sitor

Gnubie,

If you ant to be between the first to have the latest there are two options:

1 Get unstable (like cooker).

2. Pay (like club contribution).

Ciao,

Sitor

Obscure,

It seems not possible to do the normal update from the MCC. However it is possible to add a update source via urpmi (in any case via the club, but it seems to me via Easy urpmi as well. If you use the MCC and select the install module, indicate you want oly the medim repository of the update source you have indicate to urpmi as update source, you get alle packages for which an update exists. Not a direct way for the update, but it works.

Should think that the whole update should work soon now.

Ciao,

Sitor

OK, so it looks like I don't need to start downloading right away. Sounds like I'd better stick to CE myself (that looks like what I can commit to next to a Mandrake club membership, cooker is a little bit too far for me, thank you).

Already did the update. Waw, I'm so happy the mirors are up again.

Ciao,

Sitor

Yes! Open Source is great!

Speak and you will be heard. In this case not by God but by Götz:

Thanks Gôtz. The club-internet.fr does the trick indeed. I was finally

able to install avidemux. What will the new avidemux package bring? Will

all apps depending on avidemux still work with it?

 

Ciao,

 

Sitor

 

 

On Wed, 2004-04-14 at 15:27, Goetz Waschk wrote:

> Am Mi 14 Apr 2004 15:23:53 GMT schrieb Sitor:

> > Unfortunately, this does not seem to work for me.

> > I have tested different sources, and always get the same result as

> > before. It seems the libxvid2 package is not on the mirrors (yet?):

>

> club-internet.fr has libxvid2, but you can also wait for the new

> avidemux package which uses libxvid4.

Why does everyone want the ISO's immediately? Most of you guys already installed 10.0 CE, so if the mirrors go up and you update it, it should be the same as 10.0 OE. Or am I wrong?

Does it make sense to put 10.0 OE over a 10.0 CE?

Ciao,

Sitor

Hello guys,

For all those with the same problem, here is a copy of my latest mail on the plf mailing list regarding the issue. Just to keep you informed. Seems like not a real serious problem, so I guess it will not take too long before it gets fixed.

Götz,

 

Unfortunately, this does not seem to work for me.

 

I have tested different sources, and always get the same result as

before. It seems the libxvid2 package is not on the mirrors (yet?):

 

      # urpmi libxvid2

        no package named libxvid2

 

This was after changing (and thus updating source).

 

I tried to use the zarb source (as I guess this is the original that is

mirrored), but there I get this result:

 

# urpmi.addmedia plf ftp://knight.zarb.org/pub/plf/mandrake/

10.0 with hdlist.cz

added medium plf

examining synthesis file [/var/lib/urpmi/synthesis.hdlist.Installation

CD 1 (x86

) (cdrom1).cz]

examining synthesis file [/var/lib/urpmi/synthesis.hdlist.Installation

CD 3 (x86

) (cdrom3).cz]

examining synthesis file [/var/lib/urpmi/synthesis.hdlist.Installation

CD 4 (x86

) (cdrom4).cz]

examining synthesis file [/var/lib/urpmi/synthesis.hdlist.Installation

CD 2.cz]

retrieving source hdlist (or synthesis) of "plf"...

    ftp://knight.zarb.org/pub/plf/mandrake/10.0/hdlist.cz

...retrieving failed: curl: (9) Couldn't cd to 10.0

    ftp://knight.zarb.org/pub/plf/mandrake/10...hesis.hdlist.cz

...retrieving failed: curl: (9) Couldn't cd to 10.0

    ftp://knight.zarb.org/pub/plf/mandrake/ba...hesis.hdlist.cz

...retrieving failed: curl: (9) Couldn't cd to base

    ftp://knight.zarb.org/pub/plf/mandrake/sy...hesis.hdlist.cz

...retrieving failed: curl: (13) Given file does not exist

    ftp://knight.zarb.org/pub/plf/mandrake/ba...esis.hdlist1.cz

...retrieving failed: curl: (9) Couldn't cd to base

    ftp://knight.zarb.org/pub/plf/mandrake/ba...esis.hdlist2.cz

...retrieving failed: curl: (9) Couldn't cd to base

    ftp://knight.zarb.org/pub/plf/mandrake/sy...esis.hdlist1.cz

...retrieving failed: curl: (13) Given file does not exist

    ftp://knight.zarb.org/pub/plf/mandrake/sy...esis.hdlist2.cz

...retrieving failed: curl: (13) Given file does not exist

    ftp://knight.zarb.org/pub/plf/mandrake/10...esis.hdlist1.cz

...retrieving failed: curl: (9) Couldn't cd to 10.0

    ftp://knight.zarb.org/pub/plf/mandrake/10...esis.hdlist2.cz

...retrieving failed: curl: (9) Couldn't cd to 10.0

    ftp://knight.zarb.org/pub/plf/mandrake/10.0/hdlist.cz

...retrieving failed: curl: (9) Couldn't cd to 10.0

    ftp://knight.zarb.org/pub/plf/mandrake/base/hdlist.cz

...retrieving failed: curl: (9) Couldn't cd to base

    ftp://knight.zarb.org/pub/plf/mandrake/hdlist.cz

...retrieving failed: curl: (13) Given file does not exist

    ftp://knight.zarb.org/pub/plf/mandrake/base/hdlist1.cz

...retrieving failed: curl: (9) Couldn't cd to base

    ftp://knight.zarb.org/pub/plf/mandrake/base/hdlist2.cz

...retrieving failed: curl: (9) Couldn't cd to base

    ftp://knight.zarb.org/pub/plf/mandrake/hdlist1.cz

...retrieving failed: curl: (13) Given file does not exist

    ftp://knight.zarb.org/pub/plf/mandrake/hdlist2.cz

...retrieving failed: curl: (13) Given file does not exist

    ftp://knight.zarb.org/pub/plf/mandrake/10.0/hdlist1.cz

...retrieving failed: curl: (9) Couldn't cd to 10.0

    ftp://knight.zarb.org/pub/plf/mandrake/10.0/hdlist2.cz

...retrieving failed: curl: (9) Couldn't cd to 10.0

retrieval of source hdlist (or synthesis) failed

no hdlist file found for medium "plf"

examining synthesis file [/var/lib/urpmi/synthesis.hdlist.plf.cz]

problem reading synthesis file of medium "plf"

unable to update medium "plf"

 

I read somewhere that normal users would not get access anymore directly

to this source, because of overload problems, so I guess that is the

reason. Otherwise the Easy URPMI gives wrong reference to the hdlist

location.

 

Ciao,

 

Sitor

 

On Wed, 2004-04-14 at 08:07, Goetz Waschk wrote:

> Am Di 13 Apr 2004 21:02:41 GMT schrieb Sitor:

> > To come to the core of the message: I'm having a dependency problem with

> > avidemux-2.0.16-1plf.i586, and I seem not to be the only one:

> >      Sorry the following packages can't be selected:

> >      avidemux-2.0.16-1plf.i586 (due to unsatisfied libxvidcore.so.2)

>

> Hi,

>

> libxvid2 was removed from the server by accident, I've reuploaded the

> libxvid2 package, so this should work again.

>

> CU, Götz

I think the article is fair enough for it's intentions: check whether normal computer users would be able to make the switch to Linux, and if it would make sense for them.

The outcome is not too bad either. Three out of three were able to do most stuff with their computer they wanted it to do, and none said they would go back to Windoze and not use it anymore. So it shows it is possible, and it does make sense.

Of course it would have been much better if the people who started this test first sought some more information to help the newbies (like the website from aRTee, this board, etc.) so that the experience would have been more optimal. This would also have been more realistic, as someone who would do this from own will (not as a given mission) would have done so.

A pitty the site does not offer any room for comments.

All in all the latest message that is given is that a person that is not very computer literate prefers Mandrake over Windoze, so that anyone could give it a try. And the latest message is the most important, it sticks best.

Of course there should be more reasons for people to do the effort to switch, so I hope that M$ and the others will increase their efforts to fight against illegal copies of their software. That is the best marketing Linux can get.

Ciao,

Sitor

Looks nice. Prices are not really low though (in my opinion). I couldn't find anything on synchronisation with PC software (especially for the calendar and e-mail this is quite important for most people).

But of course, it is very interesting to see a Linux only development in a big market as India.

Ciao,

Sitor

William,

Have a look at this thread on how to configure Kino to export edited video back to tape. Could save you some time.

Ciao,

Sitor

I got it solved myself. From what I found on the Kino website (see first post of the thread), I understood that on the 2.6 kernel you need to use the dv1394 driver, not the video1394 driver. In the <Preferences> window, the <IEEE 1394> tab, the DV Export driver is set by default to video 1394. If you change it to dv1394, it does not automatically change the device to use. After indicating it to use the device "/dev/ieee1394/dv/host0/PAL/in" instead of the by default indicated "/dev/video1394", everything just worked like a charm. I already edited my first home movie and exported it back to the tape last night.

Probably indicates how newbie I still am that I didn't realize this from the start. But there are still a lot of newbies out there that would have problems with this as well, so I wanted to note it for them to find it. And I'm very happy myself that I do not need to boot in Windoze for this!

Ciao,

Sitor

Really no-one?

I would really hate to have to admit to my wife I need to use winbloze for this.

psycho-killer,

Wasn't laughing at you, rather at myself, since when I have a lock-up, I do use the reboot (I'm only a newbie myself, and to be honest too lazy to go looking for what file to change or delete).

Ciao,

Wim

Just send a mail to a PLF mailing list. I hope that is the right way to do it. We'll see what that gives. And I can try of course to install it with the nodeps, but I prefer not to (to keep things clean).

In any case, already a big thanks for all the help.

Ciao,

Sitor

 [wim@localhost wim]$ urpmf avidemux
gstreamer-avi:/usr/lib/gstreamer-0.6/libgstavidemux.so
gstreamer-avi:/usr/lib/gstreamer-0.6/libgstavidemux.so
avidemux:/usr/bin/avidemux2
avidemux:/usr/lib/menu/avidemux
avidemux:/usr/share/doc/avidemux-2.0.16
avidemux:/usr/share/doc/avidemux-2.0.16/AUTHORS
avidemux:/usr/share/doc/avidemux-2.0.16/COPYING
avidemux:/usr/share/doc/avidemux-2.0.16/History
avidemux:/usr/share/doc/avidemux-2.0.16/INSTALL
avidemux:/usr/share/doc/avidemux-2.0.16/README
avidemux:/usr/share/doc/avidemux-2.0.16/TODO
avidemux:/usr/share/icons/avidemux.png
avidemux:/usr/share/icons/large/avidemux.png
avidemux:/usr/share/icons/mini/avidemux.png
avidemux:/usr/share/locale/fr/LC_MESSAGES/avidemux.mo
avidemux:/usr/share/locale/klingon/LC_MESSAGES/avidemux.mo
gstreamer-avi:/usr/lib/gstreamer-0.6/libgstavidemux.so

What do you mean by getting a newer avidemux? Compiling from source? I just tried to install DVDTitler from source. Wow man, will take some time before I try something like that again. Once you solve one problem, there is another.

If that is what you mean, I fear I will need someone to hold my hand.

In the past I had similar probs with shared library versions not being present. Up till now, creating a symlink always worked. Any idea why it does not this time?

Anyone a suggestion on how to get this solved?

Ciao,

Sitor

Or for the lazy or very newbies among us, what also seems to work is a reboot.

Yeah, yeah, I know. That is not the linux way. It is just way easier to remember.

Ciao,

Sitor

I did try with the copy instead of the symlink and it gives exactly the same result. The libxvidcore.so.2 is still not recognized. What next? Anyone who has suggestions?

Sitor

Scoopy,

I do have already PLF as a urpmi source. That is why this is so annoying. In principle I should have all required packages.

bvc,

[root@localhost wim]# urpmf libxvidcore.so

libxvid4:/usr/lib/libxvidcore.so.4

libxvid4:/usr/lib/libxvidcore.so.4.0

libxvid4-devel:/usr/lib/libxvidcore.so

libxvidcore3:/usr/lib/libxvidcore.so.3

libxvidcore3:/usr/lib/libxvidcore.so.3.0

libxvidcore3-devel:/usr/lib/libxvidcore.so

So he does not recognize the symlink I created. It is indeed present in the same place though:

[root@localhost wim]# ls /usr/lib/libxvid*

/usr/lib/libxvidcore.a* /usr/lib/libxvidcore.so.3@

/usr/lib/libxvidcore.so@ /usr/lib/libxvidcore.so.3.0*

/usr/lib/libxvidcore.so.2@ /usr/lib/libxvidcore.so.4@

/usr/lib/libxvidcore.so.2.0@ /usr/lib/libxvidcore.so.4.0*

I will try to make a copy instead of a symlink. Maybe then it will get recognized?

Let's find out!

Ciao,

Sitor

Hello,

I just recently bought myself a digital camera with the purpose to edit the video on my PC and put it then back on the tape (for long term storage next to a DVD version for viewing). However, it doesn't work with Kino on MDK 10.0 CE. I searched a bit on the problem, and found the following on the Kino site:

#2425, "RE: Kino crashes exporting video 1394"

In response to Reply #0     

 

Exporting with video1394 on kernel 2.6 does not work due to a changed interface on the kernel module. It will work with dv1394 if you use the latest libdv 0.102 because the dv1394.h that comes with libdv was updated for kernel 2.6 (and backwards compatible to kernel 2.4.21 only).

 

Kino will drop support for export using video1394 on the next release, and will only use dv1394.

 

Later this year, I also plan to drop support for dv1394 for both capture and export because a new raw1394 API now has the same advantages of the dv1394. In light of that, the linux1394 team plans to deprecate and eventually phase out the dv1394 module altogether. Don't worry too much about the impact because this new API has actually been available since kernel 2.4.21.

 

Why? Because the years of experience have resulted in new implementations that are robust, simpler, and more generic. This not only reduces the chance for bugs as the kernel interfaces change, but also makes code maintainance easier. However, the biggest benefit is perhaps to the user--less confusing options, one that just works great.

 

In addition, all of this is being done over an extended period of time (roughly, beginning of 2003 to end of 2004) to minimise impact on users and ease migration.

 

+-DRD-+

Kino Developer

It seems that getting DV export to tape only works on a 2.6 kernel with a recompiled version of Kino.

Does anyone know if this was done with the version that ships with MDK 10.0 CE? Anyone that got this to work? Anyone who can help me out? I'm still a newbie, so not at all into compiling and stuff.

Thanks in advance for any help,

Sitor

Just a remark:

There will be no Final Edition. There will be an Official Edition. Might look like a detail, but seen the confusion there has been with the new development cycle, it is very important to use the correct terminology. And your question shows this again. The Community Edition and Official Edition will contain the same packages (only the bugs found will have been removed in the OE). A final edition, would mean the packages might have different versions, but that is not the purpose of the CE - OE.

Ciao,

Sitor

Hello,

I am trying for the moment to install avidemux-2.0.16-1plf.i586. However I'm stuck with the following error:

Sorry the following packages can't be selected:

avidemux-2.0.16-1plf.i586 (due to unsatisfied libxvidcore.so.2)

Thinking that this would help, I already created a symlink libxvidcore.so.2 to libxvidcore.so.4. However no luck.

I googled on the error, but no usefull results.

Anyone who can help me out here?

Thanks in advance,

Sitor

Hello,

Just did the updates an hour ago. During the updates a new version of /etc/inittab was placed. In this the default runlevel was set to 3 (no X). As a result my Mandrake did not start X anymore. Simply changing the runlevel in inittab fixed that.

Not sure if this is the same cause as what you have.

Ciao,

Sitor

It seems that the time in between CE and Official will be smaller (not even a month). In that case, will the bugs really be cleaned enough before Official? Will not a lot of people prefer to wait for those three weeks? In that case the whole point of having a CE might become endangered!

Ciao,

Sitor

Hi,

I'm an IT professional (one of the things I did recently was the technical coördination of the Belgian Electronic Identity card certification services). However I'm not at all ashamed (like a lot of people seem to be) to state that I do prefer GUI heavily over CLI.

As a matter of fact, if I wouldn't have been able to configure my MDK box with GUI tools, I would probably not have been a Linux user and advocate now. I'm not afraid of CLI, mind you. But the learning curve is just to steep, and I have too little time for that. So I use it only if the GUI is insufficient.

Most people do use a computer to get things done. Not to spent hours fiddling with it. I think I'm already way more into fiddling then the average user. So if you think it would be nice that one day the average user will be using Linux, just accept that tools will be needed to make the use of a Linux box as easy as the use of a DVD player. GUI tools are in the good direction.

Saying that people should learn how an OS works is like saying that you should only get a drivers license if you know how to repair a broken car. People do not want that. People want to be able to get from point A to point B, in a comfortable, if possible even luxureous way. And they certainly do not want to need an automechanics diploma to do so.

So yes, I do applaud very much that a tool like YAST might become more wide spread (from what I heard about it, since I've never used it yet). And I'm not at all afraid that Linux will become too uniform. After all, the reason to choose for Linux is just that one always has a choice in the tools to combine. And if YAST becomes GPL, anyone can fork it if there would be a reason.

Ciao,

Sitor

That is a known issue. If I'm not mistaken the solution is by changing something in the BIOS. I think it is mentioned on the 10.0CE Errata page of Mandrakesoft. Have a look there.

Ciao,

Sitor

aRTee,

You are very right that HW support is very important, but I do not think that does mean that you need to create a new version per sé. I should think that it would be possible to include such support in an update.

Anyhow, what I'm saying is that there is a quality issue, and that in order to fix it, more time should be given to people who are willing to test to do so.

Ciao,

Sitor