From kalloltukai2004 at yahoo.co.in Sat Apr 1 06:55:06 2006 From: kalloltukai2004 at yahoo.co.in (kallol maji) Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 07:55:06 +0100 (BST) Subject: FC4 mp3 support..... need help Message-ID: <20060401065506.98290.qmail@web8501.mail.in.yahoo.com> I have installed FC4 recently and I am a first time Linux user. I know Linux doesn't support mp3 format . We need to download some softwares . Can someone plz suggest from where can I download these packages. --------------------------------- Jiyo cricket on Yahoo! India cricket Yahoo! Messenger Mobile Stay in touch with your buddies all the time. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From b.j.smith at ieee.org Sat Apr 1 13:02:26 2006 From: b.j.smith at ieee.org (Bryan J. Smith) Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2006 08:02:26 -0500 Subject: FC4 mp3 support..... need help In-Reply-To: <20060401065506.98290.qmail@web8501.mail.in.yahoo.com> References: <20060401065506.98290.qmail@web8501.mail.in.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1143896546.6096.17.camel@bert64.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> On Sat, 2006-04-01 at 07:55 +0100, kallol maji wrote: > I have installed FC4 recently and I am a first time Linux user. > I know Linux doesn't support mp3 format . Umm, Linux very much _does_ support MP3, and has virtually since day 1! But once someone started enforcing the MP3 patent, it was left out for legal reasons since Fedora Core 1. I use "lame" to encode and the "xmms-mp3" package to play. _Both_ are available from Livna.ORG, which is not only designed for Fedora Core, but _unlike_other_ respositories, co-exists with Fedora Extras. Most other 3rd party repsitories _break_ Fedora Extras. Not Livna.ORG. > We need to download some softwares . Can someone plz suggest from > where can I download these packages. The instructions on how to setup YUM to automagically pull packages from Livna.ORG is here: http://rpm.livna.org/ -- Bryan J. Smith Professional, technical annoyance mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com ------------------------------------------------------------ ****** Speed doesn't kill. Difference in speed does! ****** From tamal.nath at gmail.com Sat Apr 1 18:45:50 2006 From: tamal.nath at gmail.com (Tamal) Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 00:15:50 +0530 Subject: FC5 Installation time Message-ID: <000b01c655bc$83c1da10$6401a8c0@homepc> FC5 minimal installation takes almost 4 minutes. The install.log after installation is attached with this mail. There are more things I want to show you. 1.. warning: libgcc-4.1.0-3: Header V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID 4f2a6fd2 : Why this warning occurs ? 2.. Installing libgcc-4.1.0-3.x86_64. AND Installing libgcc-4.1.0-3.i386. : Why library of both architecture is installed ? 3.. Installing beecrypt-4.1.2-9.2.1.x86_64. : What is the necessity of these kinds of libraries without a compiler ? 4.. Installing libX11-1.0.0-3.x86_64. : Why the graphical library is installed in minimal installation ? 5.. Installing gtk2-2.8.15-1.x86_64. : If a user wants to install only KDE, what is the use of GTK here ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: install.log Type: application/octet-stream Size: 14289 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tamal.nath at gmail.com Wed Apr 5 13:16:00 2006 From: tamal.nath at gmail.com (Tamal Kanti Nath) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 18:46:00 +0530 Subject: Kernel source Message-ID: <000b01c658b3$237c3250$0a01a8c0@xp2home> Which CD (of 5+1 CD distribution) contains the kernel source of Fedora core 5 ? Actually I want to install NFORCE driver which needs kernel source path. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From D.Mierzejewski at icm.edu.pl Wed Apr 5 16:12:09 2006 From: D.Mierzejewski at icm.edu.pl (Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 18:12:09 +0200 Subject: Kernel source In-Reply-To: <000b01c658b3$237c3250$0a01a8c0@xp2home> References: <000b01c658b3$237c3250$0a01a8c0@xp2home> Message-ID: <20060405161209.GE19612@ws-gradcol1.icm.edu.pl> On Wed, Apr 05, 2006 at 06:46:00PM +0530, Tamal Kanti Nath wrote: > Which CD (of 5+1 CD distribution) contains the kernel source of Fedora core 5 ? > Actually I want to install NFORCE driver which needs kernel source path. It shouldn't need the whole kernel source. kernel-devel package should be enough. Regards, -- Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski Interdisciplinary Centre for Mathematical and Computational Modelling Warsaw University | http://www.icm.edu.pl | tel. +48 (22) 5540810 From b.j.smith at ieee.org Fri Apr 7 18:22:39 2006 From: b.j.smith at ieee.org (Bryan J. Smith) Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2006 14:22:39 -0400 Subject: Kernel source -- Kernel 2.6 on Fedora-based Systems (and Prior History) In-Reply-To: <000b01c658b3$237c3250$0a01a8c0@xp2home> References: <000b01c658b3$237c3250$0a01a8c0@xp2home> Message-ID: <1144434159.4161.39.camel@bert64.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> On Wed, 2006-04-05 at 18:46 +0530, Tamal Kanti Nath wrote: > Which CD (of 5+1 CD distribution) contains the kernel source of Fedora > core 5 ? Actually I want to install NFORCE driver which needs kernel > source path. On Wed, 2006-04-05 at 18:12 +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > It shouldn't need the whole kernel source. kernel-devel package should > be enough. Indeed. Kernel 2.6 now includes a subset of the "build" that programs need, and the 'kernel-devel' package that contains this in FC4+/RHEL4+, should be the _only_ thing required. For more on the changes in the way kernel 2.6 distros (FC2+/RHEL4+) provide kernel source and support, as well as the history behind it, see my Blog article here: "Kernel 2.6 on Fedora-based Systems" http://thebs413.blogspot.com/2005/10/kernel-26-on-fedora-based-systems.html -- Bryan J. Smith Professional, technical annoyance mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com ------------------------------------------------------------ ****** Speed doesn't kill. Difference in speed does! ****** From laibach at luukku.com Sat Apr 8 07:41:16 2006 From: laibach at luukku.com (Matti Pulkkinen) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 10:41:16 +0300 (EEST) Subject: Trouble with Asus SK8V MB with more than 2048M memory Message-ID: <1144482076013.laibach.8424.yk7iu3oRi2MtraQdhq5JPw@luukku.com> I can't use more than 2048M of memory in my test machine. The machine has AMD Athlon 64 FX with 4096 M of physical RAM with Asus' SK8V Motherboard. I use two 2048M modules, Kingston's KVR266X72RC25/2G. I can't install FC5 x86-64 or any 64-bit Linux on the system without giving the parameter "linux mem=2048M" while installing. If I give for example "linux mem=4096M" or no mem parameter the installation hangs allmost immediately. While launching installed system with bigger mem I have a kernel panic immediately. The curious thing is that with Windows XP Professional x64-edition and 64-bit Sun Solaris the whole memory space is available. So there can't be any serious hardware or configuration problem in the machine. Before touching to the hw configuration, I would like to understand the problem better. I have had the same problem with Gentoo, where I tried to solve this problem by recompiling the kernel. I was unable to solve the problem that way. Has anybody been able to install Linux or FC5 x86-64 on that motherboard with more than 2048M of memory? ................................................................... Luukku Plus paketilla p??set eroon tila- ja turvallisuusongelmista. Hanki Luukku Plus ja helpotat el?m??si. http://www.mtv3.fi/luukku From wam at HiWAAY.net Sat Apr 8 13:19:21 2006 From: wam at HiWAAY.net (William A. Mahaffey III) Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 08:19:21 -0500 Subject: Trouble with Asus SK8V MB with more than 2048M memory In-Reply-To: <1144482076013.laibach.8424.yk7iu3oRi2MtraQdhq5JPw@luukku.com> References: <1144482076013.laibach.8424.yk7iu3oRi2MtraQdhq5JPw@luukku.com> Message-ID: <4437B859.4080506@HiWAAY.net> Matti Pulkkinen wrote: >I can't use more than 2048M of memory in my test machine. > >The machine has AMD Athlon 64 FX with 4096 M of >physical RAM with Asus' SK8V Motherboard. > >I use two 2048M modules, Kingston's KVR266X72RC25/2G. > >I can't install FC5 x86-64 or any 64-bit Linux on the system without giving the parameter "linux mem=2048M" while installing. > >If I give for example "linux mem=4096M" or no mem parameter the installation hangs allmost immediately. While launching installed system with bigger mem I have a kernel panic immediately. > >The curious thing is that with Windows XP Professional x64-edition and 64-bit Sun Solaris the whole memory space is available. So there can't be any serious hardware or configuration problem in the machine. > >Before touching to the hw configuration, I would like to understand the problem better. I have had the same problem with Gentoo, where I tried to solve this problem by recompiling the kernel. I was unable to solve the problem that way. > >Has anybody been able to install Linux or FC5 x86-64 on that motherboard with more than 2048M of memory? > > >................................................................... >Luukku Plus paketilla p??set eroon tila- ja turvallisuusongelmista. >Hanki Luukku Plus ja helpotat el?m??si. http://www.mtv3.fi/luukku > > > > You tried the 'mem=4096M' on the installed system as well, I assume. I am on the SuSE AMD64 list & that seems to be necessary for anything above 2 GB of physical RAM .... $0.02, no more, no less :-). -- William A. Mahaffey III ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "The M1 Garand is without doubt the finest implement of war ever devised by man." -- Gen. George S. Patton From b.j.smith at ieee.org Sat Apr 8 13:21:34 2006 From: b.j.smith at ieee.org (Bryan J. Smith) Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 09:21:34 -0400 Subject: Trouble with Asus SK8V MB with more than 2048M memory In-Reply-To: <1144482076013.laibach.8424.yk7iu3oRi2MtraQdhq5JPw@luukku.com> References: <1144482076013.laibach.8424.yk7iu3oRi2MtraQdhq5JPw@luukku.com> Message-ID: <1144502494.9503.4.camel@bert64.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> On Sat, 2006-04-08 at 10:41 +0300, Matti Pulkkinen wrote: > I can't use more than 2048M of memory in my test machine. > The machine has AMD Athlon 64 FX with 4096 M of > physical RAM with Asus' SK8V Motherboard. > I use two 2048M modules, Kingston's KVR266X72RC25/2G. I've got a theory, remove one DIMM. Do you get 1GiB now? ;-> If so, then your mainboard+CPU combionation only supports 1GiB SDRAM IC technology. In other words, only half of the capacity of each IC is being addressed. I've seen this many times. > The curious thing is that with Windows XP Professional x64-edition > and 64-bit Sun Solaris the whole memory space is available. So there > can't be any serious hardware or configuration problem in the machine. Hmmm, really? Wow. Okay, then it's not hardware, you're right. I'll have to research this more. > Has anybody been able to install Linux or FC5 x86-64 on that > motherboard with more than 2048M of memory? Yes, but I've always used four (4) 1GiB DIMMs to avoid lack of 2GiB DIMM support (and only getting half the memory). I typically get 3.5-3.6GiB due to the hole sub-4GiB for memory mapped I/O. -- Bryan J. Smith Professional, technical annoyance mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com ------------------------------------------------------------ ****** Speed doesn't kill. Difference in speed does! ****** From maurice at harddata.com Sat Apr 8 14:59:50 2006 From: maurice at harddata.com (Maurice Hilarius) Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 08:59:50 -0600 Subject: Trouble with Asus SK8V MB with more than 2048M memory In-Reply-To: <1144502494.9503.4.camel@bert64.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> References: <1144482076013.laibach.8424.yk7iu3oRi2MtraQdhq5JPw@luukku.com> <1144502494.9503.4.camel@bert64.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> Message-ID: <4437CFE6.6010505@harddata.com> Bryan J. Smith wrote: > On Sat, 2006-04-08 at 10:41 +0300, Matti Pulkkinen wrote: > >> I can't use more than 2048M of memory in my test machine. >> .. >> I use two 2048M modules, Kingston's KVR266X72RC25/2G. >> > .. >> Has anybody been able to install Linux or FC5 x86-64 on that >> motherboard with more than 2048M of memory? >> > > Yes, but I've always used four (4) 1GiB DIMMs to avoid lack of 2GiB DIMM > support (and only getting half the memory). I typically get 3.5-3.6GiB > due to the hole sub-4GiB for memory mapped I/O. > There are other issues as well: The SK8V features the VIA K8T800 North Bridge Many implementations of this chipset have issues with 4GB of RAM and the BIOS location for add on devices such as PCI cards. Reference some postings on this, for example: http://forums.viaarena.com/messageview.aspx?catid=12&threadid=69763&enterthread=y Further, I advise not going over 3GB with boards like this, in general, as there is loss of memory performance. Typical chipsets for single CPU such as this can only run RAM at full speed (DDR400) IF there are no more than 6 ranks of memory chips. Typical 1GB modules can only be had in a "2 rank" layout (64x8), and 2GB are usually the same (128x4) If you want to keep the ranks down you need to order 1GB modules using 128 x 4 which are quite costly. Usually at about a 40% premium. To go to all this trouble for 4GB is a bit of a waste, however, as you are still going to be losing some of the addressing below 4GB due to the BIOS ROMs occupying those addresses. In general on a PC one can count on losing about 300MB of RAM address space, so installing 4GB is a bit futile I would recommend, instead: A pair of 1GB, 64x8 (2 rank) modules A pair of 512MB, 64x8 (1 rank) modules. This achieves 3GB, accounts for 6 ranks, so memory speed stays full. Costs no premium. 2GB modules are an awful lot of money, for the small difference you will get here.. Especially since it guarantees you will be running your RAM at DDR333.. Unless you plan to overclock this I also suggest NOT wasting your time with any of the so-called "faster" RAM, that is less than CAS3. It is only needed for overclocking, and the premium should not be too much. Most of the "Overclocking, low CAS, "premium" RAM one is offered is at best "snake oil". For the cost of the "faster" RAM one can buy, it is usually possible to go up one speed in the CPU model, or buy more RAM, so the "faster" RAM is a bit silly, IMHO. -- With our best regards, Maurice W. Hilarius Telephone: 01-780-456-9771 Hard Data Ltd. FAX: 01-780-456-9772 11060 - 166 Avenue email:maurice at harddata.com Edmonton, AB, Canada http://www.harddata.com/ T5X 1Y3 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From laibach at luukku.com Sat Apr 8 18:45:29 2006 From: laibach at luukku.com (Matti Pulkkinen) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 21:45:29 +0300 (EEST) Subject: Trouble with Asus SK8V MB with more than 2048M memory Message-ID: <1144521929939.laibach.53298.4WvzXrLvzGVU4Vy9a_jTnA@luukku.com> Bryan J. Smith kirjoitti 08.04.2006 kello 16:21: > On Sat, 2006-04-08 at 10:41 +0300, Matti Pulkkinen wrote: > > I can't use more than 2048M of memory in my test machine. > > The machine has AMD Athlon 64 FX with 4096 M of > > physical RAM with Asus' SK8V Motherboard. > > I use two 2048M modules, Kingston's KVR266X72RC25/2G. > > I've got a theory, remove one DIMM. > Do you get 1GiB now? ;-> > Thanks for good ideas, Bryan. I actually tried that. With 2 x 2048M FC 5 says it uses 1.9 GiB memory. When I removed the other module, ceteris paribus, FC reported, that it has 2 GiB of RAM. Pretty counterintuitive, I think. With the 2 x 2048M chips I tried to play with the MEM parameter. To set it to 4096M when starting FC 5 didn't increase the amount the memory, but it didn't cause a kernel panic either. That was more than with some other distros. I booted with Windows XP x64 edition and it reported the amount of memory correctly. (I haven't tried to allocate more than 2048M continuous slice of memory in Win x64. With a small assembly routine it would be quite easy to tell, if there is some kind of gap in the address space somewhere near 2 GiB, but this is a Linux group and I'm not very fond of off topic posters) > Yes, but I've always used four (4) 1GiB DIMMs to avoid lack of 2GiB DIMM > support (and only getting half the memory). I typically get 3.5-3.6GiB > due to the hole sub-4GiB for memory mapped I/O. SK8V gives you an option to control the hole by the means of the BIOS. My tests with that feature have not helped me with Linux. I'm not a big Linux hacker, but if someone could give me a hint which part of the kernel code I could start looking for the reasons behind the problem, I would be very grateful. By the way, the Asus SK8V has some pretty odd features that don't work either, like Wi-Fi slot for a proprietary IEEE 802.11b card. They don't sell the product actively any more. No I know why. ................................................................... Luukku Plus paketilla p??set eroon tila- ja turvallisuusongelmista. Hanki Luukku Plus ja helpotat el?m??si. http://www.mtv3.fi/luukku From arjan at fenrus.demon.nl Sun Apr 9 19:04:28 2006 From: arjan at fenrus.demon.nl (Arjan van de Ven) Date: Sun, 09 Apr 2006 21:04:28 +0200 Subject: Kernel source In-Reply-To: <000b01c658b3$237c3250$0a01a8c0@xp2home> References: <000b01c658b3$237c3250$0a01a8c0@xp2home> Message-ID: <1144609468.2989.77.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> On Wed, 2006-04-05 at 18:46 +0530, Tamal Kanti Nath wrote: > Which CD (of 5+1 CD distribution) contains the kernel source of Fedora > core 5 ? > Actually I want to install NFORCE driver which needs kernel source > path. I'm surprised... I thought fedora already came with the best driver for that hardware built in... > From b.j.smith at ieee.org Sun Apr 9 21:31:08 2006 From: b.j.smith at ieee.org (Bryan J. Smith) Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 14:31:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Kernel source In-Reply-To: <1144609468.2989.77.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Message-ID: <20060409213108.95273.qmail@web34106.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Arjan van de Ven wrote: > I'm surprised... I thought fedora already came with the best driver > for that hardware built in... Not every MAC+PHY combination is supported for the GPL NIC driver (forcedeth) in the stock kernel or via patches to the kernel (addec by Red Hat). So sometimes you want to load the nVidia NIC driver (nvnet) in the meantime until the GPL NIC driver (forcedeth) catches up. Audio is another story, depending on if you are using 2.4 or 2.6. For 2.4, the nVidia Audio driver (nvaudio) is only OSS. For 2.6 or ALSA-enabled 2.4, nVidia does not offer a driver and relies on stock ALSA. I have several nForce 4x0 combinations and, for the most part, Fedora Core 5 has worked out-of-the-box with the NIC, and the kernel's ALSA for the sound. So I'm curious as to what issues he is having with Fedora Core 5? Unless this is for Fedora Core 4? In that case, I did run into such with the shipping 2.6.11's forcedeth for the NIC, although the updated 2.6.14's forcedeth worked fine: http://thebs413.blogspot.com/2005/12/linux-on-nvidia-c51nv44-nforce.html -- Bryan J. Smith Professional, Technical Annoyance b.j.smith at ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com -------------------------------------------------- I'm a Democrat. No wait, I'm a Republican. Hmm, it seems I'm just whatever someone disagrees with. From arjan at fenrus.demon.nl Mon Apr 10 16:24:49 2006 From: arjan at fenrus.demon.nl (Arjan van de Ven) Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 18:24:49 +0200 Subject: Kernel source In-Reply-To: <20060409213108.95273.qmail@web34106.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060409213108.95273.qmail@web34106.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1144686290.2876.6.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> On Sun, 2006-04-09 at 14:31 -0700, Bryan J. Smith wrote: > Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > I'm surprised... I thought fedora already came with the best driver > > for that hardware built in... > > Not every MAC+PHY combination is supported for the GPL NIC driver > (forcedeth) in the stock kernel or via patches to the kernel (addec > by Red Hat). So sometimes you want to load the nVidia NIC driver > (nvnet) in the meantime until the GPL NIC driver (forcedeth) catches > up. this is one of the reason such (illegal) binary modules are bad. People don't report or work with the open driver to get that one fixed, but rather just jump to the binary junk. But that way linux as a whole doesn't make progress and it doesn't get fixed for the future, giving again a crappy experience in the next release. From wam at HiWAAY.net Tue Apr 11 12:14:08 2006 From: wam at HiWAAY.net (William A. Mahaffey III) Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 07:14:08 -0500 Subject: Kernel source In-Reply-To: <1144686290.2876.6.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> References: <20060409213108.95273.qmail@web34106.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1144686290.2876.6.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Message-ID: <443B9D90.4040905@HiWAAY.net> Arjan van de Ven wrote: >On Sun, 2006-04-09 at 14:31 -0700, Bryan J. Smith wrote: > > >>Arjan van de Ven wrote: >> >> >>>I'm surprised... I thought fedora already came with the best driver >>>for that hardware built in... >>> >>> >>Not every MAC+PHY combination is supported for the GPL NIC driver >>(forcedeth) in the stock kernel or via patches to the kernel (addec >>by Red Hat). So sometimes you want to load the nVidia NIC driver >>(nvnet) in the meantime until the GPL NIC driver (forcedeth) catches >>up. >> >> > >this is one of the reason such (illegal) binary modules are bad. People >don't report or work with the open driver to get that one fixed, but >rather just jump to the binary junk. But that way linux as a whole >doesn't make progress and it doesn't get fixed for the future, giving >again a crappy experience in the next release. > > > What is 'illegal' about binary apps/drivers/modules/etc ? -- William A. Mahaffey III ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "The M1 Garand is without doubt the finest implement of war ever devised by man." -- Gen. George S. Patton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tamal.nath at gmail.com Wed Apr 12 00:59:38 2006 From: tamal.nath at gmail.com (Tamal Kanti Nath) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 06:29:38 +0530 Subject: Kernel source In-Reply-To: <443B9D90.4040905@HiWAAY.net> References: <20060409213108.95273.qmail@web34106.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1144686290.2876.6.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <443B9D90.4040905@HiWAAY.net> Message-ID: <1144803578.2097.1.camel@fedora.linux> The real problem is NVIDIA does not distribute their drivers to Linux community like HP does. So users have to download and install their driver manually. Users know very little about fixing a problem (if any error occurs). So, they had to use the generic driver provided by the vendor. I do not blame NVIDIA because Linux kernel (and related products) updates rapidly. Also there are many many flavors of UNIX/Linux in the market. So, it is impossible to build drivers for each Hardware and software platforms. -- -- Tamal K. Nath (B. Tech student in Electronics & Communication Engg.) AMD Athlon 64 3000+ @ 1.8GHz, MSI K8NGM2-IL (GeForce 6100, nForce 410), 512MB DDR @ 400MHz, 40GB Samsung PUMA @ 7200 rpm -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From b.j.smith at ieee.org Wed Apr 12 13:04:52 2006 From: b.j.smith at ieee.org (Bryan J. Smith) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 09:04:52 -0400 Subject: Kernel source -- INCORRECT ASSUMPTIONS! In-Reply-To: <1144686290.2876.6.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> References: <20060409213108.95273.qmail@web34106.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1144686290.2876.6.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Message-ID: <1144847093.3338.23.camel@bert64.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> On Mon, 2006-04-10 at 18:24 +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > this is one of the reason such (illegal) binary modules are bad. People > don't report or work with the open driver to get that one fixed, but > rather just jump to the binary junk. *WRONG*! But nVidia _does_ work with the GPL forcedeth team! They _do_ report what changes! And it goes into the _next_ stock kernel, or gets patched in the next Red Hat kernel. They just offer a "quick fix" for those that don't want to upgrade their kernel! That's all! It's _not_ nVidia, but mainboard vendors who use different PHY combinations with the nForce MAC. In fact, nVidia usually catches it, immediately rev's the nvnet driver, and then works with the kernel team on the necessary forcedeth changes. > But that way linux as a whole doesn't make progress and it doesn't get > fixed for the future, giving again a crappy experience in the next > release. Again, *WRONG*! 100% of the nVidia nForce chipset not only has GPL drivers, but nVidia *ACTIVELY* supports their development! On Wed, 2006-04-12 at 06:29 +0530, Tamal Kanti Nath wrote: > The real problem is NVIDIA does not distribute their drivers to Linux > community like HP does. *STOP*! 100% of the nVidia nForce chipset is GPL! That include reporting to and working with the kernel team. The only kernel module nVidia doesn't make GPL is the memory code for its GeForce cards. Some of that code is actually IP of Intel (among others), who nVidia has a NDA with. At one time nVidia's AGPgart was also not released into the kernel, and only with that driver. But Intel lifted the NDA on that once PCI-Express came close to release. Unlike nVidia, Intel doesn't unify its drivers across all platforms. That's why Intel puts a "crippled" driver on Linux, without that code. nVidia doesn't, hence why Intel enforces its IP. > So users have to download and install their driver manually. No, you're thinking of the video driver. And even then, nVidia _actively_ puts people on the 2D MIT "nv" driver. They typically _beat_ ATI on 2D support in Xorg/XFree for newer cards. Don't shoot nVidia because they offer a 3D GLX atop. ATI _never_ has! It was the National Weather Service that paid Precision Insight to write DRI drivers for the R100 series, which works for the R200, but not the R300+ because ATI has withheld those specs. Intel gives you a rather crippled 3D driver, at least compared to Windows, to avoid disclosing their own IP (among others). > Users know very little about fixing a problem (if any error occurs). Not any different than any other chipset -- ATI, Intel, etc... nVidia is just as supportive of GPL driver development for the nForce chipset as Intel is, although their SATA design in their MCP isn't as good as Intel's ICH. > So, they had to use the generic driver provided by the vendor. No, that is _not_ true! The "forcedeth" works fine. The "nvnet" is just there if you don't want to upgrade your kernel to work with new MAC+PHY combinations mainboard vendors introduce (_not_ nVidia!). > I do not blame NVIDIA because Linux kernel (and related products) > updates rapidly. Also there are many many flavors of UNIX/Linux in the > market. So, it is impossible to build drivers for each Hardware and > software platforms. Well nVidia _does_! I rather _tire_ of the _ignorance_ on nVidia. The only kernel driver they make proprietary is their memory driver for their GeForce video cards -- that's _it_. They support ALSA, forcedeth, SATA, etc... in 100% GPL developments. -- Bryan J. Smith Professional, technical annoyance mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com ------------------------------------------------------------ ****** Speed doesn't kill. Difference in speed does! ****** From fedora at adrianoneill.com Wed Apr 12 18:30:56 2006 From: fedora at adrianoneill.com (Adrian O'Neill) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 19:30:56 +0100 Subject: (no subject) Message-ID: <443D4760.1000006@adrianoneill.com> From fedora at adrianoneill.com Wed Apr 12 18:34:18 2006 From: fedora at adrianoneill.com (Adrian O'Neill) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 19:34:18 +0100 Subject: (no subject) Message-ID: <443D482A.3060401@adrianoneill.com> From mhammerton at gmail.com Wed Apr 12 21:19:17 2006 From: mhammerton at gmail.com (Mark Hammerton) Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 17:19:17 -0400 Subject: boot cd Message-ID: <310b80f10604121419g5c5effa0scba470ced80996fb@mail.gmail.com> i wanted to create a custom minimal install boot usb drive, I noticed on the RHEL ES4 amd64 cds they have both x86_64.rpm files and also i386.rpm files, to make the bootable usb smaller i wanted to know if i needed the i386.rpm packages. I already have my ks.cfg, and know exactly which packages i need to install but i wasnt sure if i needed the i386.rpms also. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mhammerton at gmail.com Thu Apr 13 15:23:11 2006 From: mhammerton at gmail.com (Mark Hammerton) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 11:23:11 -0400 Subject: need help please Message-ID: <310b80f10604130823q1fa6ccf4k528039f07b0ca68b@mail.gmail.com> i am trying to fit the redhat es 4 amd64 on to one bootable i reduced the size of the mounted all cds and cp them over with cp -a /media/cdrom/* /RHEL/CD1 and so forth for all five cds. i then copied over all of the RPMS into the the /RHEL/CD1/Redhat/RPMS/ folder and reduced the size, finally it is small enough to fit on one cd and it fits my needs for a minimal install. however when i try to boot the cd it boots asks for language, and so forth then it asks for installation media i press cdrom but it just says the cd is not a red hat cd and i cant continue. it says red hat enterprise linux at the top of the screen. this is the command i used to create the image i burnt to cd i used cd /RHEL/CD1 then mkisofs -o file.iso -b isolinux/isolinux.bin -c isolinux/boot.cat -no-emul-boot -boot-load-size 4 -boot-info-table -R -J -v -T /RHEL/CD1 is there anything i am missing on the single cd or in the way i make the iso -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkt at redhat.com Thu Apr 13 16:26:24 2006 From: jkt at redhat.com (Jay Turner) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 12:26:24 -0400 Subject: need help please In-Reply-To: <310b80f10604130823q1fa6ccf4k528039f07b0ca68b@mail.gmail.com> References: <310b80f10604130823q1fa6ccf4k528039f07b0ca68b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1144945584.14582.7.camel@heisey.devel.redhat.com> On Thu, 2006-04-13 at 11:23 -0400, Mark Hammerton wrote: > i am trying to fit the redhat es 4 amd64 on to one bootable i reduced > the size of the mounted all cds and cp them over with > cp -a /media/cdrom/* /RHEL/CD1 > and so forth for all five cds. > i then copied over all of the RPMS into the the /RHEL/CD1/Redhat/RPMS/ > folder and reduced the size, finally it is small enough to fit on one > cd and it fits my needs for a minimal install. > however when i try to boot the cd it boots asks for language, and so > forth then it asks for installation media i press cdrom but it just > says the cd is not a red hat cd and i cant continue. it says red hat > enterprise linux at the top of the screen. > this is the command i used to create the image i burnt to cd > i used cd /RHEL/CD1 > then > > mkisofs -o file.iso -b isolinux/isolinux.bin -c isolinux/boot.cat > -no-emul-boot -boot-load-size 4 -boot-info-table -R -J -v > -T /RHEL/CD1 > > > is there anything i am missing on the single cd or in the way i make > the iso More than likely you're missing the .discinfo file on the disc. That file contains information about the contents of the disc, ala: 1141417589.425945 Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 i386 1 RedHat/base RedHat/RPMS RedHat/pixmaps -- --*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--* Jay Turner, QE Manager jkt at redhat.com Red Hat, Inc. If A equals success, then the formula is: A = X + Y + Z, X is work. Y is play. Z is keep your mouth shut. - Albert Einstein -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From mhammerton at gmail.com Thu Apr 13 23:37:07 2006 From: mhammerton at gmail.com (Mark Hammerton) Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 19:37:07 -0400 Subject: single RHEL 4 boot CD Message-ID: <310b80f10604131637j1ea9c08eu622715e0da52c6ef@mail.gmail.com> i finally created a boot cd that will boot up and it uses the ks.cfg file on the cd so it does a complete install with out me beiing there. however after i install it instructs me to reboot and when i go to reboot it doesnt come grub starts to load and but nothing is install except a few folders under the root directory but no files or any of the packages are install before i reboot i checked the red hat installation screen and go this off of it *not all packages in hdlist had order tag File descriptor 3 left open the file descriptor on list from 1 until 31 No volume groups found these ar eth errors that i see on the screen from. can anyone help me out as to what they think my problem may be. everything would be greatly appreciated -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From arjan at fenrus.demon.nl Sun Apr 16 04:22:44 2006 From: arjan at fenrus.demon.nl (Arjan van de Ven) Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 06:22:44 +0200 Subject: Kernel source In-Reply-To: <443B9D90.4040905@HiWAAY.net> References: <20060409213108.95273.qmail@web34106.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1144686290.2876.6.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <443B9D90.4040905@HiWAAY.net> Message-ID: <1145161364.3685.3.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> On Tue, 2006-04-11 at 07:14 -0500, William A. Mahaffey III wrote: > Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > On Sun, 2006-04-09 at 14:31 -0700, Bryan J. Smith wrote: > > > > > Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > > > > > > I'm surprised... I thought fedora already came with the best driver > > > > for that hardware built in... > > > > > > > Not every MAC+PHY combination is supported for the GPL NIC driver > > > (forcedeth) in the stock kernel or via patches to the kernel (addec > > > by Red Hat). So sometimes you want to load the nVidia NIC driver > > > (nvnet) in the meantime until the GPL NIC driver (forcedeth) catches > > > up. > > > > > > > this is one of the reason such (illegal) binary modules are bad. People > > don't report or work with the open driver to get that one fixed, but > > rather just jump to the binary junk. But that way linux as a whole > > doesn't make progress and it doesn't get fixed for the future, giving > > again a crappy experience in the next release. > > > > > > What is 'illegal' about binary apps/drivers/modules/etc ? there is nothing illegal about binary applications. However binary kernel modules link to the kernel and are a derived work of the kernel (for many reasons) and thus need to be GPL licensed (as per the GPL license). For example, basically every binary module contains code taken from the GPL kernel. From b.j.smith at ieee.org Sun Apr 16 06:08:14 2006 From: b.j.smith at ieee.org (Bryan J. Smith) Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 02:08:14 -0400 Subject: Kernel source In-Reply-To: <1145161364.3685.3.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> References: <20060409213108.95273.qmail@web34106.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1144686290.2876.6.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <443B9D90.4040905@HiWAAY.net> <1145161364.3685.3.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Message-ID: <1145167694.2760.39.camel@bert64.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 06:22 +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > there is nothing illegal about binary applications. > However binary kernel modules link to the kernel and are a derived work > of the kernel (for many reasons) and thus need to be GPL licensed (as > per the GPL license). For example, basically every binary module > contains code taken from the GPL kernel. Actually, Linus has clarified his position on many items. For example, the NDIS Wrapper links in a non-GPL binary object. But because that binary object was not written for Linux, it is not incompatible with the GPL. -- Bryan J. Smith Professional, technical annoyance mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com ------------------------------------------------------------ ****** Speed doesn't kill. Difference in speed does! ****** From arjan at fenrus.demon.nl Sun Apr 16 06:22:59 2006 From: arjan at fenrus.demon.nl (Arjan van de Ven) Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 08:22:59 +0200 Subject: Kernel source In-Reply-To: <1145167694.2760.39.camel@bert64.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> References: <20060409213108.95273.qmail@web34106.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1144686290.2876.6.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <443B9D90.4040905@HiWAAY.net> <1145161364.3685.3.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1145167694.2760.39.camel@bert64.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> Message-ID: <1145168579.3809.3.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 02:08 -0400, Bryan J. Smith wrote: > On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 06:22 +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > there is nothing illegal about binary applications. > > However binary kernel modules link to the kernel and are a derived work > > of the kernel (for many reasons) and thus need to be GPL licensed (as > > per the GPL license). For example, basically every binary module > > contains code taken from the GPL kernel. > > Actually, Linus has clarified his position on many items. > > For example, the NDIS Wrapper links in a non-GPL binary object. But > because that binary object was not written for Linux, it is not > incompatible with the GPL. sure; I'd not call that a link kernel module though.. more a windows kernel module (which it is). I should have been more precise.. (and btw that doesn't mean it is automatically to ship a linux kernel, ndiswrapper and the windows driver as one work if the intent is for them to function together, because that's again something one should ask a lawyer about. Yes the GPL is tricky and pretty restrictive, as is the concept of intent ;) From b.j.smith at ieee.org Sun Apr 16 13:29:48 2006 From: b.j.smith at ieee.org (Bryan J. Smith) Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 09:29:48 -0400 Subject: Kernel source In-Reply-To: <1145168579.3809.3.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> References: <20060409213108.95273.qmail@web34106.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1144686290.2876.6.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <443B9D90.4040905@HiWAAY.net> <1145161364.3685.3.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1145167694.2760.39.camel@bert64.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> <1145168579.3809.3.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Message-ID: <1145194188.2760.50.camel@bert64.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 08:22 +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > sure; I'd not call that a link kernel module though.. The kernel module _is_ the GPL portion _statically_linked_ with the NDIS object code. The _entire_unit_ executes as a whole, including the GPL portion calling _and_running_ the NDIS code. GPL-anal advocates claim that since the GPL driver doesn't work without the NDIS object code, it is a GPL violation. Linux says if the code was not written for Linux, and the GPL portion merely allows Linux to use it, it's not a GPL violation. > more a windows kernel module (which it is). I should have been more precise.. Absolutely _no_difference_, the object code is intertwined -- part GPL, part non-GPL. Again, advocates v. Linux applies. There are also a couple of Linux _native_ WLAN card drivers (non-NDIS) that statically link in object code that is non-GPL. This is because the FCC (at least in the US) does not allow the disclosure and modification of some signaling information. I'm sure the FCC wish it had pushed this on vendors back in the Prism days. ;-> Anyhoo, same reasoning. Even though some argue the Linux GPL code relies on the object code, the vendors used the same object code on other platforms. The nVidia code is also a split GPL interface with non-GPL object binary. But I haven't been able to find out, with a certainty, that the non-GPL object was built for other platforms than Linux. Yes, nVidia's combined kernel (memory) + GLX (Xorg/XFree portion, which doesn't have to be GPL) is the _exact_same_design_ across FreeBSD, Linux, MacOS X and Windows, but is that object code in the kernel the _exact_same_ used across at least FreeBSD and/or Windows? nVidia used to make its AGPgart driver non-GPL as well, but that is no longer the case. Intel lifted its NDA on nVidia with regards to the AGPgart once PCI-Express came out. That seemed to be clearly Linux-only. -- Bryan P.S. Again, these only apply to the kernel module for the GeForce _video_ driver. It does _not_ apply to nVidia's nForce chipset -- which is available in 100% GPL -- and well supported by nVidia. -- Bryan J. Smith Professional, technical annoyance mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com ------------------------------------------------------------ ****** Speed doesn't kill. Difference in speed does! ****** From arjan at fenrus.demon.nl Sun Apr 16 15:36:20 2006 From: arjan at fenrus.demon.nl (Arjan van de Ven) Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 17:36:20 +0200 Subject: Kernel source In-Reply-To: <1145194188.2760.50.camel@bert64.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> References: <20060409213108.95273.qmail@web34106.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1144686290.2876.6.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <443B9D90.4040905@HiWAAY.net> <1145161364.3685.3.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1145167694.2760.39.camel@bert64.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> <1145168579.3809.3.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1145194188.2760.50.camel@bert64.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> Message-ID: <1145201780.3809.12.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 09:29 -0400, Bryan J. Smith wrote: > On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 08:22 +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > sure; I'd not call that a link kernel module though.. > > The kernel module _is_ the GPL portion _statically_linked_ with the NDIS > object code. That's an "issue" if that's the case. First of all Linus has clearly stated that the kernel is licensed under the GPL without any exceptions. (And he couldn't make exceptions even if he wanted to; there's many other copyright owners) The GPL in short has basically 2 parts that matter for this case, clause 2 and clause 3. Clause 3 is about derived works, which is the most gray area, and seems to be the bit that you're talking about (eg "it's also for BSD and windows so I claim it's not a derived work of Linux" and this is the case where Linus has said that if a part of a module started for another OS that he didn't consider *that part* a derived work normally). When something becomes a derived work is up to the judge/jury in question most likely, and depends also a bit on jurisdiction for sure; but once something is a derived work of the kernel, the GPL controls it for sure. Clause 2 is about including the GPL work in a bigger work (say a CD or a distro or combining 2 object files statically linked into a bigger file). A lawyer will tell you the fine print but it basically comes down that the GPL doesn't allow you to use the GPL work in a bigger work unless the rest of the bigger work is GPL as a whole, with one exception: The GPL also allows you to put "independent" files on the medium. An example of this exception would be if you shipped both mysql and oracle on the same CD. A kernel module is, in it's compiled form at least, not independent of the kernel by any reasonable interpretation so I doubt any lawyer who gets asked this question will approve this ;) Now, I think you misunderstand how this stuff works because really nobody is so stupid to do static linking to GPL stuff with non-GPL stuff; that's the part where your lawyer will yell at you for being a total idiot. With dynamic linking it gets a bit of a gray area (is it "derived" if you dynamic link? Is it still independent enough to be able to ship it in one work? That's where you have to consult your lawyer to get any meaningful answer, which may even vary per jurisdiction :) From b.j.smith at ieee.org Mon Apr 17 01:33:25 2006 From: b.j.smith at ieee.org (Bryan J. Smith) Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 21:33:25 -0400 Subject: Kernel source In-Reply-To: <1145201780.3809.12.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> References: <20060409213108.95273.qmail@web34106.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1144686290.2876.6.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <443B9D90.4040905@HiWAAY.net> <1145161364.3685.3.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1145167694.2760.39.camel@bert64.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> <1145168579.3809.3.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1145194188.2760.50.camel@bert64.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> <1145201780.3809.12.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Message-ID: <1145237605.2760.54.camel@bert64.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 17:36 +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > That's an "issue" if that's the case. It is the case. NDIS is object code and it's linked to the GPL code. No different than how Atheros does its WLAN module either. > Now, I think you misunderstand how this stuff works because really > nobody is so stupid to do static linking to GPL stuff with non-GPL > stuff; Linus has stated, on the LKML, with regards to the Atheros module and others. I'll find the link for you. > that's the part where your lawyer will yell at you for being a > total idiot. Be careful with that assertion. > With dynamic linking it gets a bit of a gray area (is it > "derived" if you dynamic link? Is it still independent enough to be able > to ship it in one work? That's where you have to consult your lawyer to > get any meaningful answer, which may even vary per jurisdiction :) If the non-GPL code was written for _another_OS_, how can it be a "derived work"? That's basically what Linus said. -- Bryan J. Smith Professional, technical annoyance mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com ------------------------------------------------------------ ****** Speed doesn't kill. Difference in speed does! ****** From arjan at fenrus.demon.nl Mon Apr 17 05:47:29 2006 From: arjan at fenrus.demon.nl (Arjan van de Ven) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 07:47:29 +0200 Subject: Kernel source In-Reply-To: <1145237605.2760.54.camel@bert64.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> References: <20060409213108.95273.qmail@web34106.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1144686290.2876.6.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <443B9D90.4040905@HiWAAY.net> <1145161364.3685.3.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1145167694.2760.39.camel@bert64.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> <1145168579.3809.3.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1145194188.2760.50.camel@bert64.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> <1145201780.3809.12.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1145237605.2760.54.camel@bert64.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> Message-ID: <1145252849.2847.9.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 21:33 -0400, Bryan J. Smith wrote: > On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 17:36 +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > That's an "issue" if that's the case. > > It is the case. NDIS is object code and it's linked to the GPL code. but ndiswrapper isn't static linked > No different than how Atheros does its WLAN module either. atheros IS a problem. > > that's the part where your lawyer will yell at you for being a > > total idiot. > > Be careful with that assertion. For static linking to GPL? I've not even found a single lawyer who thinks there is a gray area there. Dynamic linking to the kernel.. yes. But not static linking. > > > With dynamic linking it gets a bit of a gray area (is it > > "derived" if you dynamic link? Is it still independent enough to be able > > to ship it in one work? That's where you have to consult your lawyer to > > get any meaningful answer, which may even vary per jurisdiction :) > > If the non-GPL code was written for _another_OS_, how can it be a > "derived work"? That's basically what Linus said. actually the test here is not "derived work". Derived work matters for clause 3 but not for clause 2. That's where there is a difference between static and dynamic linking. Static linking doesn't "need" the derived work part. And there is a gray area on at what point something stops being for another OS... like how much are you allowed to change/add in other code (and mind you, the "glue layer" then cannot be GPL or you violate clause 2 again, so if your glue layer is derived you have lost again anyway) From b.j.smith at ieee.org Mon Apr 17 15:25:53 2006 From: b.j.smith at ieee.org (Bryan J. Smith) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 08:25:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Kernel source -- CASE IN POINT (does anyone remember the original thread?) In-Reply-To: <20060417145823.24291.qmail@web34111.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060417152553.50586.qmail@web34104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Does _anyone_ remember what the _original_ point of this was? It was _not_ the GeForce, but the _nForce_. It was about nVidia's _nForce_chipset_ drivers, which are 100% GPL. You have forcedeth, nv_sata and other _GPL_ drivers like i810, 1394, ALSA, etc... nVidia puts people on those GPL driver development. nVidia is probably the most _pro-GPL_ vendor along with Intel (although I could make cases pro/con for each). The fact that this has gone mega-anal, because someone wanted to use the opportunity about the nForce to bitch about the GeForce, is why so many people are turned-off to Linux. WE WERE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE GEFORCE, BUT THE NFORCE! But that doesn't seem to stop people from starting a "Jihad" about nVidia -- often in _their_ collective ignorance. >From a vendor who has 100% released *ALL* of its technical specifications on the chipset. ATI doesn't. ViA doesn't. nVidia _does_! The fact that so many Tawainese vendors create endless variants of MAC+PHY is _not_ nVidia's fault. nVidia works with the kernel team to add that support to the GPL forcedeth. Don't shoot them because they also offer the "nvnet" module for those that don't want to upgrade their kernel, as well as the older "nvsound" for those not running ALSA. In fact, anyone who knows about nVidia and their Xorg/XFree development knows nVidia puts people on the MIT-licensed 2D driver as well. nVidia has _never_ horded 2D knowledge of their RAMDAC, scan converters, etc... but ATI has, Intel has, others have. Yes, their kernel-memory (3rd party IP, heavily Intel) and Xorg/XFree GLX implementation (3rd party IP, heavily Intel, Microsoft, SGI, etc...). nVidia _tried_ to release the source back for XFree 3.3.x, and got letters from everyone -- from Intel to Microsoft to others. But you don't have to use them for just 2D. You can use the MIT drivers and no kernel-memory driver. Which is what most other video cards do anyway -- *0* 3D. And Intel's Linux driver is so far behind their Windows one. Largely because they won't open up their own IP. But, again, just WTF does this have to do with the _nForce_?!?!?! You can't even help someone these days without someone slamming a fsck'ing pole up your @$$ everytime you try to help them with nVidia. And 90% of the time it's because of their ignorance on the nForce! I love Red Hat, the FSF and the GPL, but I'm sorry, this *BIGOTRY* has to go! I don't think Linus would approve either. I know it's only a subset of Red Hat, the FSF, etc... But I'm tired of getting slamed from just trying to help people (let alone educate them on forcedeth issues _not_ due to nVidia). -- Bryan J. Smith Professional, Technical Annoyance b.j.smith at ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com -------------------------------------------------- I'm a Democrat. No wait, I'm a Republican. Hmm, it seems I'm just whatever someone disagrees with. From b.j.smith at ieee.org Mon Apr 17 14:58:23 2006 From: b.j.smith at ieee.org (Bryan J. Smith) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 07:58:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Kernel source In-Reply-To: <1145252849.2847.9.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Message-ID: <20060417145823.24291.qmail@web34111.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Arjan van de Ven wrote: > but ndiswrapper isn't static linked Are you sure about that? Just because it uses external object code doesn't mean it's dynamically linked. And even if it's dynamically linked, that does _not_ address the GPL issue. > atheros IS a problem. And so is the FCC. Get over it. And so is IP in general. Get over it. Furthermore, it is impossible to write any OpenGL driver these days without infringing on IP. Luckily, Xorg is MIT licensed and doesn't fall under the GPL. Unfortunately, some of the crucial IP used in the kernel-memory management is someone's IP (largely Intel). So ATI and nVidia can choose to: A) [GPL] Don't implement anything (which Intel itself does) B) [GPL]Implement a Linux-specific, non-infringing, cleanroom module (if possible or feasible) C) [GPL + non-derived] Build a GPL wrapper around non-Linux object code D) [non-GPL] Build a Linux-specific, GPL infringing module I have not personally verified if "C" is what nVidia does. Many people I know in the industry says "C" is what nVidia has done, now that they've GPL'd their AGPgart (thanx to Intel no longer enforcing IP on that). But it could be "D". Have no idea what ATI does. > For static linking to GPL? I've not even found a single lawyer who > thinks there is a gray area there. Dynamic linking to the kernel.. > yes. But not static linking. Ummm, last time I checked, "static v. dynamic" _only_ matters in the LGPL, _not_ the GPL. I've followed much of the litigation on this matter. IANAL, but it's not about "static v. dynamic" but whether or not it is a _derived_work_! Something is _not_ a "derived work," according to Linus himself, if it runs on another OS _unmodified_ in binary form. > actually the test here is not "derived work". Derived work matters > for clause 3 but not for clause 2. That's where there is a > difference between static and dynamic linking. Static linking > doesn't "need" the derived work part. Again, I think you have the GPL v. LGPL confused. Furthermore, what's the difference if you have kernel (GPL) + module ndiswrapper (GPL) + NDIS driver (non-GPL) and kernel (GPL) + module whatever (non-GPL). Is that not "dynamically linked" too?!?!?! > And there is a gray area on at what point something stops being for > another OS... like how much are you allowed to change/add in other > code (and mind you, the "glue layer" then cannot be GPL or you > violate clause 2 again, so if your glue layer is derived you have > lost again anyway) Really? Then doesn't that prevent NDIS wrapper too?! -- Bryan J. Smith Professional, Technical Annoyance b.j.smith at ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com -------------------------------------------------- I'm a Democrat. No wait, I'm a Republican. Hmm, it seems I'm just whatever someone disagrees with. From maurice at harddata.com Mon Apr 17 16:28:16 2006 From: maurice at harddata.com (Maurice Hilarius) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 10:28:16 -0600 Subject: Kernel source -- CASE IN POINT (does anyone remember the original thread?) In-Reply-To: <20060417152553.50586.qmail@web34104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060417152553.50586.qmail@web34104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4443C220.5030202@harddata.com> Bryan J. Smith wrote: > Does _anyone_ remember what the _original_ point of this was? > It was _not_ the GeForce, but the _nForce_. > What a funny coincidence: http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-6061491.html -- With our best regards, Maurice W. Hilarius Telephone: 01-780-456-9771 Hard Data Ltd. FAX: 01-780-456-9772 11060 - 166 Avenue email:maurice at harddata.com Edmonton, AB, Canada http://www.harddata.com/ T5X 1Y3 From b.j.smith at ieee.org Mon Apr 17 16:52:42 2006 From: b.j.smith at ieee.org (Bryan J. Smith) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 09:52:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: The Tangent that Won't Die: GeForce and binary LKMs -- WAS: Kernel source (and GPL nForce drivers) In-Reply-To: <4443C220.5030202@harddata.com> Message-ID: <20060417165242.41037.qmail@web34106.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Okay, since help on the GPL nForce drivers has turned into an anal probe of the GPL license and Linux Kernel Modules (LKMs), I guess we can't avoid it. Maurice Hilarius wrote: > What a funny coincidence: > http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-6061491.html Yes. If you follow the LKML, you'll see Linus come in and talk about different modules. Some people have collectively called these "binary/license module exceptions" and that's a skewed name for it. But from AFS to Atheros, he has weighed in on several non-GPL LKMs. Saying "3D acceleration" is like saying "network services." It's a massively open-ended statement that covers _thousands_ of technologies and functions. Graphical Processor Units (GPUs) are _more_complex_ than _any_ CPU these days. You can't just write a "driver" and it works. Furthermore, let us not mistake the fact that there are two (2) _different_ portions to a video driver. There is the kernel-memory interface into the GPU, and then the actual X11 plus GLX (OpenGL on X11) driver. The latter _can_ be closed source. Only the former is an issue with the GPL license of the kernel. IP is the biggest PITA, and it's _unavoidable_ in the GPU world. Also, when I hear the word "proprietary," do you mean proprietary source or standards? OpenGL is an "open standard," with an Architecture Review Board (ARB) and inter-vendor exchange. Yes, ATI and nVidia might handle it different in hardware, but for the most part, OpenGL is OpenGL, and a common interface becomes an ARB implementation and make it into the next revision. Here's the deal, there should be a _common_ interface for kernel-memory interfaces into the GPU. It's in the interest of ATI, Intel and nVidia to work on this. It would help if Intel would open up some of its IP, but it won't for whatever reasons (hence why Intel's Linux driver sucks compared to its Windows). But without opening up the IP, there _should_ be a standard, flexible interface that ATI and nVidia should support. Otherwise you get far worse issues -- like trying to change from the ATI to nVidia driver or vice-versa. Reminds me of conflicting Windows printing drivers. We're the community, and we can provide a solution. The pipe dream is to get an open source GLX driver. It would _still_infringe_ on _hundreds_ of OpenGL and other patents. Many of those owned by you-know-who in Redmond. If anything, ATI and nVidia address that issue. It's either that, or come up with a replacement for OpenGL all-together, while reverse engineering the _thousands_ of function calls into ATI and nVidia hardware. Hardware that _doubles_in_performance_ every 9-12 months. Yes, you heard that right, every 9-12 months! 2x Moore's Law for CPUs. In the time CPUs gain 4x performance, GPUs gain 16x. -- Bryan P.S. Miquel deIcaza's comment about NT 4 drivers working on XP (NT 5.1) was _not_accurate_ with regards to the video driver. In fact, the video driver is one driver for Windows that _always_changes_ with every NT revision. Yes, a NT 4 printer driver might work on NT 5.x (2000/XP), but a video driver for NT 4 does _not_. In fact, one of the few drivers from NT 5.0 (2000) that will not work on NT 5.1 (XP) is the video driver -- Microsoft made changes. Why? Because the kernel-memory interface is very complex, and sacked by a lot of IP. And that's just one _small_ portion of the overall driver for "3D Acceleration." ;-> -- Bryan J. Smith Professional, Technical Annoyance b.j.smith at ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com -------------------------------------------------- I'm a Democrat. No wait, I'm a Republican. Hmm, it seems I'm just whatever someone disagrees with. From mhammerton at gmail.com Mon Apr 17 23:02:38 2006 From: mhammerton at gmail.com (Mark Hammerton) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 19:02:38 -0400 Subject: need help with boot cd Message-ID: <310b80f10604171602i55329367h6e1e204ee6083c03@mail.gmail.com> i finally created a boot cd that will boot up and it uses the ks.cfg file on the cd so it does a complete install with out me beiing there. however after i install it instructs me to reboot and when i go to reboot it doesnt come grub starts to load and but nothing is install except a few folders under the root directory but no files or any of the packages are install before i reboot i checked the red hat installation screen and go this off of it *not all packages in hdlist had order tag File descriptor 3 left open the file descriptor on list from 1 until 31 No volume groups found these ar eth errors that i see on the screen from. can anyone help me out as to what they think my problem may be. everything would be greatly appreciated -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wam at HiWAAY.net Tue Apr 18 02:18:19 2006 From: wam at HiWAAY.net (William A. Mahaffey III) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 21:18:19 -0500 Subject: Kernel source -- CASE IN POINT (does anyone remember the original thread?) In-Reply-To: <20060417152553.50586.qmail@web34104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060417152553.50586.qmail@web34104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <44444C6B.1090804@HiWAAY.net> Bryan J. Smith wrote: >Does _anyone_ remember what the _original_ point of this was? >It was _not_ the GeForce, but the _nForce_. > >It was about nVidia's _nForce_chipset_ drivers, which are 100% GPL. >You have forcedeth, nv_sata and other _GPL_ drivers like i810, 1394, >ALSA, etc... >nVidia puts people on those GPL driver development. >nVidia is probably the most _pro-GPL_ vendor along with Intel >(although I could make cases pro/con for each). > >The fact that this has gone mega-anal, because someone wanted to use >the opportunity about the nForce to bitch about the GeForce, is why >so many people are turned-off to Linux. WE WERE NOT TALKING ABOUT >THE GEFORCE, BUT THE NFORCE! But that doesn't seem to stop people >from starting a "Jihad" about nVidia -- often in _their_ collective >ignorance. > >>From a vendor who has 100% released *ALL* of its technical >specifications on the chipset. ATI doesn't. ViA doesn't. nVidia >_does_! > >The fact that so many Tawainese vendors create endless variants of >MAC+PHY is _not_ nVidia's fault. nVidia works with the kernel team >to add that support to the GPL forcedeth. Don't shoot them because >they also offer the "nvnet" module for those that don't want to >upgrade their kernel, as well as the older "nvsound" for those not >running ALSA. > >In fact, anyone who knows about nVidia and their Xorg/XFree >development knows nVidia puts people on the MIT-licensed 2D driver as >well. nVidia has _never_ horded 2D knowledge of their RAMDAC, scan >converters, etc... but ATI has, Intel has, others have. > >Yes, their kernel-memory (3rd party IP, heavily Intel) and Xorg/XFree >GLX implementation (3rd party IP, heavily Intel, Microsoft, SGI, >etc...). nVidia _tried_ to release the source back for XFree 3.3.x, >and got letters from everyone -- from Intel to Microsoft to others. >But you don't have to use them for just 2D. You can use the MIT >drivers and no kernel-memory driver. > >Which is what most other video cards do anyway -- *0* 3D. >And Intel's Linux driver is so far behind their Windows one. >Largely because they won't open up their own IP. > >But, again, just WTF does this have to do with the _nForce_?!?!?! > >You can't even help someone these days without someone slamming a >fsck'ing pole up your @$$ everytime you try to help them with nVidia. > And 90% of the time it's because of their ignorance on the nForce! > >I love Red Hat, the FSF and the GPL, but I'm sorry, this *BIGOTRY* >has to go! I don't think Linus would approve either. I know it's >only a subset of Red Hat, the FSF, etc... But I'm tired of getting >slamed from just trying to help people (let alone educate them on >forcedeth issues _not_ due to nVidia). > > > > Sorry for starting it all :-). I *knew* it was a bait question/statement about binary drivers/apps/whatever, shoulda left it alone .... -- William A. Mahaffey III ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "The M1 Garand is without doubt the finest implement of war ever devised by man." -- Gen. George S. Patton From b.j.smith at ieee.org Tue Apr 18 12:20:35 2006 From: b.j.smith at ieee.org (Bryan J. Smith) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 08:20:35 -0400 Subject: Kernel source -- CASE IN POINT (does anyone remember the original thread?) In-Reply-To: <44444C6B.1090804@HiWAAY.net> References: <20060417152553.50586.qmail@web34104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <44444C6B.1090804@HiWAAY.net> Message-ID: <1145362835.2840.8.camel@bert64.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> On Mon, 2006-04-17 at 21:18 -0500, William A. Mahaffey III wrote: > Sorry for starting it all :-). I *knew* it was a bait question/statement > about binary drivers/apps/whatever, shoulda left it alone .... No, it wasn't you at all. Here was the chronology: Donminiki asks about the source kernel (to build the nForce against): https://www.redhat.com/archives/amd64-list/2006-April/msg00004.html Arjan makes a comment that the kernel should already have a driver: https://www.redhat.com/archives/amd64-list/2006-April/msg00011.html I expand on why the forcedeth might not work (vendor MAC+PHY combo): https://www.redhat.com/archives/amd64-list/2006-April/msg00012.html Then Arjan makes an assumption, lashes at nVidia for _mainboard_vendor_ created issues (which nVidia _does_ work with the kernel team on): https://www.redhat.com/archives/amd64-list/2006-April/msg00013.html Yes, you asked your question here, but it was already too late: https://www.redhat.com/archives/amd64-list/2006-April/msg00014.html Tamal added to the non-sense here too: https://www.redhat.com/archives/amd64-list/2006-April/msg00015.html And I got a little pissed that yet another anti-nVidia thread had started: https://www.redhat.com/archives/amd64-list/2006-April/msg00016.html I rather _tire_ of people confusing the nForce with the GeForce. I rather _tire_ for nVidia helping people _more_ than ViA and others. They try to solve problems _other_ companies create -- whether it is new MAC+PHY combinations for the network or 3rd party IP (some from Intel no less) they have no control over. I really hate it when I get a pole shouved up my @$$ because I try to explain why a driver may or may not work with an older kernel, and mention the additional option nVidia gives you. Newer kernels will have an updated forcedeth that will work with newer MAC+PHY combinations. Now that I know Arjan works for Intel, it seems a bit hypocritical. It's some of their IP that is the problem. I know he can't do anything about it himself, but it does make it a little more laughable -- and frustrating at the same time. -- Bryan J. Smith Professional, technical annoyance mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com ------------------------------------------------------------ ****** Speed doesn't kill. Difference in speed does! ****** From arjan at fenrus.demon.nl Tue Apr 18 16:24:15 2006 From: arjan at fenrus.demon.nl (Arjan van de Ven) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 18:24:15 +0200 Subject: Kernel source -- CASE IN POINT (does anyone remember the original thread?) In-Reply-To: <1145362835.2840.8.camel@bert64.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> References: <20060417152553.50586.qmail@web34104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <44444C6B.1090804@HiWAAY.net> <1145362835.2840.8.camel@bert64.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> Message-ID: <1145377455.2976.31.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> > Then Arjan makes an assumption, lashes at nVidia for _mainboard_vendor_ > created issues (which nVidia _does_ work with the kernel team on): > https://www.redhat.com/archives/amd64-list/2006-April/msg00013.html no you made the assumption that I was blaming nvidia for not keeping the other driver uptodate. I was blaming having a binary driver at all (or I could even go as far as having an external other driver) for causing users not to report errors or even wanting to help fix things. Different beasts. From maurice at harddata.com Tue Apr 18 17:08:07 2006 From: maurice at harddata.com (Maurice Hilarius) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 11:08:07 -0600 Subject: Kernel source -- CASE IN POINT (does anyone remember the original thread?) In-Reply-To: <1145377455.2976.31.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> References: <20060417152553.50586.qmail@web34104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <44444C6B.1090804@HiWAAY.net> <1145362835.2840.8.camel@bert64.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> <1145377455.2976.31.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Message-ID: <44451CF7.3060300@harddata.com> The beast that would not die.. http://www.zdnetasia.com/news/software/0,39044164,39352584,00.htm -- With our best regards, Maurice W. Hilarius Telephone: 01-780-456-9771 Hard Data Ltd. FAX: 01-780-456-9772 11060 - 166 Avenue email:maurice at harddata.com Edmonton, AB, Canada http://www.harddata.com/ T5X 1Y3 From b.j.smith at ieee.org Tue Apr 18 17:43:26 2006 From: b.j.smith at ieee.org (Bryan J. Smith) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 10:43:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Kernel source -- CASE IN POINT (does anyone remember the original thread?) In-Reply-To: <1145377455.2976.31.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Message-ID: <20060418174326.55088.qmail@web34102.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Arjan van de Ven wrote: > no you made the assumption that I was blaming nvidia for not > keeping the other driver uptodate. I was blaming having a binary > driver at all (or I could even go as far as having an external > other driver) for causing users not to report errors or even > wanting to help fix things. Different beasts. Okay, I stand clarified. But here's the deal. Users expect it to work "out-of-the-box," so most users _do_ report the issue. But don't shoot nVidia for offering another avenue. In fact, was it not Intel that did the same with the e100/e1000 drivers, before it was GPL? I remember a lot of transmitter problems that were solved. ;-> Same issue. And nVidia is quickly moving GPL as fast as they can, just like Intel did. It doesn't happen overnight. There's also the added issue that _unlike_ Intel, nVidia is *NOT* the 800lbs. gorilla that can force everyone to buy _only_ their Intel product. Let's remember that not everyone out there can act like Intel and Microsoft in forcing Tawainese vendors to only use their MAC+PHY combination. In fact, using only Intel's single combination of a MAC+PHY is really more of a side effect of a near-monopoly (Intel) without competition. So don't shoot nVidia for not being "big enough" to do what Intel forces everyone else to do. ;-> -- Bryan J. Smith Professional, Technical Annoyance b.j.smith at ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com -------------------------------------------------- I'm a Democrat. No wait, I'm a Republican. Hmm, it seems I'm just whatever someone disagrees with. From tamal.nath at gmail.com Tue Apr 18 20:04:27 2006 From: tamal.nath at gmail.com (Tamal Kanti Nath) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 01:34:27 +0530 Subject: Kernel source -- CASE IN POINT (does anyone rememberthe original thread?) References: <20060417152553.50586.qmail@web34104.mail.mud.yahoo.com><44444C6B.1090804@HiWAAY.net> <1145362835.2840.8.camel@bert64.oviedo.smithconcepts.com> Message-ID: <005001c66323$4e187a30$0a01a8c0@xp2home> Possibly, I had started the thread. I had made a wrong assumption about nVidia. I am using the generic driver as I was unsuccessful to run the driver. But thanks to Bryan J. Smith for the information about nVidia. Also thanks to other posters. Can you help me about how to configure X (by modifying xorg.conf) ? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan J. Smith" To: "William A. Mahaffey III" Cc: Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 5:50 PM Subject: Re: Kernel source -- CASE IN POINT (does anyone rememberthe original thread?) > On Mon, 2006-04-17 at 21:18 -0500, William A. Mahaffey III wrote: >> Sorry for starting it all :-). I *knew* it was a bait question/statement >> about binary drivers/apps/whatever, shoulda left it alone .... > > No, it wasn't you at all. > > Here was the chronology: > > Donminiki asks about the source kernel (to build the nForce against): > https://www.redhat.com/archives/amd64-list/2006-April/msg00004.html From b.j.smith at ieee.org Tue Apr 18 21:13:01 2006 From: b.j.smith at ieee.org (Bryan J. Smith) Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 14:13:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: OpenGL = IP mindfield, Intel is problem #1, vendors need to adhere to LSB -- WAS: Kernel source In-Reply-To: <005001c66323$4e187a30$0a01a8c0@xp2home> Message-ID: <20060418211301.38488.qmail@web34109.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Tamal Kanti Nath wrote: > Possibly, I had started the thread. Well, regardless who started the thread, I sure know how to finish it off. Sorry I get heated sometimes. nVidia has always done its best to keep up the GPL drivers for the nForce -- from ALSA to NIC to USB. Understand nVidia, unlike Intel, isn't a 800lbs. gorilla. They can't force all Tawainese companies to use only their approved PHY or sick lawyers or make their market life a "living hell" on invalid configurations. nVidia tries to track all those configurations, and get them into the forcedeth _immediately_ when they know about them. But people don't always have the latest kernel with it -- whereas you can download the nVidia package and install it on _any_ kernel. In fact, "integrator choice" is currently the #1 problem with AMD Turion64 on Linux. AMD doesn't sell the whole stack, but lets vendors add value. Intel Centrino is a P3 CPU, i8xx+ICH series chipset, MAC+PHY WLAN, etc... all-in-one. Intel can do that because it has dollars. AMD doesn't. > I had made a wrong assumption about nVidia. It's okay. You aren't rabid like some people. Sorry I sacked you with my 'tude because I just try to help people sometimes and my words just get raped on-line by 3-4 people. Then the tangent is way off -- and I stupidly try to explain things. > I am using the generic driver as I was unsuccessful to run > the driver. > But thanks to Bryan J. Smith for the information about nVidia. nVidia gets bashed for a lot of things that aren't their fault. They *DID* release the NV0x (TNT2/GeForce[1]) source code with _full_ GLX 3D acceleration back in the XFree86 3.3.x days. And Intel, Microsoft and many other lawyers sent "cease'n desist" letters. That source code release was then used for the open source nVidia UtahGLX drivers that did work through some of the NV1x (GeForce2/4MX) models, but none of the NV2x+ (GeForce3/4Ti) on-ward. Some of the kernel-memory code is IP of Intel. In fact, nVidia's Linux AGPgart became _GPL_ and went into the stock kernel the second Intel stopped enforcing their IP on it. The nVidia AGPgart is _much_more_stable_ than other chipsets. That's the _only_ part that has to be GPL -- that kernel-memory interface module. XFree/Xorg allows binary modules for all the GLX functions, and the nVidia license on their libGL allows dynamic linking. I think it's time the community gets off the rabid anti-proprietary and realize: A. OpenGL/GLX _is_ an "open standard" with board committee B. There needs to be a _standard_ mechanism for kernel-memory control C. There needs to be a _standard_ mechanism for "alternative" libGL With regards to "A," yes, it's not "open source." But it is *NOT* "proprietary standard." In fact, because OpenGL is an IP minefield, by letting the OpenGL library/driver be "closed source" from companies that have IP arrangements with Intel, Microsoft, SGI and others, we _avoid_ sacking the community with countless IP litigation. The _only_ way to avoid that is to come up with an _alternative_ to OpenGL. And even then, some OpenGL technology patents _will_ overlap. Now "B" is clearly on _Intel_ for the most part. It affects _both_ ATI and nVidia. Hell, if we didn't use PC compatible, "clusterfsck" interfaces that make a peripheral bus look like a CPU -- and adopted a _real_ system interconnect like AMD HyperTransport with _real_ I/O MMU in the CPU itself (with the GPU as a _peer_ processor on the _same_ interconnect) -- we would *NOT* have to play stupid games like Intel does with kernel-memory-peripheral mapping. But AMD doesn't have the R&D dollars to influence other companies like Intel -- so we're stuck with Intel's utter-lack of a _real_ system interconnect, and the "clusterfsck" hacks like the kernel-memory interface. And that crap is protected by IP. As an EE with a focus on computer architecture, I'm really tired of Intel's use of a 12 year-old interconnect/CPU making life hell -- AMD figured this crap out 6 years ago, in a way that _removes_ the need for these hacks. Now "C" could be solved by ATI, Matrox and nVidia using the "alternatives" subsystem. The Linux Standard Base (LSB) could be a little less vague on using "alternatives." > Also thanks to other posters. Can you help me about how to > configure X (by modifying xorg.conf) ? Why not use the system-config-* program? -- Bryan J. Smith Professional, Technical Annoyance b.j.smith at ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com -------------------------------------------------- I'm a Democrat. No wait, I'm a Republican. Hmm, it seems I'm just whatever someone disagrees with. From mhammerton at gmail.com Thu Apr 20 19:38:44 2006 From: mhammerton at gmail.com (Mark Hammerton) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 15:38:44 -0400 Subject: Stripping down red hat cds Message-ID: <310b80f10604201238t4a637d71laf0d07290d3b6393@mail.gmail.com> I wanted to created a single RHEL v4 CD {down from 5cds} during the installation i know which packages i need however i want to know which rpms would i need to keep such as including and fixing dependeencies so i can do a base instal from one cd or one jump drive. I can show you the ks.cfg file so you can see which pacages i need -- my LAN is your LAN -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mhammerton at gmail.com Thu Apr 20 19:40:28 2006 From: mhammerton at gmail.com (Mark Hammerton) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 15:40:28 -0400 Subject: Stripping down red hat cds Message-ID: <310b80f10604201240s104649edsb15db64058b9428a@mail.gmail.com> I wanted to created a single RHEL v4 CD {down from 5cds} during the installation i know which packages i need however i want to know which rpms would i need to keep such as including and fixing dependeencies so i can do a base instal from one cd or one jump drive. I can show you the ks.cfg file so you can see which pacages i need -- my LAN is your LAN -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From maurice at harddata.com Tue Apr 25 14:47:36 2006 From: maurice at harddata.com (Maurice Hilarius) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 08:47:36 -0600 Subject: OpenGL = IP mindfield, Intel is problem #1, vendors need to adhere to LSB -- WAS: Kernel source In-Reply-To: <20060418211301.38488.qmail@web34109.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060418211301.38488.qmail@web34109.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <444E3688.7030600@harddata.com> Bryan J. Smith wrote: > .. > > Well, regardless who started the thread, I sure know how to finish it > off. Sorry I get heated sometimes. > > I think it is time to "throw another log on the fire" I recently received an email from Kevin Carmony of the company called "Linspire" (formerly Lindows). Here is a quote from that email: > However, there is a very important reason why I'm so happy with Linux > today. In addition to the things I mentioned above, Linux works for me > because I can play .mp3 files on my iPod, watch a DVD movie on my > laptop, use Java, Flash and Real. I can view movie trailers on the web > with Apple's QuickTime, and view and print Adobe .pdf files. I have > advanced 3D support for my nVidia and ATI graphic cards. However, what > many may not understand, is that for me to enjoy all of these things, > Linspire uses legally licensed, proprietary codecs, drivers and > software from third-party companies. Without utilizing this software, > Linux is right back where I started five years ago: unusable. > > .. > Here in this Linspire Letter, however, I'd like to discuss the main > reason the Freespire announcement is such big news. Yes, it's great > that Freespire is "free" (as in it doesn't cost anything to download > it), but that's not really why we named it Freespire. We mostly like > the name Freespire because Freespire offers "freedom of choice." You > see, Freespire is the first free, community-driven Linux to provide > the option of including proprietary drivers in the core distribution. > > Freespire is very unique for open source Linux distributions, in that > it will allow users the choice to download a version that is 100% > open-source OR one that includes proprietary software. Freespire is > venturing into new territory by offering a free community Linux > operating system that includes the option for legally licensed > proprietary software pieces at its core distribution. Without this > choice, desktop Linux's market adoption will continue its slow creep > toward mainstream acceptance. > > .. > > I know there will be some who will abhor the idea of offering > proprietary software to be used next to open source, but I honestly > believe it's time to take a realistic approach. The world just isn't > going to throw away their millions of iPods, or stop watching DVDs. > Until viable alternatives emerge, Linux needs to offer a total, usable > experience. Freespire doesn't force any proprietary code on anyone, it > simply gives them that choice as an option. > Some links: http://www.freespire.org/ http://www.freespire.org/support/faqs Freespire Community Project: http://www.freespire.org/community -- With our best regards, Maurice W. Hilarius Telephone: 01-780-456-9771 Hard Data Ltd. FAX: 01-780-456-9772 11060 - 166 Avenue email:maurice at harddata.com Edmonton, AB, Canada http://www.harddata.com/ T5X 1Y3 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From b.j.smith at ieee.org Tue Apr 25 15:05:07 2006 From: b.j.smith at ieee.org (Bryan J. Smith) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 08:05:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Offering legally licensed software as optional download for distros -- WAS: OpenGL = IP mindfield In-Reply-To: <444E3688.7030600@harddata.com> Message-ID: <20060425150507.32847.qmail@web34105.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Maurice Hilarius wrote: > I think it is time to "throw another log on the fire" > ... cut ... > "Freespire is the first free, community-driven Linux to > provide the option of including proprietary drivers in > the core distribution." I think the greater question of _any_ project is if its worth legally licensing any such codecs, technologies, etc... and offering them as an _optional_ download -- but _never_ included in the CD. That avoids some of the "redistribution" issue, offering a "repository" where people _individually_ download from has agree to terms by doing so. Right now, Fedora has the _unofficial_/_unsanctioned_ Livna.ORG YUM repository. The mere fact that it exists says that a _significant_ number of Fedora users want this. So it might be worthwhile to at least investigate what the greater Fedora Foundation, or even Red Hat itself, can do to ensure that end-users are _not_ installing unlicensed software -- and maybe offer another path. I still _strongly_ believe that Fedora Core/Extras itself should _always_ 100% redistributable distribution. There should _never_ be such software included with the CD. That _removes_ 100% of the indemification issues. E.g., indemification is the main reason why I have to _confiscate_ 99% of Knoppix CDs when people bring them to work -- because they have _unlicensed_ software. Regardless, I think there needs to be a "click through" facility added to YUM that allows users to agree to terms when downloading select packages from select repositories. That would be a nice option that might open up Adobe, Macromedia and other vendors to offering their own, _direct_ YUM repositories -- if YUM itself had this facility build-in. Just my $0.02 ... -- Bryan J. Smith Professional, Technical Annoyance b.j.smith at ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com -------------------------------------------------- I'm a Democrat. No wait, I'm a Republican. Hmm, it seems I'm just whatever someone disagrees with. From tamal.nath at gmail.com Tue Apr 25 15:28:51 2006 From: tamal.nath at gmail.com (Tamal Kanti Nath) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 20:58:51 +0530 Subject: OpenGL = IP mindfield, Intel is problem #1, vendors need to adhere to LSB -- WAS: Kernel source References: <20060418211301.38488.qmail@web34109.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <444E3688.7030600@harddata.com> Message-ID: <000c01c6687c$f9d61c70$0a01a8c0@xp2home> Freespire supports MP3, Windows Media, QuickTime, Java, Flash, Real, nVidia drivers, Adobe Acrobat Reader. That is something like what SuSE 10.0 offers. So, what is special in Freespire ? ----- Original Message ----- From: Maurice Hilarius To: amd64-list at redhat.com Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2006 8:17 PM Subject: Re: OpenGL = IP mindfield, Intel is problem #1, vendors need to adhere to LSB -- WAS: Kernel source Freespire is very unique for open source Linux distributions, in that it will allow users the choice to download a version that is 100% open-source OR one that includes proprietary software. Freespire is venturing into new territory by offering a free community Linux operating system that includes the option for legally licensed proprietary software pieces at its core distribution. Without this choice, desktop Linux's market adoption will continue its slow creep toward mainstream acceptance. http://www.freespire.org/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From b.j.smith at ieee.org Tue Apr 25 15:43:27 2006 From: b.j.smith at ieee.org (Bryan J. Smith) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 08:43:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: OpenGL = IP mindfield, Intel is problem #1, vendors need to adhere to LSB -- WAS: Kernel source In-Reply-To: <000c01c6687c$f9d61c70$0a01a8c0@xp2home> Message-ID: <20060425154327.49781.qmail@web34105.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Tamal Kanti Nath wrote: > Freespire supports MP3, Windows Media, QuickTime, Java, Flash, > Real, nVidia drivers, Adobe Acrobat Reader. That is something like > what SuSE 10.0 offers. So, what is special in Freespire ? Is this what OpenSuSE offers, in a freely downloadble CD/repository? Or just what SuSE offers, in a _retail_ box? *HUGE* difference! It means Linspire has secured the legal rights to _freely_redistribute_ the software without charge or signed agreement. -- Bryan J. Smith Professional, Technical Annoyance b.j.smith at ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com -------------------------------------------------- I'm a Democrat. No wait, I'm a Republican. Hmm, it seems I'm just whatever someone disagrees with. From lamont at gurulabs.com Tue Apr 25 17:03:02 2006 From: lamont at gurulabs.com (Lamont R. Peterson) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 11:03:02 -0600 Subject: OpenGL = IP mindfield, Intel is problem #1, vendors need to adhere to LSB -- WAS: Kernel source In-Reply-To: <000c01c6687c$f9d61c70$0a01a8c0@xp2home> References: <20060418211301.38488.qmail@web34109.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <444E3688.7030600@harddata.com> <000c01c6687c$f9d61c70$0a01a8c0@xp2home> Message-ID: <200604251103.03028.lamont@gurulabs.com> On Tuesday 25 April 2006 09:28am, Tamal Kanti Nath wrote: > Freespire supports MP3, Windows Media, QuickTime, Java, Flash, Real, nVidia > drivers, Adobe Acrobat Reader. That is something like what SuSE 10.0 > offers. So, what is special in Freespire ? Actually, Adobe Reader (they've dropped the work "Acrobat" from it) is freely redistributable. it's license, however, is *_not_* open source compatible [ http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php ]. When you install SUSE LINUX 10.0 (or 9.3 or 9.2 or any older versions that include Adobe Reader) you have to agree to the Adobe EULA either before the installation begins and when each user runs Adobe Reader for the first time, or just when each user launches it. This is perfectly legal and Red Hat could *legally* include Adobe Reader in a similar fashion. However, I don't think they should. Despite the fact that it would be "legal" to redistribute the binary, it's still not open source. *Everything* in Fedora and RHEL is open source. Yes, I know; Red Hat's RHN Proxy Server and RHN Satellite Server products are not open source. They are the only two exceptions and I have no problem with them being that way. -- Lamont R. Peterson Senior Instructor Guru Labs, L.C. [ http://www.GuruLabs.com/ ] GPG Key fingerprint: F98C E31A 5C4C 834A BCAB 8CB3 F980 6C97 DC0D D409 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From b.j.smith at ieee.org Tue Apr 25 17:19:15 2006 From: b.j.smith at ieee.org (Bryan J. Smith) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 10:19:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: 100% redistributable software repositories ("official" Fedora Third Party?) -- WAS: OpenGL In-Reply-To: <200604251103.03028.lamont@gurulabs.com> Message-ID: <20060425171915.4978.qmail@web34112.mail.mud.yahoo.com> "Lamont R. Peterson" wrote: > Actually, Adobe Reader (they've dropped the work "Acrobat" from it) > is freely redistributable. It is freely redistributable, not merely just freely downloadable? If this is the case, then why isn't it at least in Livna.ORG? [ Thanx for the heads-up and correcting my ignorance ] > When you install SUSE LINUX 10.0 (or 9.3 or 9.2 or any older > versions that include Adobe Reader) you have to agree to the Adobe > EULA either before the installation begins and when each user runs > Adobe Reader for the first time, or just when each user launches > it. Yes, I've run into that myself. That's actually an _ideal_ model to use for "click-through" when it comes to end-user software. > This is perfectly legal and Red Hat could *legally* include Adobe > Reader in a similar fashion. However, I don't think they should. > Despite the fact that it would be "legal" to redistribute the > binary, it's still not open source. *Everything* in Fedora and > RHEL is open source. I agree with you when it comes to Fedora Core, Extras and the CDs. *HOWEVER*, I think it's time that Red Hat and the Fedora Foundation look at fostering a repository _separate_ from Livna.ORG where 100% freely redistributable software can be tapped. > Yes, I know; Red Hat's RHN Proxy Server and RHN Satellite Server > products are not open source. They are the only two exceptions > and I have no problem with them being that way. I'm not considering at Red Hat's RHEL/subscription developments. That's an argumentative viewpoint some people have and like to make. I can appreciate what Red Hat does, for the good of the community. I'm just concerned with Fedora. I 100% understand and appreciate why Fedora Core/Extras have their guidelines -- but I think it's time that Red Hat takes a more active role in "Fedora Third Party" where vendors can drop off 100% redsitritand _not_ just leave it to Livna.ORG. Livna.ORG is a legal nightmare. It's fine and I personally use it at home. But I _never_ use it in a corporate environment, as it would be a major indemification issue -- much like 99% of Knoppix variants. It would be nice to have a "Fedora Third Party" repository full of 100% redistributable software. -- Bryan J. Smith Professional, Technical Annoyance b.j.smith at ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com -------------------------------------------------- I'm a Democrat. No wait, I'm a Republican. Hmm, it seems I'm just whatever someone disagrees with. From mrtrashtalk at gmx.net Thu Apr 27 14:10:50 2006 From: mrtrashtalk at gmx.net (Andreas Gapel) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 16:10:50 +0200 (MEST) Subject: redhat el 3.x WS 64 Bit Version Message-ID: <10395.1146147050@www058.gmx.net> We have the 30-day test-subscription to the Redhat Network. We would like to install RH 3.x on our dual-opteron system. I read in this list, that the 64-bit versions (x86_64) are on a separate set of CDs. In the download section I cannot find 64 bit version of the CDs. Is there a 64bit version of RH EL 3 WS, and can you access it with a evaluation subscription ?? -- Analog-/ISDN-Nutzer sparen mit GMX SmartSurfer bis zu 70%! Kostenlos downloaden: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/smartsurfer From George.Liu at noaa.gov Thu Apr 27 16:12:21 2006 From: George.Liu at noaa.gov (George Liu) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 11:12:21 -0500 Subject: amd64-list Digest, Vol 26, Issue 19 In-Reply-To: <20060427160007.223F3737F2@hormel.redhat.com> References: <20060427160007.223F3737F2@hormel.redhat.com> Message-ID: <4450ED65.4000704@noaa.gov> amd64-list-request at redhat.com wrote: >Send amd64-list mailing list submissions to > amd64-list at redhat.com > >To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/amd64-list >or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > amd64-list-request at redhat.com > >You can reach the person managing the list at > amd64-list-owner at redhat.com > >When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >than "Re: Contents of amd64-list digest..." > > >Today's Topics: > > 1. redhat el 3.x WS 64 Bit Version (Andreas Gapel) > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Message: 1 >Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 16:10:50 +0200 (MEST) >From: "Andreas Gapel" >Subject: redhat el 3.x WS 64 Bit Version >To: amd64-list at redhat.com >Message-ID: <10395.1146147050 at www058.gmx.net> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > >We have the 30-day test-subscription to the Redhat Network. We would like to >install RH 3.x on our dual-opteron system. > >I read in this list, that the 64-bit versions (x86_64) are on a separate set >of CDs. In the download section I cannot find 64 bit version of the CDs. > >Is there a 64bit version of RH EL 3 WS, and can you access it with a >evaluation subscription ?? > > > you should see 64-bit versions in "Full Software Channel List". BTW, while EL4 is out for more than 1 year with lots of advantages, I suggest you to install EL4 verison. --George From George.Liu at noaa.gov Thu Apr 27 19:49:36 2006 From: George.Liu at noaa.gov (George Liu) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:49:36 -0500 Subject: amd64-list Digest, Vol 26, Issue 19 In-Reply-To: <30502.1146166404@www024.gmx.net> References: <4450ED65.4000704@noaa.gov> <30502.1146166404@www024.gmx.net> Message-ID: <44512050.5000803@noaa.gov> andreas gapel wrote: >>--- Urspr?ngliche Nachricht --- >>Von: George Liu >>An: amd64-list at redhat.com, mrtrashtalk at gmx.net >>Betreff: Re: amd64-list Digest, Vol 26, Issue 19 >>Datum: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 11:12:21 -0500 >> >>amd64-list-request at redhat.com wrote: >> >> >> >>>Send amd64-list mailing list submissions to >>> amd64-list at redhat.com >>> >>>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/amd64-list >>>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >>> amd64-list-request at redhat.com >>> >>>You can reach the person managing the list at >>> amd64-list-owner at redhat.com >>> >>>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >>>than "Re: Contents of amd64-list digest..." >>> >>> >>>Today's Topics: >>> >>> 1. redhat el 3.x WS 64 Bit Version (Andreas Gapel) >>> >>> >>>---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>>Message: 1 >>>Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 16:10:50 +0200 (MEST) >>>From: "Andreas Gapel" >>>Subject: redhat el 3.x WS 64 Bit Version >>>To: amd64-list at redhat.com >>>Message-ID: <10395.1146147050 at www058.gmx.net> >>>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >>> >>>We have the 30-day test-subscription to the Redhat Network. We would like >>> >>> >>to >> >> >>>install RH 3.x on our dual-opteron system. >>> >>>I read in this list, that the 64-bit versions (x86_64) are on a separate >>> >>> >>set >> >> >>>of CDs. In the download section I cannot find 64 bit version of the CDs. >>> >>>Is there a 64bit version of RH EL 3 WS, and can you access it with a >>>evaluation subscription ?? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>you should see 64-bit versions in "Full Software Channel List". BTW, >>while EL4 is out for more than 1 year with lots of advantages, I suggest >>you to install EL4 verison. >> >>--George >> >> >> > > >Thanks, > >I found the CDs. I tried to install Version 4.0 on the machine, but it hangs >during configuration (after the packages have been installed). > > > Try the most recent version that is RHEL4 U3 as of today. Also, try to change rhgb to norhgb in grub.conf or pass it in when reboot. I did see rhgb hung the system if X is used. If OS installation doesn't complete, suggest to reinstall to avoid other unpredictable problems later. --George