FreeBSD (well, except it has Java issues) or Fedora and tweak everything myself. Preston
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 12:10 -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
That's good to hear. However, I'm going to wait and see. Like I said, what I'm reading isn't good. Especially with regards to problems with OpenOffice 2.0 (which last I heard is still beta). Putting major versions of software like this into the distro when their beta seems like a bad idea. And people are having problems with it.
I wanted to point out that, while OOo 2.0 is beta, you can easily download the latest batch of rpms from the website and install with your tool of choice. They even have specific rpms for suse, redhat, mandrake, and freedesktop menus (although you do have to delete the redhat and mandrake rpms in order to install). The latest release, build .95 is really pretty solid for all the basic functions in writer. I use it for school constantly.
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 12:10 -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
Especially with regards to problems with OpenOffice 2.0 (which last I heard is still beta). Putting major versions of software like this into the distro when their beta seems like a bad idea. And people are having problems with it.
I wanted to point out that, while OOo 2.0 is beta, you can easily download the latest batch of rpms i.e. development versions from the website and install with your tool of choice. They even have specific rpms for suse, redhat, mandrake, and freedesktop menus (although you do have to delete the redhat and mandrake rpms in order to install). The latest release, build .95 is really pretty solid for all the basic functions in writer. I use it for school constantly. I would concur, using 1.9.95 here in 9.2 presently, and it is working
Jack Brooks wrote: pretty good for my purposes. -- Joe Morris New Tribes Mission Email Address: Joe_Morris@ntm.org Registered Linux user 231871
On 4/27/05, Joe Morris (NTM) <Joe_Morris@ntm.org> wrote:
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 12:10 -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
Especially with regards to problems with OpenOffice 2.0 (which last I heard is still beta). Putting major versions of software like this into the distro when their beta seems like a bad idea. And people are having problems with it.
I wanted to point out that, while OOo 2.0 is beta, you can easily download the latest batch of rpms i.e. development versions from the website and install with your tool of choice. They even have specific rpms for suse, redhat, mandrake, and freedesktop menus (although you do have to delete the redhat and mandrake rpms in order to install). The latest release, build .95 is really pretty solid for all the basic functions in writer. I use it for school constantly. I would concur, using 1.9.95 here in 9.2 presently, and it is working
Jack Brooks wrote: pretty good for my purposes. -- Joe Morris New Tribes Mission Email Address: Joe_Morris@ntm.org Registered Linux user 231871
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
The main point is that a beta version should not have been included in SuSE 9.3 SuSE Linux has a known reputation for only including stable versions of software. Gnome 2.8 (please correct me if I have the version wrong) was not included in SuSE 9.2 because it was not in a stable release when 9.2 was officailly released. So why do it with OOo as good as the software is. Sorry but I feel this is a slippery slope. -- Take care. Kevan Farmer 34 Hill Street Cheslyn Hay Staffordshire WS6 7HR
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Kevanf1 wrote:
On 4/27/05, Joe Morris (NTM) <Joe_Morris@ntm.org> wrote:
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 12:10 -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
Especially with regards to problems with OpenOffice 2.0 (which last I heard is still beta). Putting major versions of software like this into the distro when their beta seems like a bad idea. And people are having problems with it.
I wanted to point out that, while OOo 2.0 is beta, you can easily download the latest batch of rpms i.e. development versions from the website and install with your tool of choice. They even have specific rpms for suse, redhat, mandrake, and freedesktop menus (although you do have to delete the redhat and mandrake rpms in order to install). The latest release, build .95 is really pretty solid for all the basic functions in writer. I use it for school constantly. I would concur, using 1.9.95 here in 9.2 presently, and it is working
Jack Brooks wrote: pretty good for my purposes. -- Joe Morris New Tribes Mission Email Address: Joe_Morris@ntm.org Registered Linux user 231871
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
The main point is that a beta version should not have been included in SuSE 9.3 SuSE Linux has a known reputation for only including stable versions of software. Gnome 2.8 (please correct me if I have the version wrong) was not included in SuSE 9.2 because it was not in a stable release when 9.2 was officailly released. So why do it with OOo as good as the software is. Sorry but I feel this is a slippery slope.
Exactly. Preston
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Joe Morris (NTM) wrote:
Jack Brooks wrote:
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 12:10 -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
Especially with regards to problems with OpenOffice 2.0 (which last I heard is still beta). Putting major versions of software like this into the distro when their beta seems like a bad idea. And people are having problems with it.
I wanted to point out that, while OOo 2.0 is beta, you can easily download the latest batch of rpms i.e. development versions from the website and install with your tool of choice. They even have specific rpms for suse, redhat, mandrake, and freedesktop menus (although you do have to delete the redhat and mandrake rpms in order to install). The latest release, build .95 is really pretty solid for all the basic functions in writer. I use it for school constantly. I would concur, using 1.9.95 here in 9.2 presently, and it is working pretty good for my purposes.
This misses the point. It may work, but that isn't the SuSE way of doing things. So back to my original point. If SuSE is going to begin releasing software that's unstable, doesn't work, hasn't been tested or is in beta, what am I paying for exactly? I could just as easily get FreeBSD or Fedora for free and spend my $80 every 6 months (because I *usually* get every upgrade) on contributing to the free software project of my choice directly, instead of paying for software that is every bit as unstable as other free distributions. Preston
On Wednesday 27 April 2005 07:16 pm, Preston Crawford wrote:
This misses the point. It may work, but that isn't the SuSE way of doing things. So back to my original point. If SuSE is going to begin releasing software that's unstable, doesn't work, hasn't been tested or is in beta, what am I paying for exactly? I could just as easily get FreeBSD or Fedora for free and spend my $80 every 6 months (because I *usually* get every upgrade) on contributing to the free software project of my choice directly, instead of paying for software that is every bit as unstable as other free distributions.
I guess if you don't like it, leave it... There's always a fine line between "giving people what they want" and trying to be totally stable. How many times have we seen the comment on this list about "why didn't they include the latest version of <nameyourpoison> in the current release?" Learn this: They will never make everyone happy all of the time. You know that, I know that and Novell knows that. I am sure they are doing their best. I'm running the latest OO beta (.95) on 9.2 and loving it. So I am totally happy with what they have included. (even though I don't have 9.3 yet) Life is tough. Deal with it.
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 19:22 -0400, Bruce Marshall wrote:
On Wednesday 27 April 2005 07:16 pm, Preston Crawford wrote:
This misses the point. It may work, but that isn't the SuSE way of doing things. So back to my original point. If SuSE is going to begin releasing software that's unstable, doesn't work, hasn't been tested or is in beta, what am I paying for exactly? I could just as easily get FreeBSD or Fedora for free and spend my $80 every 6 months (because I *usually* get every upgrade) on contributing to the free software project of my choice directly, instead of paying for software that is every bit as unstable as other free distributions.
I guess if you don't like it, leave it...
Is that the new SuSE mantra or just yours? I think SuSE wants to please the customers. If you think they should cop that attitude then we're certainly in trouble as users of SuSE Pro.
There's always a fine line between "giving people what they want" and trying to be totally stable. How many times have we seen the comment on this list about "why didn't they include the latest version of <nameyourpoison> in the current release?"
I think most people who use SuSE value stability. I know more people off this list than on this list who not only don't complain about SuSE, but run old versions around their house because it just works. So I think you're, once again, misrepresenting what the general SuSE user base expects and wants. I expect and want stability. Not new and flashy. I think most SuSE users are that way. If they wanted new and flashy they could go with Fedora or another Mandriva.
Learn this: They will never make everyone happy all of the time. You know that, I know that and Novell knows that. I am sure they are doing their best.
We'll see. Verdict is still out on that. All I know is that it's strange that my copy of SuSE 9.2 includes an old version of Mono (just fine by me) because it's stable, yet they're starting to include betas when perfectly usable stable versions are available. It's a trend I don't like.
I'm running the latest OO beta (.95) on 9.2 and loving it. So I am totally happy with what they have included. (even though I don't have 9.3 yet)
Life is tough. Deal with it.
How is this tough? It's not tough, it's just a bad choice on SuSE's part in my opinion. One I hope doesn't continue or else I'll have to go distro shopping. And I don't think I'm alone in that sentiment. Preston
I'm running the latest OO beta (.95) on 9.2 and loving it. So I am totally happy with what they have included. (even though I don't have 9.3 yet)
Life is tough. Deal with it.
How is this tough? It's not tough, it's just a bad choice on SuSE's part in my opinion. One I hope doesn't continue or else I'll have to go distro shopping. And I don't think I'm alone in that sentiment.
Preston
It's backed by SUSE on their choice for doing this and they have developers that work on OO fulltime. They did a lot of work in this Beta to make it very usable. Want links??? JD
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 23:14 -0600, JD. Brown wrote:
I'm running the latest OO beta (.95) on 9.2 and loving it. So I am totally happy with what they have included. (even though I don't have 9.3 yet)
Life is tough. Deal with it.
How is this tough? It's not tough, it's just a bad choice on SuSE's part in my opinion. One I hope doesn't continue or else I'll have to go distro shopping. And I don't think I'm alone in that sentiment.
Preston
It's backed by SUSE on their choice for doing this and they have developers that work on OO fulltime. They did a lot of work in this Beta to make it very usable. Want links???
No. You're clearly just an apologist and not here to help anyone. Preston
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 11:32:37PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 23:14 -0600, JD. Brown wrote:
I'm running the latest OO beta (.95) on 9.2 and loving it. So I am totally happy with what they have included. (even though I don't have 9.3 yet)
Life is tough. Deal with it.
How is this tough? It's not tough, it's just a bad choice on SuSE's part in my opinion. One I hope doesn't continue or else I'll have to go distro shopping. And I don't think I'm alone in that sentiment.
Preston
It's backed by SUSE on their choice for doing this and they have developers that work on OO fulltime. They did a lot of work in this Beta to make it very usable. Want links???
No. You're clearly just an apologist and not here to help anyone.
Preston
And you're clearly a retard. You've been told 900 times (Almost once for each mail you've sent bitching) to tell SUSE, not us. If a browser is oh so simple like firefox is (Your words) then build your own. After reading the rest of your mails it astounds me you've managed not to drool on your machine enough to kill it or you, and you have this aura about you like you're threatning US that you'll swict to another distro if the big bad wolf doesn't fix your damn browser. SUse, we don't get paid for anything here, it would be aBLESSING if you chose Fedora, go whine to them and fill THEIR lists with your constant dribble.
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 03:44 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 11:32:37PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 23:14 -0600, JD. Brown wrote:
I'm running the latest OO beta (.95) on 9.2 and loving it. So I am totally happy with what they have included. (even though I don't have 9.3 yet)
Life is tough. Deal with it.
How is this tough? It's not tough, it's just a bad choice on SuSE's part in my opinion. One I hope doesn't continue or else I'll have to go distro shopping. And I don't think I'm alone in that sentiment.
Preston
It's backed by SUSE on their choice for doing this and they have developers that work on OO fulltime. They did a lot of work in this Beta to make it very usable. Want links???
No. You're clearly just an apologist and not here to help anyone.
Preston
And you're clearly a retard. You've been told 900 times (Almost once for
Is this what the mailing list has come to? Name calling? You've got to be kidding me.
each mail you've sent bitching) to tell SUSE, not us. If a browser is oh so simple like firefox is (Your words) then build your own.
You don't get it. #1 - I fixed the problem by rolling back to a previous version of Firefox. The other 899 emails (a specious number, anyway) are regarding the general stability of SUSE these days. A generally respectful discussion, minus posts like yours. #2 - I never said firefox is simple. I said it's basic functionality for an OS. i.e. Functionality that should be tested before being released. Why you can't understand that, I don't know.
After reading the rest of your mails it astounds me you've managed not to drool on your machine enough to kill it or you, and you have this aura
Yet more personal insults.
about you like you're threatning US that you'll swict to another distro if the big bad wolf doesn't fix your damn browser. SUse, we don't get paid for anything here, it would be aBLESSING if you chose Fedora, go whine to them and fill THEIR lists with your constant dribble.
I think SuSE cares to keep customers. People like you may enjoy insulting people instead of helping them, but I think SuSE might care that people are starting to consider the distribution unstable and reconsidering whether it's worth paying for. Thus my comments. Nothing more. Definitely not worthy of your derision and rudeness. Preston
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 12:58:20AM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 03:44 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 11:32:37PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 23:14 -0600, JD. Brown wrote:
I'm running the latest OO beta (.95) on 9.2 and loving it. So I am totally happy with what they have included. (even though I don't have 9.3 yet)
Life is tough. Deal with it.
How is this tough? It's not tough, it's just a bad choice on SuSE's part in my opinion. One I hope doesn't continue or else I'll have to go distro shopping. And I don't think I'm alone in that sentiment.
Preston
It's backed by SUSE on their choice for doing this and they have developers that work on OO fulltime. They did a lot of work in this Beta to make it very usable. Want links???
No. You're clearly just an apologist and not here to help anyone.
Preston
And you're clearly a retard. You've been told 900 times (Almost once for
Is this what the mailing list has come to? Name calling? You've got to be kidding me.
I was hoping you were. After 12 hours I'm thinking you just might be serious.
each mail you've sent bitching) to tell SUSE, not us. If a browser is oh so simple like firefox is (Your words) then build your own.
You don't get it.
You'r right, because I've yet to have the same problem you've got and I have 4 versions of SUSE running here. I haven't even gotten a stability issue, and it would seem no one else on this list has either.
#1 - I fixed the problem by rolling back to a previous version of Firefox. The other 899 emails (a specious number, anyway) are regarding the general stability of SUSE these days. A generally respectful discussion, minus posts like yours.
Don't expect respect. I know I'm not the only one tired of seeing your mails which have been whinning. I didn't find one bit of "respectful discussion". You come off as a child.
#2 - I never said firefox is simple. I said it's basic functionality for an OS. i.e. Functionality that should be tested before being released. Why you can't understand that, I don't know.
Uhhh, no, you said simple, I have the mail right here.
After reading the rest of your mails it astounds me you've managed not to drool on your machine enough to kill it or you, and you have this aura
Yet more personal insults.
Yet more whining.
about you like you're threatning US that you'll swict to another distro if the big bad wolf doesn't fix your damn browser. SUse, we don't get paid for anything here, it would be aBLESSING if you chose Fedora, go whine to them and fill THEIR lists with your constant dribble.
I think SuSE cares to keep customers. People like you may enjoy insulting people instead of helping them, but I think SuSE might care that people are starting to consider the distribution unstable and reconsidering whether it's worth paying for. Thus my comments. Nothing more. Definitely not worthy of your derision and rudeness.
My OS isn't finished but if I ever market it, you can be sure if someone started complaining this badly instead of telling the developers about the problem, I'd personally pay for a copy of another OS and have it sent to your house.
Preston
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 04:05 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 12:58:20AM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 03:44 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 11:32:37PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 23:14 -0600, JD. Brown wrote:
> I'm running the latest OO beta (.95) on 9.2 and loving it. So I am > totally happy with what they have included. (even though I don't have > 9.3 yet) > > Life is tough. Deal with it.
How is this tough? It's not tough, it's just a bad choice on SuSE's part in my opinion. One I hope doesn't continue or else I'll have to go distro shopping. And I don't think I'm alone in that sentiment.
Preston
It's backed by SUSE on their choice for doing this and they have developers that work on OO fulltime. They did a lot of work in this Beta to make it very usable. Want links???
No. You're clearly just an apologist and not here to help anyone.
Preston
And you're clearly a retard. You've been told 900 times (Almost once for
Is this what the mailing list has come to? Name calling? You've got to be kidding me.
I was hoping you were. After 12 hours I'm thinking you just might be serious.
I am serious. You, I'm not sure what your deal is.
each mail you've sent bitching) to tell SUSE, not us. If a browser is oh so simple like firefox is (Your words) then build your own.
You don't get it.
You'r right, because I've yet to have the same problem you've got and I have 4 versions of SUSE running here. I haven't even gotten a stability issue, and it would seem no one else on this list has either.
Actually, a couple have. One emailed me and I supplied at least some help to rollback to a previous version. I think that was email 8764.
#1 - I fixed the problem by rolling back to a previous version of Firefox. The other 899 emails (a specious number, anyway) are regarding the general stability of SUSE these days. A generally respectful discussion, minus posts like yours.
Don't expect respect. I know I'm not the only one tired of seeing your mails which have been whinning. I didn't find one bit of "respectful discussion". You come off as a child.
???? I came off as a child for complaining about the stability of a YOU update? Is this not a place to discuss SUSE or am I wrong?
#2 - I never said firefox is simple. I said it's basic functionality for an OS. i.e. Functionality that should be tested before being released. Why you can't understand that, I don't know.
Uhhh, no, you said simple, I have the mail right here.
I said "basic" and what I meant is entirely different from how you read it.
After reading the rest of your mails it astounds me you've managed not to drool on your machine enough to kill it or you, and you have this aura
Yet more personal insults.
Yet more whining.
Pointing out that you can't do anything more than insult people is whining?
about you like you're threatning US that you'll swict to another distro if the big bad wolf doesn't fix your damn browser. SUse, we don't get paid for anything here, it would be aBLESSING if you chose Fedora, go whine to them and fill THEIR lists with your constant dribble.
I think SuSE cares to keep customers. People like you may enjoy insulting people instead of helping them, but I think SuSE might care that people are starting to consider the distribution unstable and reconsidering whether it's worth paying for. Thus my comments. Nothing more. Definitely not worthy of your derision and rudeness.
My OS isn't finished but if I ever market it, you can be sure if someone started complaining this badly instead of telling the developers about the problem, I'd personally pay for a copy of another OS and have it sent to your house.
okay..... Anyway, can we end this now? Are you done yelling at me? Preston
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 01:15:39AM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 04:05 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 12:58:20AM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 03:44 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 11:32:37PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 23:14 -0600, JD. Brown wrote:
> > I'm running the latest OO beta (.95) on 9.2 and loving it. So I am > > totally happy with what they have included. (even though I don't have > > 9.3 yet) > > > > Life is tough. Deal with it. > > How is this tough? It's not tough, it's just a bad choice on SuSE's part > in my opinion. One I hope doesn't continue or else I'll have to go > distro shopping. And I don't think I'm alone in that sentiment. > > Preston
It's backed by SUSE on their choice for doing this and they have developers that work on OO fulltime. They did a lot of work in this Beta to make it very usable. Want links???
No. You're clearly just an apologist and not here to help anyone.
Preston
And you're clearly a retard. You've been told 900 times (Almost once for
Is this what the mailing list has come to? Name calling? You've got to be kidding me.
I was hoping you were. After 12 hours I'm thinking you just might be serious.
I am serious. You, I'm not sure what your deal is.
each mail you've sent bitching) to tell SUSE, not us. If a browser is oh so simple like firefox is (Your words) then build your own.
You don't get it.
You'r right, because I've yet to have the same problem you've got and I have 4 versions of SUSE running here. I haven't even gotten a stability issue, and it would seem no one else on this list has either.
Actually, a couple have. One emailed me and I supplied at least some help to rollback to a previous version. I think that was email 8764.
#1 - I fixed the problem by rolling back to a previous version of Firefox. The other 899 emails (a specious number, anyway) are regarding the general stability of SUSE these days. A generally respectful discussion, minus posts like yours.
Don't expect respect. I know I'm not the only one tired of seeing your mails which have been whinning. I didn't find one bit of "respectful discussion". You come off as a child.
????
I came off as a child for complaining about the stability of a YOU update? Is this not a place to discuss SUSE or am I wrong?
No this is the OS/2 list...
#2 - I never said firefox is simple. I said it's basic functionality for an OS. i.e. Functionality that should be tested before being released. Why you can't understand that, I don't know.
Uhhh, no, you said simple, I have the mail right here.
I said "basic" and what I meant is entirely different from how you read it.
After reading the rest of your mails it astounds me you've managed not to drool on your machine enough to kill it or you, and you have this aura
Yet more personal insults.
Yet more whining.
Pointing out that you can't do anything more than insult people is whining?
Oh a personal insult! So how does it feel? Telling me I'm incapable of anything but insults. Blah.
about you like you're threatning US that you'll swict to another distro if the big bad wolf doesn't fix your damn browser. SUse, we don't get paid for anything here, it would be aBLESSING if you chose Fedora, go whine to them and fill THEIR lists with your constant dribble.
I think SuSE cares to keep customers. People like you may enjoy insulting people instead of helping them, but I think SuSE might care that people are starting to consider the distribution unstable and reconsidering whether it's worth paying for. Thus my comments. Nothing more. Definitely not worthy of your derision and rudeness.
My OS isn't finished but if I ever market it, you can be sure if someone started complaining this badly instead of telling the developers about the problem, I'd personally pay for a copy of another OS and have it sent to your house.
okay.....
Anyway, can we end this now? Are you done yelling at me?
I don't know, are you done? I've managed to get you to waste this much time coming back to me with almost no efort. You plan on making it challenging any time soon?
Preston
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 04:28 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 01:15:39AM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 04:05 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 12:58:20AM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 03:44 -0400, Allen wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 11:32:37PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 23:14 -0600, JD. Brown wrote: > > > I'm running the latest OO beta (.95) on 9.2 and loving it. So I am > > > totally happy with what they have included. (even though I don't have > > > 9.3 yet) > > > > > > Life is tough. Deal with it. > > > > How is this tough? It's not tough, it's just a bad choice on SuSE's part > > in my opinion. One I hope doesn't continue or else I'll have to go > > distro shopping. And I don't think I'm alone in that sentiment. > > > > Preston > > It's backed by SUSE on their choice for doing this and they have developers > that work on OO fulltime. They did a lot of work in this Beta to make it very > usable. Want links???
No. You're clearly just an apologist and not here to help anyone.
Preston
And you're clearly a retard. You've been told 900 times (Almost once for
Is this what the mailing list has come to? Name calling? You've got to be kidding me.
I was hoping you were. After 12 hours I'm thinking you just might be serious.
I am serious. You, I'm not sure what your deal is.
each mail you've sent bitching) to tell SUSE, not us. If a browser is oh so simple like firefox is (Your words) then build your own.
You don't get it.
You'r right, because I've yet to have the same problem you've got and I have 4 versions of SUSE running here. I haven't even gotten a stability issue, and it would seem no one else on this list has either.
Actually, a couple have. One emailed me and I supplied at least some help to rollback to a previous version. I think that was email 8764.
#1 - I fixed the problem by rolling back to a previous version of Firefox. The other 899 emails (a specious number, anyway) are regarding the general stability of SUSE these days. A generally respectful discussion, minus posts like yours.
Don't expect respect. I know I'm not the only one tired of seeing your mails which have been whinning. I didn't find one bit of "respectful discussion". You come off as a child.
????
I came off as a child for complaining about the stability of a YOU update? Is this not a place to discuss SUSE or am I wrong?
No this is the OS/2 list...
#2 - I never said firefox is simple. I said it's basic functionality for an OS. i.e. Functionality that should be tested before being released. Why you can't understand that, I don't know.
Uhhh, no, you said simple, I have the mail right here.
I said "basic" and what I meant is entirely different from how you read it.
After reading the rest of your mails it astounds me you've managed not to drool on your machine enough to kill it or you, and you have this aura
Yet more personal insults.
Yet more whining.
Pointing out that you can't do anything more than insult people is whining?
Oh a personal insult! So how does it feel? Telling me I'm incapable of anything but insults. Blah.
about you like you're threatning US that you'll swict to another distro if the big bad wolf doesn't fix your damn browser. SUse, we don't get paid for anything here, it would be aBLESSING if you chose Fedora, go whine to them and fill THEIR lists with your constant dribble.
I think SuSE cares to keep customers. People like you may enjoy insulting people instead of helping them, but I think SuSE might care that people are starting to consider the distribution unstable and reconsidering whether it's worth paying for. Thus my comments. Nothing more. Definitely not worthy of your derision and rudeness.
My OS isn't finished but if I ever market it, you can be sure if someone started complaining this badly instead of telling the developers about the problem, I'd personally pay for a copy of another OS and have it sent to your house.
okay.....
Anyway, can we end this now? Are you done yelling at me?
I don't know, are you done? I've managed to get you to waste this much time coming back to me with almost no efort. You plan on making it challenging any time soon?
"Challenging"? I'm just posting about my issue with SUSE. I'm not trying to win an argument. I wasn't aware we were having a contest of any sort. You're just rude and insulting and disrespectful. What am I competing with again? What are the rules? Preston
On Thursday 28 April 2005 01:32, Preston Crawford wrote:
It's backed by SUSE on their choice for doing this and they have developers that work on OO fulltime. They did a lot of work in this Beta to make it very usable. Want links???
No. You're clearly just an apologist and not here to help anyone.
Nor are you. For years, all we've seen you do, here and on a.o.l.s, is bitch, moan, whine, complain and threaten to use another distribution. Please do, as I'm sure that the Fedora or *BSD folks would be happy to give your feedback the attention it deserves. -- Homepage http://scottj.org XFce desktop environment http://www.xfce.org Goodies for the XFce desktop http://xfce-goodies.berlios.de GPG public key ID: 811B00AB
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 11:00 -0500, Scott Jones wrote:
On Thursday 28 April 2005 01:32, Preston Crawford wrote:
It's backed by SUSE on their choice for doing this and they have developers that work on OO fulltime. They did a lot of work in this Beta to make it very usable. Want links???
No. You're clearly just an apologist and not here to help anyone.
Nor are you. For years, all we've seen you do, here and on a.o.l.s, is bitch, moan, whine, complain and threaten to use another distribution. Please do, as I'm sure that the Fedora or *BSD folks would be happy to give your feedback the attention it deserves.
Please. I've helped people. More often on IRC than on here or the message board, but I've helped people. I've complained some. And I've asked questions. What I find fascinating is that registering your dissatisfaction with a distribution you pay for is taken so seriously that this is the kind of reaction you'd get? Am I never supposed to complain when SuSE does something wrong? I don't get it. Preston
On Thursday 28 April 2005 12:13 pm, Preston Crawford wrote:
Please. I've helped people. More often on IRC than on here or the message board, but I've helped people. I've complained some. And I've asked questions. What I find fascinating is that registering your dissatisfaction with a distribution you pay for is taken so seriously that this is the kind of reaction you'd get? Am I never supposed to complain when SuSE does something wrong? I don't get it.
Do NOT complain here then. Use the feedback section on SuSE's site. This list is for customers and we're tired of hearing you whine when it will DO NO GOOD here. Take it elsewhere.
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Bruce Marshall wrote:
On Thursday 28 April 2005 12:13 pm, Preston Crawford wrote:
Please. I've helped people. More often on IRC than on here or the message board, but I've helped people. I've complained some. And I've asked questions. What I find fascinating is that registering your dissatisfaction with a distribution you pay for is taken so seriously that this is the kind of reaction you'd get? Am I never supposed to complain when SuSE does something wrong? I don't get it.
Do NOT complain here then.
Use the feedback section on SuSE's site. This list is for customers and we're tired of hearing you whine when it will DO NO GOOD here.
Take it elsewhere.
First off, I am a customer. I bought 8.0, 8.1, 8.2, 9.1, 9.2. Plus I've recommended and gotten SuSE installed at numerous sites, including a doctor's office and the headquarters of a political campaign. So not only am I a customer, I'm generally a SuSE booster. Thus the nature of my concern about the quality of SuSE recently. As a customer am I not allowed to ask other customers if this is indeed a problem. If the answer is "no", then the mature thing to do would just be to say "no", not to flame me, call me names and tell me to go away. I'm a customer. I deploy SuSE when given the chance. I help bring in money to SuSE in drips and I have spent over $400 on software from SuSE. I think I've earned the right to at least question where they are headed when something looks ary. And, once again, the mature adult response would be to point out that what I'm reading or seeing is not representative of the actual state of the distro (as someone else helpfully and maturely did), rather than to tell me I don't belong here. I started this thread initially to ask if others were experiencing this problem with Firefox and if it was fixable. I made the mistake of also positing that this was part of a larger trend, which in turn caused people to turn the flamethrowers on. I apologize for that. But I still don't get the response. Preston
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 14:48 -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
I started this thread initially to ask if others were experiencing this problem with Firefox and if it was fixable. I made the mistake of also positing that this was part of a larger trend, which in turn caused people to turn the flamethrowers on. I apologize for that. But I still don't get the response.
Preston
Regarding the problem with Firefox and other packages after the update using YOU... I also had a little problem in that I had to re-create the launch bar icon as the original one would not work. Once I did that (on two systems) I have had no further problems. This is on 9.2, one still at KDE 3.3 and one with KDE updated to 3.4. <opinion> It may be that SuSE/Novell is going to push the NLD platform for stability and start making SuSE pro more of a test bed product and make it more bleeding edge. This will certainly piss off a few people myself included as I have to rely on the stability of SuSE linux not only at home but also in the workplace before I retired. I have noticed more frequent updates of late and was floored with the upgrade of Firefox to 1.0.3 from 1.0.1. I have never before seen a product version upgrade like this on SuSE before. The package had the security fixes back ported to the currently running version. I may be way off here but that is how I see it. </opinion> -- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998 "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably the day they start making vacuum cleaners." -Ernst Jan Plugge
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Ken Schneider wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 14:48 -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
I started this thread initially to ask if others were experiencing this problem with Firefox and if it was fixable. I made the mistake of also positing that this was part of a larger trend, which in turn caused people to turn the flamethrowers on. I apologize for that. But I still don't get the response.
Preston
Regarding the problem with Firefox and other packages after the update using YOU...
<opinion> It may be that SuSE/Novell is going to push the NLD platform for stability and start making SuSE pro more of a test bed product and make it more bleeding edge. This will certainly piss off a few people myself included as I have to rely on the stability of SuSE linux not only at home but also in the workplace before I retired.
This was certainly tossed out there before by SuSE. I'm sure everyone remembers the interview where SuSE Linux Pro was compared to Fedora and thus the implication that perhaps it would be a test bed for NL Desktop and Server. I hope that doesn't happen either and that's been the nature of my concern about the recent stability problems I've seen in SuSE.
I have noticed more frequent updates of late and was floored with the upgrade of Firefox to 1.0.3 from 1.0.1. I have never before seen a product version upgrade like this on SuSE before. The package had the security fixes back ported to the currently running version. I may be way off here but that is how I see it. </opinion>
We may be the only ones on the mailing list, but that's how I see it as well. That's been a hallmark of SuSE for years. That rather than releasing new versions of software they backport bug fixes to the current version. The release of Firefox feels like they just tossed the RPM into YOU. I could have done that myself. I pay SuSE so they make it so I don't have to do that. That's the way it's been for quite a while. I agree. I hope this is just a blip. Preston
Need to fix my own typo below. On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 15:12 -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Ken Schneider wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 14:48 -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
I started this thread initially to ask if others were experiencing this problem with Firefox and if it was fixable. I made the mistake of also positing that this was part of a larger trend, which in turn caused people to turn the flamethrowers on. I apologize for that. But I still don't get the response.
Preston
Regarding the problem with Firefox and other packages after the update using YOU...
<opinion> It may be that SuSE/Novell is going to push the NLD platform for stability and start making SuSE pro more of a test bed product and make it more bleeding edge. This will certainly piss off a few people myself included as I have to rely on the stability of SuSE linux not only at
Should be: included as I have come to rely on the stability of SuSE not only at
home but also in the workplace before I retired.
This was certainly tossed out there before by SuSE. I'm sure everyone remembers the interview where SuSE Linux Pro was compared to Fedora and thus the implication that perhaps it would be a test bed for NL Desktop and Server. I hope that doesn't happen either and that's been the nature of my concern about the recent stability problems I've seen in SuSE.
I have noticed more frequent updates of late and was floored with the upgrade of Firefox to 1.0.3 from 1.0.1. I have never before seen a product version upgrade like this on SuSE before. The package had the security fixes back ported to the currently running version. I may be way off here but that is how I see it. </opinion>
We may be the only ones on the mailing list, but that's how I see it as well. That's been a hallmark of SuSE for years. That rather than releasing new versions of software they backport bug fixes to the current version. The release of Firefox feels like they just tossed the RPM into YOU. I could have done that myself. I pay SuSE so they make it so I don't have to do that. That's the way it's been for quite a while. I agree. I hope this is just a blip.
If I wanted to use a bleeding edge distribution of linux I would be using a different distribution. -- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998 "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably the day they start making vacuum cleaners." -Ernst Jan Plugge
Preston, Allen et al... Enough. Now, I know I don't actually have real power on this list[*] to y'know, ban you or anything, but please, put a lid on it, give it a rest and make everyone else on the list's lives a lot better. If you want to flame each other, do it in private, not here, and certainly not with reams of included text for two lines of response. If you don't, rest assured that some of us will be contacting the list admins to get you a spanking. [*] and be thankful for this, in my BBS admin days I tolerated nothing -- James Ogley james@usr-local-bin.org GNOME for SuSE: http://usr-local-bin.org/rpms
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 23:52 +0100, James Ogley wrote:
Preston, Allen et al...
Enough.
Now, I know I don't actually have real power on this list[*] to y'know, ban you or anything, but please, put a lid on it, give it a rest and make everyone else on the list's lives a lot better. If you want to flame each other, do it in private, not here, and certainly not with reams of included text for two lines of response.
If you don't, rest assured that some of us will be contacting the list admins to get you a spanking.
Bravo, bravo. Now about that spanking, some on this list may actually like to take you up on your offer. Not me personally but others. :-) -- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998 "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably the day they start making vacuum cleaners." -Ernst Jan Plugge
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 11:52:58PM +0100, James Ogley wrote:
Preston, Allen et al...
Enough.
Ummm, I haven't made a reply in over 13 hours...
Now, I know I don't actually have real power on this list[*] to y'know, ban you or anything, but please, put a lid on it, give it a rest and make everyone else on the list's lives a lot better. If you want to flame each other, do it in private, not here, and certainly not with reams of included text for two lines of response.
If you don't, rest assured that some of us will be contacting the list admins to get you a spanking.
[*] and be thankful for this, in my BBS admin days I tolerated nothing -- James Ogley james@usr-local-bin.org GNOME for SuSE: http://usr-local-bin.org/rpms
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Thursday 28 April 2005 12:53 am, Preston Crawford wrote:
I think most people who use SuSE value stability. I know more people off this list than on this list who not only don't complain about SuSE, but run old versions around their house because it just works. So I think you're, once again, misrepresenting what the general SuSE user base expects and wants. I expect and want stability. Not new and flashy. I think most SuSE users are that way. If they wanted new and flashy they could go with Fedora or another Mandriva.
Go back to 9.2 then.... and go to 9.3 when they've got all the bugs worked out of it. Don't expect a release to be perfect on day one unless you want them to only release every 18 months or so (to test more like you want them to) Then you'd be bitching about "how far behind SuSE is with their releases". You can't have it both ways.
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 08:46 -0400, Bruce Marshall wrote:
On Thursday 28 April 2005 12:53 am, Preston Crawford wrote:
I think most people who use SuSE value stability. I know more people off this list than on this list who not only don't complain about SuSE, but run old versions around their house because it just works. So I think you're, once again, misrepresenting what the general SuSE user base expects and wants. I expect and want stability. Not new and flashy. I think most SuSE users are that way. If they wanted new and flashy they could go with Fedora or another Mandriva.
Go back to 9.2 then.... and go to 9.3 when they've got all the bugs worked out of it.
I'm running 9.2.
Don't expect a release to be perfect on day one unless you want them to only release every 18 months or so (to test more like you want them to)
Then you'd be bitching about "how far behind SuSE is with their releases".
You can't have it both ways.
I don't want it both ways. Didn't you read what I wrote. I want stability. That's why I use SUSE. Who said I want the latest and greatest? I just want the patches and updates to be stable and tested. That's been my entire point all along. Preston
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 05:46, Bruce Marshall wrote:
On Thursday 28 April 2005 12:53 am, Preston Crawford wrote:
I think most people who use SuSE value stability. I know more people off this list than on this list who not only don't complain about SuSE, but <SNIP> Don't expect a release to be perfect on day one unless you want them to only release every 18 months or so (to test more like you want them to)
Then you'd be bitching about "how far behind SuSE is with their releases".
You can't have it both ways.
Myself I wait until the message traffic dies down a bit about issues. Usually about two months and then the price is also down a bit. already a local outfit has had it for $79 down from the original $100 usd. I only buy once a year anyway so patience is a virtue. After only three years I am still considered a newbie by my local LUG because I don't use more than two distros Knoppix being the other. I help people when I can but I figure testing is best left to better hackers. -- ___ _ _ _ ____ _ _ _ | | | | [__ | | | |___ |_|_| ___] | \/
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 12:10:54PM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Michael W Cocke wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 08:59:19 -0700, you wrote:
I've been watching the happenings on the message boards recently with regards to SuSE 9.3. It seems like it's more bleeding edge and unstable than usual.
Then you haven't been paying attention. It's 'bleeding edge and unstable' if you choose to disregard common sense. I've got it on 2
What does that mean? I'm just reading the Usenet group and the message boards and reading about all kinds of problems. It's anecdotal, but come on. Not everyone who has a bug with SuSE is an idiot. Sometimes the system is actually at fault.
Although I think I have a valid opinion on the last mail I sent about stability VS features, you have a point that it should work so don't take me the wrong way. But, firefox isn't known industry wide for stability either. No browser outside of links is. (I see you are a developer for web stuff, you check your pages in links too right? ;) )
systems so far, including a production email server. One relatively minor problem, to which the solution was already posted here. The performance improvement over 9.1 and 9.2 is fantastic! I'm actually looking forward to upgrading my file server. 8-)>
That's good to hear. However, I'm going to wait and see. Like I said, what I'm reading isn't good. Especially with regards to problems with OpenOffice 2.0 (which last I heard is still beta). Putting major versions of software like this into the distro when their beta seems like a bad idea. And people are having problems with it.
Again, if you want the newest things that have proven to be stable like OO, you have to sacrifice.
Of course, I've never tried to 'update' a system - I follow the conventional wisdom (based on my own experiences) of doing a clean install of ANY operating system upgrade, whether it's windows, OS/2, linux, or DOS.
I didn't do an update. I updated Firefox via YOU.
And now I get a Firefox YOU update where my bookmarks and profile are broken. I can still get to my bookmarks, but I have to select "Bookmarks > Manage Bookmarks" then my bookmarks appear after having disappeared. They disappear next time I start Firefox back up. On top of that it doesn't properly recognize my profile, i.e. Firefox looks different than it should. Different X to close down tabs, etc.
You should probably be asking this question of the mozilla/firefox team, since the exact same thing happened to me when I upgraded (manually) from 1.0.2 to 1.0.3 on a SuSE 9.2 system, and a bit of investigation showed that it was because of a bug in 1.0.2 that 1.0.3 corrected...
YOU totally bi-passed 1.0.2 I believe. I don't find it in the RPM cache, at least. So this is something to do with the current update.
Have you sent any of this to any of the SUSE guys? I can't speak for all of them but I think they are great guys. They don't read all the lists all the time but I seriously think of you are being honest and the update isn't working that you really should send one of them a mail. They can't fix it if they don't know it's broken and it's very possible only a few systems are affected.
What is going on with Novell quality control? I'm a little concerned. In the short term I want Firefox to work again. In the long term I want to know that YOU isn't going to thrash my desktop for daily use. I can get that with Fedora if I want.
As far as I can see, if you pay attention to what's going on you should be fine. If you want to be oblivious, I suggest windows.
Oh please. I don't want oblivious. I can admin a Linux box. I can admin a FreeBSD box.
Free BSD is easy though... Believe me, I'm in the process of porting the Free BSD documentation project over to Slackware with their blessings. I wrote docs for Free BSD, Slackware, and for free, SUSE.
I could do it all from source if I wanted to. But I'm a web and Java developer. I need my system to "just work". And that's why I pay SuSE the money. So it "just works". So excuse me if that's my expectation. It's not because I'm stupid or lazy. It's because there's a reason I pay for SuSE. And if they fall down on the job, then I could just run FreeBSD (well, except it has Java issues) or Fedora and tweak everything myself.
Free BSD won't make the problems go away, they too have them. As I said Mail someone from SUSE at least do something about it. Remember how MP3s wouldn't work? Users told them they didn't like it and in less than one week, they had it fixed. Trust me, the SUSE staff and Novell staff are good people, I'd love to be a part of them some day but for now, I talk to them, let them know I care, and sometimes when I find something wrong with the website, even if it's just a typo, I point it out and they fix it.
Preston
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 08:59:19AM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
I've been watching the happenings on the message boards recently with regards to SuSE 9.3. It seems like it's more bleeding edge and unstable than usual. And now I get a Firefox YOU update where my bookmarks and profile are broken. I can still get to my bookmarks, but I have to select "Bookmarks > Manage Bookmarks" then my bookmarks appear after having disappeared. They disappear next time I start Firefox back up. On top of that it doesn't properly recognize my profile, i.e. Firefox looks different than it should. Different X to close down tabs, etc.
This looks as if it may be a known Firefox 1.0.* issue, rather than any issue related to SuSE per se. The issue, and a workaround for it, are described here: http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?t=230896 -- Anthony Edwards anthony.edwards@uk.easynet.net
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Anthony Edwards wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 08:59:19AM -0700, Preston Crawford wrote:
I've been watching the happenings on the message boards recently with regards to SuSE 9.3. It seems like it's more bleeding edge and unstable than usual. And now I get a Firefox YOU update where my bookmarks and profile are broken. I can still get to my bookmarks, but I have to select "Bookmarks > Manage Bookmarks" then my bookmarks appear after having disappeared. They disappear next time I start Firefox back up. On top of that it doesn't properly recognize my profile, i.e. Firefox looks different than it should. Different X to close down tabs, etc.
This looks as if it may be a known Firefox 1.0.* issue, rather than any issue related to SuSE per se.
The issue, and a workaround for it, are described here:
http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?t=230896
-- Anthony Edwards anthony.edwards@uk.easynet.net
I'll check this out. See if it works. Thanks. Preston
Preston Crawford wrote:
I've been watching the happenings on the message boards recently with regards to SuSE 9.3. It seems like it's more bleeding edge and unstable than usual. And now I get a Firefox YOU update where my bookmarks and profile are broken.
[snip] FWIW, I updated earlier today using apt and there was a problem. Apt said that it couldn't install the new version of Firefox because it contained dependencies which were even newer versions of Firefox itself! Anyway, I took a chance and installed via rpm (which also barfed at first) with --nodeps. Everything is working fine, but something is borked inside the Firefox rpm even if it's only a misconfigured list of dependencies. As for SuSE 9.3, well ... surely better to wait for two or three months after first release to see what the verdict is? That's what I always try to do. SuSe 9.2 here and it is very stable and fast so there is no real need to upgrade. :) Fish
participants (21)
-
Allen -
Anthony Edwards -
Bruce Marshall -
Carl William Spitzer IV -
David Johanson -
Jack Brooks -
James Ogley -
JD. Brown -
jfweber＠bellsouth.net -
Joe Morris (NTM) -
Ken Schneider -
Kevanf1 -
Mark Crean -
Martin Moeller -
Michael W Cocke -
Peter Nikolic -
Preston Crawford -
Roger Beever -
Russ -
Scott Jones -
Sudhir Anand