Sun Aug 18 16:21:35 NZST 2002
> I didn't write particularly precisely in the first place. The point is that
> the keycodes are so shocking as to render yast useless.
Well, I find them annoying, but wouldn't say useless.
> are so distracting. I still sometimes miss the old vt220. It really
> focussed me on the work when I used it.
There are still 1 or 2 around, but I gave the rest away.
> I was given the rpm files only. I therefore had no choice about having
> correct dir structure, etc. That was all I had to work with. Old yast with
> Suse 7.2 would work with that. New yast2 with Suse 8.0 doesn't. I consider
> that a step backwards.
Likewise. I dropped them a few lines about YOU already. Please do the
> > did upgrade to KDE 3.0.2 with that while running KDE as shipped.
> Interesting. I'm surprised it worked OK.
The update procedure doesn't use that much, and shared libs are only
closed when the program terminates. Until a files is closed, it won't
be deleted, even if it's no longer in the directory (and therefore
unaccessible). rpm itself is linked static, and I guess it gets called
only once with all packages. Heavy use during upgrade is not
recommended though. Rebooting seems like a good idea (well, restarting
> My shell script does more than that. There were problems that
> straightforward use of rpm per package couldn't sort out.
Yes, you can't call rpm with 2 different versions of the same package
(doh). I'd like a copy of your script, I'm getting too annoyed with YOU
as well, and it's dog slow until it even lets you select anything.
Automating this would require automatically removing rpms from the list
if there is a newer version. While that is possible (though I didn't
implement it - time), another problem is that some package names
changed. It's faster to maintain a lastest-packages list manually.
> > As anyone recently pointed out, these days Unix=Linux (unless you go by
> > financial turnover) :))
> Sorry, but I don't accept that.
It was tongue in cheek...
> Yes, I might have a go at that. Another question, why do Suse insist on a
> filter queue that feeds into a raw queue for every printer? Why not just
> set up one queue to a postscript printer.
I don't know. Is it only suse doing that? It would allow you to send
raw data to the remote printer. It may have historic reasons, I read
info on printcap once and boy were they trying to put you off input
filters. Ask suse, and tell them it's annoying you.
> Everything of any interest
> generates postscript, and the only printers of any interest are postscript
Wrong. I just bought a nice Epson photo printer, and it sure doesn't do
postscript. I also suspect that most lower end "postscript" printers
are sold with a software postscript driver (mickey only, of course).
> I suspect I'll end up configuring the printer queues myself instead of using
> yast. Fortunately we already have shell/perl scripts to do that on our
> alphas and so it will be minimal work to modify them for Suse.
I don't quite see your problem. Having a double-queue is maybe not
necessary, but who cares. The jetdirect thing should be easy, get yast
to configure the closest and then tweak a few settings. Still be easier
than starting from scratch.
Something which also should have solved your cups problem is to delete
everything first, and then use yast to put a new cups setup together,
then to fiddle it as you want it.
Volker Kuhlmann is possibly list0570 with the domain in header
http://volker.orcon.net.nz/ Please do not CC list postings to me.
More information about the wlug
NOTICE: This is an archive of a public mailing list. The University of Waikato is not responsible for its contents.