On Thu, 2010-06-03 at 07:36 +0200, Aurélien Naldi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> when using Drag and Drop, nautilus switches from GIO/GVFS URI to local
> path, depending on the drop target (i.e. it will paste a local path if
> you drop to a gnome-terminal). I guess dropping on a gtk filechooser
> assumes that t
On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 01:05 +0100, Shane Fagan wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-05-17 at 18:28 -0500, Chris Cheney wrote:
> > openoffice.org-presentation (Impress) currently depends on it. Assuming
> > we would be keeping that on the CD it would need to be tested to see if
> > the
openoffice.org-presentation (Impress) currently depends on it. Assuming
we would be keeping that on the CD it would need to be tested to see if
the libraries in the draw package are needed by Impress to function,
which I am pretty certain they are needed. In that case we would have to
split them ou
On Thu, 2010-03-25 at 18:01 -0400, Paul Smith wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-03-25 at 15:41 -0500, Patrick Goetz wrote:
> > Flávio Etrusco wrote:
> > > Seriously? Ubuntu is not only about techies, it's about general
> > > use(rs) and businesses too. They have to have a solid and well-tested
> > > base.
> >
On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 21:23 +0100, Remco wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 17:40, Tom H wrote:
> >> Ugh. I really thought that only primitive systems use white text on a black
> >> background. It's ergonomically very bad. I never use such a terminal
> >> except in Windows, where I haven't figured
On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 11:40 -0500, Tom H wrote:
> >> Everybody knows that a terminal has white text on black background.
> >> Windows has a terminal like this. Mac OS X have a terminal like this.
>
> OS X's terminal is a very civilized black text on white background...
True, funny enough their te
On Tue, 2009-12-08 at 22:53 -0600, Chris Cheney wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-12-07 at 17:13 -0600, Patrick Goetz wrote:
> > I've been out of the loop for a couple of months, so pardon me if this
> > has already been discussed, but Karmic got thoroughly trashed in a
> &g
On Mon, 2009-12-07 at 17:13 -0600, Patrick Goetz wrote:
> I've been out of the loop for a couple of months, so pardon me if this
> has already been discussed, but Karmic got thoroughly trashed in a
> TomsHardware.com review:
>
>http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ubuntu-karmic-koala,2484.htm
On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 13:50 -0400, Tim Gelvin wrote:
> When can we expect to see an update to OpenOffice?
What do you mean? There is 1:3.1.1-5ubuntu1 in Karmic already.
Chris
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://
The issue you are talking about appears to be this:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openoffice.org/+bug/244353
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=440055
Chris
On Tue, 2009-05-26 at 16:27 +0200, Stefan Kachaunov wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am writing to you because I (as well as oth
On Thu, 2009-03-26 at 13:57 +, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-03-26 at 08:13 +0100, Stephan Hermann wrote:
>
> > TBH, I just bursted into a laugh attackfor easyiness: 500 Gigabytes
> > as written on a Harddrive label are not the same as 500 Gigabytes
> > transfered over the Netw
>From an email from Colin Watson:
==
The partitioner has done this since November 2005.
partman-partitioning (37) unstable; urgency=low
[...]
[ Frans Pop ]
* Use gpt instead of msdos disklabel for disks larger than 2TB.
[...]
-- Frans Pop Sun, 27 Nov 2005 20:19:17 +0100
==
So this shoul
On Sat, 2009-02-28 at 12:38 +0100, Markus Hitter wrote:
> This is likely all true, but with resolution independent rendering,
> it no longer applies. In the future, "px" is just a measurement unit,
> just like "in" or "mm". Once the software gets this, it's perfectly
> fine for web developers
On Fri, 2009-02-27 at 13:55 -0500, Felix Miata wrote:
> On 2009/02/27 10:09 (GMT-0600) Chris Cheney composed:
>
> > On Fri, 2009-02-27 at 02:55 -0500, Felix Miata wrote:
>
> >> These may not be the best around, but even if they're off by 50%, the real
> >>
On Fri, 2009-02-27 at 16:28 +, (``-_-´´) -- BUGabundo wrote:
> Olá Mackenzie e a todos.
>
> On Thursday 26 February 2009 18:59:28 Mackenzie Morgan wrote:
> > I have a 1280x800 13" screen, and the fonts look fine to me.
>
> Hi have a 13" at 1280x800 (DPI 112 according to xorg log) and I have t
On Fri, 2009-02-27 at 02:55 -0500, Felix Miata wrote:
> On 2009/02/26 21:12 (GMT-0600) Chris Cheney composed:
>
> > On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 21:08 -0500, Felix Miata wrote:
>
> >> On 2009/02/26 19:15 (GMT-0600) Chris Cheney composed:
>
> >> >> On 26/02/09
On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 21:08 -0500, Felix Miata wrote:
> On 2009/02/26 19:15 (GMT-0600) Chris Cheney composed:
>
> >> On 26/02/09 14:31, Felix Miata wrote:
>
> >> Real-world DPI has been steadily increasing from release to
> >> release.
>
> > I don&
On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 17:33 -0600, Ryan Hayle wrote:
> On 26/02/09 14:31, Felix Miata wrote:
> > On the contrary, preference is about the difference between acceptable and
> > unacceptable.
> >
>
> There are two separate issues here. You seem to be arguing that the OLD
> size is too small, a
On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 21:15 +0100, Siegfried-Angel wrote:
> 2009/2/26 Chris Cheney :
> > [...] personally I think they are already fine [...]
>
> I don't agree. Having fonts as displayed in
> http://launchpadlibrarian.net/23152448/10pt.jpg is clearly not right
> and
On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 15:05 -0500, Felix Miata wrote:
> On 2009/02/26 20:08 (GMT+0100) Nicolò Chieffo composed:
>
> > Yes. Currently the most spread resolution is:
>
> > 1280x800 (in 15") what is the DPI? (how can I evaluate the DPI of a
> > monitor?)
>
> 1-You can calculate it. Divide the inch
On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 18:29 +0100, Nicolò Chieffo wrote:
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-control-center/+bug/310353
> This discussion was started becaus Sebastien Bacher asked for it.
>
> -
>
> Hello, now that the default DPI is asked to X, it's no more '96' as it
> used to
Even if Alt+SysRq+K does work for you it will likely cause your console
(eg Alt F1-F6) to not work again until reboot, because it doesn't
cleanly shut down the xserver like C-A-B does. I used it once recently
after C-A-B was disabled by default and it worked well enough to get X
back but after that
On Tue, 2008-12-30 at 08:46 -0500, Mackenzie Morgan wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-12-29 at 16:48 -0500, John Moser wrote:
> > I was considering filing a bug for package request or creating a spec
> > for Go-Ooo.org for inclusion in Ubuntu, or possibly as a replacement
> > for OpenOffice.org vanilla. Start
I maintain OOo for Ubuntu.
The OpenOffice.org in Ubuntu is the go-oo.org version.
go-oo takes the original sun tarballs then patches it heavily with
somewhere around 500 patches. Pretty much all Linux distributions use
the go-oo.org build system and patches, except for Fedora, which just
takes a
On Sun, 2008-12-28 at 12:03 +0100, Markus Hitter wrote:
> Am 28.12.2008 um 07:49 schrieb Chris Cheney:
>
> > Thus it would take a very long time to download for a large
> > percentage of the world. Although perhaps this is not as big an
> > issue since many places have
On Sat, 2008-12-27 at 16:47 +, richard wrote:
<-snip->
> He knows that if he buys a copy of windows 1 CD maybe 2
<-snip->
Windows is a DVD now
MacOS is a DVD as well
Perhaps its time to move the default Ubuntu release to a DVD also. ;-)
If I remember correctly the main reason it hasn't been s
John,
2.6.28 will come out around January and Jaunty will probably ship with
2.6.29 but it very well might not be a good idea to use it by default
for Jaunty which is what shirish seemed to be talking about. Just
because it is not considered development status doesn't necessarily mean
it is stable
On Sat, 2008-09-27 at 11:53 +0300, Timo Jyrinki wrote:
> 2008/9/5 Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > released on Sept 8 which puts the final release around Oct 20. That
> > doesn't leave enough time to make it even marginally stable, since that
> > would be
On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 19:22 -0500, Tony Yarusso wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 10:48 AM, Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sun, 2008-08-31 at 11:30 +0530, Vishal Rao wrote:
> >> What is the latest status of the possibility of including OOo 3 and FF
> &g
On Sun, 2008-08-31 at 11:30 +0530, Vishal Rao wrote:
> What is the latest status of the possibility of including OOo 3 and FF
> 3.1 by default in Intrepid?
OpenOffice.org 3.0 will be in Intrepid but it is looking like it will
not be as the primary version that is installed by default. The release
30 matches
Mail list logo
