On Sat, 29 Oct 2011, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Do some of the checkbox installs omit it? I just ran into this on a
> system where I chose the 'web server' install, then wanted to run
> gparted remotely.
Yes, it's definitely possible to install without it. I've done the same as
you when setting up
On 10/29/11 12:58 AM, John Hodrien wrote:
> Yes, it's definitely possible to install without it. I've done the same as
> you when setting up servers and had to add xauth afterwards to get remote X
> working. It's a real gotcha for people who don't know about it, as other than
> DISPLAY not being
On Sat, 29 Oct 2011, John R Pierce wrote:
> well, there's the subtle clue that the first time you log onto a
> particular account with X forwarding, xauth prints a message about
> saving the .Xauth file
Sure, but that means you're looking for absence of an info message (that you
typically don
On Saturday, October 29, 2011 07:28:27 AM John Hodrien wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Oct 2011, John R Pierce wrote:
> > well, there's the subtle clue that the first time you log onto a
> > particular account with X forwarding, xauth prints a message about
> > saving the .Xauth file
> Sure, but that mean
On Saturday, October 29, 2011 04:36 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> It's a bad thing if you think clones should exist at all.
> Realistically, we would all probably be better off jumping ship the
> day of the fedora/EL split, but I've just been too lazy to learn to
> spell "apt-get".
>
/me is puzzled.
On 10/28/2011 12:47 PM, Ned Slider wrote:
> On 28/10/11 18:31, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 12:17 PM, Patrick Lists
>> wrote:
>>>
How is, say, being
required to pay a license fee as a consequence different from losing
something you have already contracted and paid
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Christopher Chan
wrote:
> On Saturday, October 29, 2011 04:36 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>
>> It's a bad thing if you think clones should exist at all.
>> Realistically, we would all probably be better off jumping ship the
>> day of the fedora/EL split, but I've just
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>>
> I can tell you that we have been contacted by upstream to make sure we
> **UNDERSTAND** the new AUP restrictions on distribution. I can also
> tell you that we (CentOS) are doing everything in our power to meet the
> restrictions as they
This may not be the best place to ask, but Google hasn't given me any
useful information.
I have an "older" laptop that is using the Intel 2200 wireless
interface. I installed CentOS 5 on it some time ago and everything is
fine. When I was reviewing my kickstart setups I found that the ipw2200
Vreme: 10/29/2011 05:36 PM, Les Mikesell piše:
> Also, there is probably room for a public, if not legal, complaint
> about gpl compliance if the source and binary components they
> distribute don't match in a way that you can rebuild a binary that
> works the same. Of course there is a lot of no
Vreme: 10/29/2011 07:41 PM, Ron Loftin piše:
>
> This may not be the best place to ask, but Google hasn't given me any
> useful information.
>
> I have an "older" laptop that is using the Intel 2200 wireless
> interface. I installed CentOS 5 on it some time ago and everything is
> fine. When I wa
On Sat, 2011-10-29 at 20:17 +0200, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
> Vreme: 10/29/2011 07:41 PM, Ron Loftin piše:
> >
> > This may not be the best place to ask, but Google hasn't given me any
> > useful information.
> >
> > I have an "older" laptop that is using the Intel 2200 wireless
> > interface.
On Sat, 2011-10-29 at 20:56 +0800, Christopher Chan wrote:
> On Saturday, October 29, 2011 04:36 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>
> > It's a bad thing if you think clones should exist at all.
> > Realistically, we would all probably be better off jumping ship the
> > day of the fedora/EL split, but I've
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 3:03 PM, Craig White wrote:
>>
>>
>> /me is puzzled. You spelt it correctly. Maybe not so keen on learning
>> the intricacies of Debian and the 'Debian way'.
>
> Linux is still Linux and while there is some learning curve, it does
> tend to broaden one's knowledge base
On 29/10/11 18:41, Ron Loftin wrote:
>
> This may not be the best place to ask, but Google hasn't given me any
> useful information.
>
> I have an "older" laptop that is using the Intel 2200 wireless
> interface. I installed CentOS 5 on it some time ago and everything is
> fine. When I was review
On 29/10/11 23:04, Ned Slider wrote:
> On 29/10/11 18:41, Ron Loftin wrote:
>>
>> This may not be the best place to ask, but Google hasn't given me any
>> useful information.
>>
>> I have an "older" laptop that is using the Intel 2200 wireless
>> interface. I installed CentOS 5 on it some time ago
I did not mean to "stir" up anything.
I was simply asking if I was looking in the wrong place for an update to 6.1
or where are the ISO's?
I cannot find anything out there as far as an update.
Thanks
Jerry
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 8:58 PM, John Hodrien wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Oct 2011, Les Mikesell wrote:
>
>> Do some of the checkbox installs omit it? I just ran into this on a
>> system where I chose the 'web server' install, then wanted to run
>> gparted remotely.
>
> Yes, it's definitely possible to
Vreme: 10/30/2011 12:31 AM, Jerry Geis piše:
>I did not mean to "stir" up anything.
>
> I was simply asking if I was looking in the wrong place for an update to 6.1
> or where are the ISO's?
>
> I cannot find anything out there as far as an update.
>
> Thanks
>
>
> Jerry
Sorry to be blunt, but
Vreme: 10/30/2011 12:12 AM, Ned Slider piše:
> I'm not sure why they're not showing up on rpmforge as the package is
> still showing in their git tree:
>
> https://github.com/repoforge/rpms/tree/master/specs/ipw2200-firmware
>
> Maybe you should ask / file an issue with repoforge.
>
I am not sure
On Sat, 29 Oct 2011, Cliff Pratt wrote:
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 8:58 PM, John Hodrien wrote:
On Sat, 29 Oct 2011, Les Mikesell wrote:
Do some of the checkbox installs omit it? I just ran into this on a
system where I chose the 'web server' install, then wanted to run
gparted remotely.
Ye
On Saturday, October 29, 2011 07:26:04 PM John Hodrien wrote:
> ssh tells you when it creates a .Xauthority file for the first time. Why does
> it do that?
Being totally pedantic here, but isn't it /usr/bin/xauth that issues the
message telling that the .Xauthority file has been created?
_
On Saturday, October 29, 2011 06:31:46 PM Jerry Geis wrote:
> I cannot find anything out there as far as an update.
This has been a useful discourse since the new difficulties that the team is
facing are now more widely known. Sometimes the pot needs a good stirring, and
this time we got what i
On Sat, 2011-10-29 at 23:12 +0100, Ned Slider wrote:
> On 29/10/11 23:04, Ned Slider wrote:
> > On 29/10/11 18:41, Ron Loftin wrote:
> >>
> >> This may not be the best place to ask, but Google hasn't given me any
> >> useful information.
> >>
> >> I have an "older" laptop that is using the Intel 2
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 6:38 PM, Lamar Owen wrote:
> On Saturday, October 29, 2011 07:26:04 PM John Hodrien wrote:
>> ssh tells you when it creates a .Xauthority file for the first time. Why
>> does
>> it do that?
>
> Being totally pedantic here, but isn't it /usr/bin/xauth that issues the
> me
25 matches
Mail list logo
