dexter11

Read the error message then click on the link and read that too.

You need a compiler to compile a program even a compiler needs to be compiled usually with the previous version. To solve your problem you need to install gcc from the software repos (install it with the software installer utility).

What do you need that wiki for? Is it for your own purposes or you want to make another wiki for mandrivausers.org? If the latter than mandrivausers.org already has a wiki see https://mandrivausers.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page The link you gave does not work for me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabayon

David Reveman announced the new version of compiz 0.3.4. Some more word about the new features in the announcement; and here's a roadmap, though no estimated times are given there. source: hup.hu

Curl is the downloader which urpmi\rpmdrake uses to download packages by default. You can use an other downloader instead called wget. So try urpmi --wget smart smart-gui ksmarttray and see if that helps.

Try right clicking on kicker somewhere and choose something like configure or properties. No need to edit textfiles if you don't want to do it. It can be done in a GUI.

Ther's no need to write a howto for this. Install smart, smart-gui and ksmarttray if you'd like an update applet. Add mirrors (channels) as you would do with urpmi just choose smart instead of urpmi in easyurpmi or smart-urpmi. Done.

You can try to use wget instead of curl (with the --wget option). But before adding new urpmi sources consider using smart as package manager. The new rpmdrake is a complete rewrite and still doesn't function exactly as it should. Unless you're not afraid of the command line because urpmi works. Were you able to add other sources like main? Or you have this error message with all of them?

That must be a really old howto. You don't need to download swt anymore. Look into the azureus folder you unpacked. Open the azureus script with a text editor. In the beginning of the file you can see this: #!/bin/bash ######## CONFIGURATION OPTIONS ######## JAVA_PROGRAM_DIR="/usr/java/bin/" # use full path to java bin dir, ex. "/usr/java/j2sdk1.4.2/bin/" Modify the JAVA_PROGRAM_DIR path to your needs. Azureus now should start.

And here's a petition to Novell started by Bruce Perens: http://techp.org/petition/show/1

Is that a movie? did you install libdvdcss?

Is the problem only with main\backports or with all the other channels too?

Nope for a analogy look at the IBM bios reverse engineering ... done by AMI, phoenix etc. When AMI first did it they had a complete clean room and another room full of lawyers... Every document passed from anyone who understood IBM bios had to go through lawyers ... and be squeaky clean that is the purpose of the code could be passed but nothing specific about the code itself... Noone who had EVER worked for IBM was allowed on the development team... Samba are presently clean... (one presumes) they can stand up and say nono of the devs has ever seen a line of MS CIFS code... so its a clean re-engineering... Then let's follow this analogy. First SAMBA developers already told their opinion about this deal. Yes I remember you telling me about they have to choose between their job and thier ethics. But 1. Samba is an essential part of all the major distros so they won't let it die 2. not all Samba developers work for Novell, aren't they? So in the unlikely case MS starts to shout they put propietary code in Samba and they proove it in front of the court they take it out in matter of minutes since they have a version tracking system like every project nowadays. So they know exactly who put what into Samba. And I agree with tyme here. Showing a couple of for loops ar any general code is just not enough. You have to proove it comes from your closed source and it's unique. If they choose to develop a closed source application for SUSE, then what? Nothing changes. I don't think so, I think it means (to them) exactly what Balmer says it means...that as far as they are concerned Opensource has a debt of payments. That is they can say they disclosed code merely for the interoperability with their stategic partner Suse/Novell... Suse cannot use that source as is and still be GPL... so they either re engineer it or non GPL it... either of which is bad for the open source community. Well then maybe they don't share code. MS engineers just help test the two system together. Who knows? That's why I think it's too early to critisize this deal. One thing is sure if they share some code it can't be GPL'ed AND only for SUSE. No, lots of people believe MS is corrupt... but they still use the software! I meant the FOSS community. Windows and MACOS users are not relevant in this point of view. This is where I disagree... MS have been trying to kill linux for a long time... however they lack expertise in dealing with an organisation that cannot be purchased, bribed or threatened. MS have successfully set out to break companies simply because they are competition doing what they do best... bribery, threats and perverting the course of justice... Netscape, Corel, stacker and an endless list of companies have been broken... at a cost much higher to MS than any tangible gain. Take netscape... they spent 10's of millions, possibly billions breaking netscape because it competed with a product they don't even charge for... thus zero tangible benefits EXCEPT ... it prevented competitors... like for instance Sun who bundled netscape with Solaris... for a time it provided IE for Solaris (just like it did with Mac) just long enough for people to get used to it and then it pulled the plug... What they have always lacked in linux is something to attack financially... because they cannot compete technically but they have gone after any commercial companies... Take Lindows.... sounds like Windows .. so they took them to court... but there is something fundamentally wrong here... MS didn't invent windows... I was using Dec Windows before DOS existed... who? Dec an ex mutli-million $ company destroyed by MS... and then this goes back via Apple and Xerox... to the point where calling Windows an MS trademark is laughable... but Dec played no hold poker with the worlds richest company and unsurprisingly lost... And this is fundamental to MS... if they can get you to the table they win... they simply have more money by far and the stakes are too high... so what they do is they slip you 10 million or so as a stay quiet payoff and raise the stakes until your choice is loose everything or take the 10M for a company that was worth 500M... Almost all MS IP cases are actually settled out of court... why? Because they include the sweetner in the bitter medicine... walk away now and we won't see you pennyless and homeless ... continue and we won't stop until you can't afford to rent a sleazy hotel room ... You talk about MS like it was an evil person. Well it's not. It's a huge company with a sole purpose of generating profit for its owners but it's not good or bad. They are (MS) sometimes using questionable methods for saving their monopolistic position on the market like any other big company. But this monopoly is giving them hard times too. Think about the EU retributions. I truly believe that they will open source Windows or release their own Linux distro if they think they can earn more money that way. Look at codeplex. That's certainly a huge step from "open source is a communist cancer". MS killed Netscape because they could control the internet technologies that way. They invented the protocols, the big part of the web pages worked only in IE because they were built by their costly web editors (e.g. Front Page) or a web editor which was using their patents therefore payed for them. So it was for profit not from some ill will. Just some correction on Lindows. IIRC all native English speaking contries denied using Windows as a trademark. So Lindows could have used that name in those countries but should have used another name in other coutries like Belgium where Windows become an MS trademark. Not because they sold their soul but because they don't use the word Windows in their everyday life or when they use it they are using it for MS Windows. But I think you understand that as a non-native-English speaker. It's the same in my language too. I admit though that the 20something million $ from MS surely helped to settle the case. But Linspire still exists today. The same for Novell. Suse was the most closed distro out there. With its own closed tools. And even then they had their user base. Then came Novell bought Suse, released YAST code, created OpenSUSE and became the good company. Now they made a deal with the bad company and they become bad too. We still don't know what the technological benefits or disadvantages of this deal are because they only just made it. OTOH they declared they won't sue each other for five years AFAIK. Nothing wrong with that. But in the same time MS and Ballmer made an implication that they will sue everybody else using their so called intellectual property. Whoooooo I'm scared. Come back to me when you won in front of the court against Redhat, IBM, HP and the rest. What's new in this? MS is threatening the FOSS community since it acknowledged its existence. If they have a malice in their minds then its this divide the FOSS community which they are doing now. You know the old Roman expression divide et impera. That's why I think all this "IwontuseSUSEever"s are all childish, foolish etc. Because we don't know yet if it will be harmful for open source yet. I think it won't. And Novell doesn't care because if their systems work better with Windows they can get more money from the companies than from thier OpenSUSE users. So I say people keep using SUSE if that's what fits for you.

And here's what IBM thinks about it: http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS4468266798.html

Yeah love to get hold of one of those.... I'm sure there will be millions for sale on the black market as soon as they are given out. Gee - thanks a laptop can I eat it? does it make clean water? Im betting they will be on sale for half the $100 pretty soon after they are distributed. LOL. My thoughts exactly.

Following this logic Samba developers could already be sued for reverse engeneering the SMB protocol. MS doesn't need a deal for this. If MS shows the SMB protocol or any of their closed specification to an open source developer that means they agree with an open source software using their closed data format. Do you think that Novell is that stupid? Not thinking about an obvious trap like this means they are idiots, which I'm sure they're not otherwise they wouldn't lead a company which worths several billion dollars. Or do you think they are corrupt? They sold out the open source world? Everybody would stop using their software and would start develop from the codebase before the MS deal. So that doesn't make any sense either to me. Besides reading the Novell open letter to the Foss community mean to me that they wanna follow their own way as they did it before. They made a deal, a business with MS and that's all. No need for conspiracy theories. If there's a trap in this agreement somewhere it's much more hidden. What makes sense to me is the spreading of Linux makes MS to acknowledge it. They have to make interoperability better or they out of business in that segment and they don't want that. So "if you can't beat them join them" they make it easyer to work the two system together.

I don't care how it's called if it sticks to it's principles. Already an estimated 1 million computers are using it. There will be much more because the 100$ laptop is using it.

Maybe you missed this: https://mandrivausers.org/index.php?showtopic=36924 I was aware of the letter.... The point is how will this affect the team.... Will core devs have to leave SAMBA because they get paid by Novell? What will happen to core devels who are exposed as part of their paying job at Suse exposed to MS source code. They can no longer develop for SAMBA because they have seen the MS code... SAMBA can not be clean if they have so at some point these devs will be forced to choose between SAMBA and working for MS/Novell Well yes. But if they stick to their word they can choose to leave Novell and join to another distro. Samba is a core component of every enterprise and some non-enterprise distro. They can find another job very easely IMHO. Seriously, anyone or any company puts GPL'ed code into a program the software remains GPL'ed. If they change their mind the old codebase is still GPL'ed. That's the main point of GPL. But of course you aware of this. The responsibility of putting something patented into a software is the person's who gave the code. In other words if MS suddenly realizes they made a mistake they can only delete the code they put into the program, nothing else they can do. Besides I don't think that open source programs don't violate any software patents. In fact I think there are already thousands of software patents are violated, just noone cares until you don't get a dime out of it. AFAIk intellectual property as a legal term does not exists. Anyone knows what it exactly means at all? It's a blury mixture of patents, processes, ideas etc. But if you start to use this term in a court you'll be thrown out very shortly. It sounds very good on press conferences but that's all. It's the invention of the marketing people. So if there's a trap it's more hidden or more complecated or both.

It only supports 121 mobos from 58 vendors, version 1 and 2 alltogether. It's still a small project.

Maybe you missed this: https://mandrivausers.org/index.php?showtopic=36924

More about this here source : hup.hu

I don't think that upgrading from 10.1 to 2007 is supported. Too many things changed between the two release and there were two main release (2005LE and 2006) between the two. As others said before me do a fresh install. Or upgrade to the next release.

Post the output of the following commands: uname -r file /usr/src/linux

Steve Ballmer (Microsoft CEO) was questioned by an audience member "during a session this morning at the Professional Association for SQL Server (PASS) summit in Seattle". Read the question and his answer here. source: hup.hu