Re: Excuse me for contacting you directly.
- From: Jesse <Jessebrain ozemail com au>
- To: "netwise" <bartom nwsca com>
- Cc: gnome-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: Excuse me for contacting you directly.
- Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 09:43:03 +1000
yes there is, are you running X from the command line or is it starting
when the machine boots? if it's when the machine boots then you need
to run the command "ln -fs /usr/bin/gdm /etc/X11/prefdm" for gnome,
"ln -fs /usr/bin/kdm /etc/X11/prefdm" for KDE and"ln -fs /usr/X11R6/bin/xdm
for X11 display manager.
This may not fix your problem, merely divert it to another. if it is too small
than run Xconfigurator, go through the steps and select a lower resolution.
And what do you mean "Excuse me for contacting you directly."?
At 08:31 AM 21/07/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Excuse me for contacting you directly. I joined the list but it said my
>was being held for review before posting and I do not know how long that
>Is there some way to stop Gnome from automatically starting once it's
>My x86 install will only run in 1024 x 786 which on a 15 in monitor is
>hard to read.
>(I don't have and can not find the Magnavox SuperVga Monitor sync rates
>it's just not usable with my Mach 32 card.) Because I am very new to
>Linux I need
>Gnome when I can not figure out what I need to do on the command line.
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Jesse <Jessebrain@ozemail.com.au>
>Sent: Friday, July 21, 2000 7:55 AM
>Subject: Re: RH Gnome Sucks ? (For you all to read)
> > Hi.
> > I Have been following linux for years, as I am sure you all have. and
> > I belive the version
> > of gnome released with RH6.0 was not that great, but then again RH 6.0
> > not that great
> > either, it was slow and clunky, but then there was 6.1 which was a
> > improvement,
> > and now 6.2, and I am sure that very few people that work on gnome and
> > RedHat that feel
> > that what Miguel was quoted correctly.
> > Everyone in the Gnome and RedHat team has made a great effort, and
> > would not have
> > come this far without their efforts, and I am grateful for all the
> > everyone else has put in
> > to give me and millions of others out there a tough, reliable and
> > Keep up the good work, and don't let the press get you down, anyway,
> > was the last time
> > you read the truth?? they allways put a spin on it and never ever
> > whole story, just enough
> > for you to jump to a seemingly logical conclusion.
> > Jesse.
> > At 11:51 AM 20/07/00 -0700, you wrote:
> > >Paul Warren wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jul 20, 2000 at 12:41:02PM -0500, Thomas R. Shannon wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, 20 Jul 2000 17:46:41 +0100 you wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > In today's LWN Miguel is quoted as having said that: If you
> > > thinking
> > > > > > that GNOME sucks, however, it's probably "because you are
> > > Red Hat's
> > > > > > version."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I just can't believe the Gnome leader is bashing a company
> > > has always
> > > > > > been so supportive of this project (not only for including
> > > as their
> > > > > > primary desktop but also by producing lots of code for the
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm guessing that he meant a version which was distributed
> > > > > with Red Hat (i.e. an old one).
> > > >
> > > > Yeah, that's what I took it to mean. Quite a common thread of
> > > > conversation, on this list and others:
> > > >
> > > > "Hey Gnome sux"
> > > > "What version you using?"
> > > > "Whatever comes with RH 6"
> > > > "Ah. Upgrade..."
> > > >
> > > > IIRC, RH released 6.0 (or was it 6.1) just before October Gnome,
> > > > was by any measure a massive improvement on what was being shipped
> > > > RH.
> > >
> > >So Miguel was quoted out of context then. What he probably (or
> > >have) said was: "If you think Gnome sucks, you were probably using
> > >version we provided with RH 6.0. Right after RH 6.0 was released, we
> > >made massive improvements to Gnome. Looking back, maybe we should
> > >waited until those improvements were finished before rolling Gnome
> > >with the most popular Linux distribution."
> > >
> > >Not knowing any more about the article and the interviewer, I would
> > >guess off the top of my head that this is just another case of the
> > >trying to whip up a controversy where there really is none. Conflict
> > >sells, almost as much as sex.
> > >
> > >Or, if you're a conspiracy theorist, maybe the interviewer does a lot
> > >side jobs for MSnbc.
> > >
> > >Dan
> > >--
> > >Daniel Lyddy firstname.lastname@example.org
> > >California PATH/UC Berkeley Vision Group
> > >Richmond Field Station, Building 452
> > >1357 S. 46th St, Richmond, CA 94804-4698
> > >tel: +1 (510) 231-5659 fax: +1 (510) 231-5600
> > >url: http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~daniell
> > _______________________________________________
> > gnome-list mailing list
> > email@example.com
> > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-list
] [Thread Prev