17 Mar
2006
17 Mar
'06
2:20 p.m.
Just as an FYI to those of you who might be interested in this...
I have it on good authority that Mark Shuttleworth has been working
towards hosting a multimedia-oriented derivative of Ubuntu, set for
Dapper+1 release time.
I should know more on Monday, after his conference call.
My own speculation is that it will be called "Mubuntu" given this:
Domain name: MUBUNTU.COM
Administrative Contact:
Troup, James hostmaster(a)canonical.com
Dana
17 Mar
17 Mar
2:24 p.m.
On 3/17/06, Dana Olson <dana(a)ubuntustudio.com> wrote:
Just as an FYI to those of you who might be interested
in this...
I have it on good authority that Mark Shuttleworth has been working
towards hosting a multimedia-oriented derivative of Ubuntu, set for
Dapper+1 release time.
I should know more on Monday, after his conference call.
Dana,
Put me down as being very, very interested in this. Be sure to keep
us posted with updates. I would love to help test that out.
--
Josh Lawrence
http://www.hardbop200.com
2:31 p.m.
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 13:22 -0500, Dana Olson wrote:
Just as an FYI to those of you who might be interested
in this...
I have it on good authority that Mark Shuttleworth has been working
towards hosting a multimedia-oriented derivative of Ubuntu, set for
Dapper+1 release time.
I should know more on Monday, after his conference call.
My own speculation is that it will be called "Mubuntu" given this:
Domain name: MUBUNTU.COM
Administrative Contact:
Troup, James hostmaster(a)canonical.com
Dana
Arrrgh.... why? Why not just make regular Ubuntu usable for multimedia?
This fragmentation is idiotic and will destroy Linux. Linux as an audio
platform will be a joke as long as a customized distro is required to
use it.
OSX and Windows don't need a "Multimedia edition" why should Linux?
Lee
2:36 p.m.
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 13:31 -0500, Lee Revell wrote:
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 13:22 -0500, Dana Olson wrote:
Yes, I agree. And we should get rid of Kubuntu as well. And Xubuntu.
That's just silly.
Regardless, I am not involved with this project at all. So, direct your
concerns to Mark. He has listened to me to some degree, otherwise we
wouldn't even be seeing such a thing.
I am just the messanger.
Dana
Just as an FYI to those of you who might be
interested in this...
I have it on good authority that Mark Shuttleworth has been working
towards hosting a multimedia-oriented derivative of Ubuntu, set for
Dapper+1 release time.
I should know more on Monday, after his conference call.
My own speculation is that it will be called "Mubuntu" given this:
Domain name: MUBUNTU.COM
Administrative Contact:
Troup, James hostmaster(a)canonical.com
Dana
Arrrgh.... why? Why not just make regular Ubuntu usable for multimedia?
This fragmentation is idiotic and will destroy Linux. Linux as an audio
platform will be a joke as long as a customized distro is required to
use it.
OSX and Windows don't need a "Multimedia edition" why should Linux?
Lee 
2:59 p.m.
Dana Olson wrote:
Yes, I agree. And we should get rid of Kubuntu as
well. And Xubuntu.
That's just silly.
It may be a bit strange, but all of the kubuntu packages are accessible
in the regular ubuntu repositories.
try a 'apt-get install kubuntu' on your ubuntu box.
The specialized distros are for people who want to install their
favourite flavour without having to worry about all the base-install
junk that they don't want to use (gnome in the case of kubuntu) ...
later,
Steve
3:06 p.m.
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 10:59 -0800, Stephen Hassard wrote:
Dana Olson wrote:
I understand that. I assume Lee knows this as well.
The question is, will this Mubuntu or whatever they end up calling it,
will that be the same?
Because if it is, then Lee's worries are invalid.
If it isn't, then I'm with him on this one..
Dana
Yes, I agree. And we should get rid of Kubuntu as
well. And Xubuntu.
That's just silly.
It may be a bit strange, but all of the kubuntu packages are accessible
in the regular ubuntu repositories.
try a 'apt-get install kubuntu' on your ubuntu box.
The specialized distros are for people who want to install their
favourite flavour without having to worry about all the base-install
junk that they don't want to use (gnome in the case of kubuntu) ...
later,
Steve
2:54 p.m.
On 3/17/06, Lee Revell <rlrevell(a)joe-job.com> wrote:
OSX and Windows don't need a "Multimedia
edition" why should Linux?
Umm, and? As a former long-time Windows user, I can tell you that
they sure could use it. Just because OSX and Microsoft don't do
something, why should that mean the Linux community shouldn't as well?
--
Josh Lawrence
http://www.hardbop200.com
3:07 p.m.
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 12:54 -0600, Josh Lawrence wrote:
On 3/17/06, Lee Revell <rlrevell(a)joe-job.com>
wrote:
Give me one good reason to have a separate distro for multimedia rather
than using the main branch. I can think of many reasons not to.
Lee
OSX and Windows don't need a "Multimedia
edition" why should Linux?
Umm, and? As a former long-time Windows user, I can tell you that
they sure could use it. Just because OSX and Microsoft don't do
something, why should that mean the Linux community shouldn't as well?
4:15 p.m.
On Fri March 17 2006 14:07, Lee Revell wrote:
Give me one good reason to have a separate distro for
multimedia rather than using the main branch. I can think of
many reasons not to.
Are they the same reasons people used to say there shouldn't be
an Ubuntu in the first place because everyone should just
running plain ol' Debian? ;)
Rb
4:41 p.m.
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 15:15 -0500, Rob wrote:
On Fri March 17 2006 14:07, Lee Revell wrote:
No, the Ubuntu vs. Debian differences are HUGE compared to the very
narrow gap between the requirements of multimedia vs. regular desktop
use.
Lee
Give me one good reason to have a separate distro
for
multimedia rather than using the main branch. I can think of
many reasons not to.
Are they the same reasons people used to say there shouldn't be
an Ubuntu in the first place because everyone should just
running plain ol' Debian? ;) 
21 Mar
21 Mar
6:03 a.m.
Lee Revell wrote:
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 12:54 -0600, Josh Lawrence
wrote:
The reasons were to do with security and optimisation issues. Also it's
nice to have a single CD installer. However, a separate multimedia
distro is a _workaround_ for issues which have mostly been fixed.
A/DeMuDi is now being integrated back into Debian, but will continue
making separate releases until such time as everything works ootb in
Debian without conflicting with other users' needs or there is still a
perceived need and Free is still motivated to do so. I don't think we're
ready to drop the separate distro yet.
cheers,
tim hall
On 3/17/06, Lee Revell
<rlrevell(a)joe-job.com> wrote:
Give me one good reason to have a separate distro for multimedia rather
than using the main branch. I can think of many reasons not to. OSX and Windows don't need a "Multimedia
edition" why should Linux?
Umm, and? As a former long-time Windows user, I can tell you that
they sure could use it. Just because OSX and Microsoft don't do
something, why should that mean the Linux community shouldn't as well?
17 Mar
17 Mar
3:12 p.m.
Umm, and? As a former long-time Windows user, I can
tell you that
they sure could use it. Just because OSX and Microsoft don't do
something, why should that mean the Linux community shouldn't as well?
I gotta agree with this. Even on OSX I tend to try to have customized
setups for my audio, but especially with Windows you HAVE to do tweaking
in order to get it truly useable.
Seablade
3:21 p.m.
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 14:15 -0500, Thomas Vecchione wrote:
Sure, I just don't see why a new Ubuntu flavor is required, rather than
actually finding and fixing the issues with the main branch. It's not
like we live in a closed source world where it's Microsoft or Apple's
way or the highway...
Lee
Umm, and? As
a former long-time Windows user, I can tell you that
they sure could use it. Just because OSX and Microsoft don't do
something, why should that mean the Linux community shouldn't as well?
I gotta agree with this. Even on OSX I tend to try to have customized
setups for my audio, but especially with Windows you HAVE to do tweaking
in order to get it truly useable.
3:50 p.m.
Sure, I just don't see why a new Ubuntu flavor is
required, rather than
actually finding and fixing the issues with the main branch. It's not
like we live in a closed source world where it's Microsoft or Apple's
way or the highway...
One of Ubuntu's bragging rights is its ease of setup and install, even
easier than Windows in most cases I have used it. Requiring tweaks in
order to use the audio as compared to a standard distro is part of what
can take away from that.
I dont really think it is the same thing as say, a completly different
distro. It is just precustomized versions of the distro for specific
purposes, meaning I dont have to put in these tweaks every time.
I dont know enough about kernel development or the hundreds of other
topics that it can cover to give a pro/con version of doing the audio
flavor vs standard flavor myself, maybe others can do it. But I do know
that while it is possible to create one distro that does it all, you
tend to end up with huge amounts of bloat doing this, and it causes more
problems than it solves IMO rather than keeping small concentrated
flavors for what are essentially niche markets that fit that niche VERY
well.
Seablade
4:12 p.m.
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 14:52 -0500, Thomas Vecchione wrote:
I just think it's much easier for developers and users to fix the
mainline distro so these tweaks are no longer needed than to create a
new project.
Lee
Sure, I just
don't see why a new Ubuntu flavor is required, rather than
actually finding and fixing the issues with the main branch. It's not
like we live in a closed source world where it's Microsoft or Apple's
way or the highway...
One of Ubuntu's bragging rights is its ease of setup and install, even
easier than Windows in most cases I have used it. Requiring tweaks in
order to use the audio as compared to a standard distro is part of what
can take away from that.
I dont really think it is the same thing as say, a completly different
distro. It is just precustomized versions of the distro for specific
purposes, meaning I dont have to put in these tweaks every time.
4:20 p.m.
On 3/17/06, Lee Revell <rlrevell(a)joe-job.com> wrote:
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 14:52 -0500, Thomas Vecchione
wrote:
I just think it's much easier for developers and users to fix the
mainline distro so these tweaks are no longer needed than to create a
new project.
Lee
But what if "fixing" the mainline distro degrades the performance for
things other than multimedia?
Sure, I
just don't see why a new Ubuntu flavor is required, rather than
actually finding and fixing the issues with the main branch. It's not
like we live in a closed source world where it's Microsoft or Apple's
way or the highway...
One of Ubuntu's bragging rights is its ease of setup and install, even
easier than Windows in most cases I have used it. Requiring tweaks in
order to use the audio as compared to a standard distro is part of what
can take away from that.
I dont really think it is the same thing as say, a completly different
distro. It is just precustomized versions of the distro for specific
purposes, meaning I dont have to put in these tweaks every time.
4:30 p.m.
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 14:20 -0600, Matt Henley wrote:
On 3/17/06, Lee Revell <rlrevell(a)joe-job.com>
wrote:
Look, we don't have the specifics yet. Mark considers Kubuntu to be an
Ubuntu derivative as well, so who is to say that Mubuntu or whatever
they end up calling it won't be also the same way? Basically a
meta-package with an alternate ISO? I can't see them doing it any other
way than this, because it would be kinda dumb. But the point is, WE
DON'T KNOW YET.
Yes, it will require a better kernel, and Mark said in the past "don't
worry, you'll get it" so I'm sure this is factored in.
"Fixing" the main Ubuntu distro won't degrade performance for anything.
Simple, you don't install the audio app stuff if you don't want it. Even
if you do install it, it won't do more than take up your hard drive
space.
The kernel is another story, and it won't ever become standard in the
default unless it is accepted into the official kernel branch.
So. Let's just wait and see...
Dana
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 14:52 -0500, Thomas
Vecchione wrote:
I just think it's much easier for developers and users to fix the
mainline distro so these tweaks are no longer needed than to create a
new project.
Lee
But what if "fixing" the mainline distro degrades the performance for
things other than multimedia? Sure, I
just don't see why a new Ubuntu flavor is required, rather than
actually finding and fixing the issues with the main branch. It's not
like we live in a closed source world where it's Microsoft or Apple's
way or the highway...
One of Ubuntu's bragging rights is its ease of setup and install, even
easier than Windows in most cases I have used it. Requiring tweaks in
order to use the audio as compared to a standard distro is part of what
can take away from that.
I dont really think it is the same thing as say, a completly different
distro. It is just precustomized versions of the distro for specific
purposes, meaning I dont have to put in these tweaks every time.
4:39 p.m.
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 14:20 -0600, Matt Henley wrote:
But what if "fixing" the mainline distro degrades the performance for
things other than multimedia?
My experience is that it does not. I'd be interested to see any
evidence that optimizing a system for multimedia (latency in the 1-2ms
range) degrades normal desktop use.
Lee
4:50 p.m.
On my box, I do have an example. If I use the kernel set up for low
latency recording, the kernel modules required for vmware do not
compile.
On 3/17/06, Lee Revell <rlrevell(a)joe-job.com> wrote:
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 14:20 -0600, Matt Henley wrote:
But what if "fixing" the mainline distro degrades the performance for
things other than multimedia?
My experience is that it does not. I'd be interested to see any
evidence that optimizing a system for multimedia (latency in the 1-2ms
range) degrades normal desktop use.
Lee
4:55 p.m.
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 14:50 -0600, Matt Henley wrote:
On my box, I do have an example. If I use the kernel
set up for low
latency recording, the kernel modules required for vmware do not
compile.
I am not referring to the -rt kernel, but the mainline kernel, which is
perfectly adequate for low latency these days.
On 3/17/06, Lee Revell <rlrevell(a)joe-job.com>
wrote:
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 14:20 -0600, Matt Henley
wrote:
But what if "fixing" the mainline distro degrades the performance for
things other than multimedia?
My experience is that it does not. I'd be interested to see any
evidence that optimizing a system for multimedia (latency in the 1-2ms
range) degrades normal desktop use.
Lee
5:02 p.m.
On Fri March 17 2006 15:55, Lee Revell wrote:
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 14:50 -0600, Matt Henley wrote:
I would think that the difference between the "plain"
distribution and the "multimedia" distribution would be the
difference between "adequate" and "excellent."
Rob
On my box, I do have an example. If I use the
kernel set up
for low latency recording, the kernel modules required for
vmware do not compile.
I am not referring to the -rt kernel, but the mainline kernel,
which is perfectly adequate for low latency these days.
5:09 p.m.
On 3/17/06, Rob <lau(a)kudla.org> wrote:
On Fri March 17 2006 15:55, Lee Revell wrote:
And the system feels great with the Ingo's patch on it. Slightly off
topic (not really) but does anyone have a Tascam US-428 working
properly? I got one off ebay, because it was supported but have not
been able to get it up and running (although i have gotten it to load
the bios software and initialize.
Matt
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 14:50 -0600, Matt Henley
wrote:
I would think that the difference between the "plain"
distribution and the "multimedia" distribution would be the
difference between "adequate" and "excellent."
Rob
On my box, I do have an example. If I use the
kernel set up
for low latency recording, the kernel modules required for
vmware do not compile.
I am not referring to the -rt kernel, but the mainline kernel,
which is perfectly adequate for low latency these days.
5:29 p.m.
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 15:59 -0500, Rob wrote:
On Fri March 17 2006 15:55, Lee Revell wrote:
-rt kernel is not stable enough to qualify as "excellent" anytime soon.
The focus should be on making the mainline kernel "excellent" for
multimedia - developers won't port to Linux if a custom kernel is
required.
Lee
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 14:50 -0600, Matt Henley
wrote:
I would think that the difference between the "plain"
distribution and the "multimedia" distribution would be the
difference between "adequate" and "excellent." On my box, I do have an example. If I use the
kernel set up
for low latency recording, the kernel modules required for
vmware do not compile.
I am not referring to the -rt kernel, but the mainline kernel,
which is perfectly adequate for low latency these days.
4:57 p.m.
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 14:50 -0600, Matt Henley wrote:
On 3/17/06, Lee Revell <rlrevell(a)joe-job.com> wrote:
Again, the kernel won't become default. Period.
Also, there are separate kernels for server users, so this wouldn't be
much different.
No sane general-purpose distro will ship a -rt kernel as the only
option. But that doesn't mean it won't be an option.
Dana
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 14:20 -0600, Matt Henley
wrote:
On my box, I do have an example. If I use the kernel set up for low
latency recording, the kernel modules required for vmware do not
compile.
But what if "fixing" the mainline distro degrades the performance for
things other than multimedia?
My experience is that it does not. I'd be interested to see any
evidence that optimizing a system for multimedia (latency in the 1-2ms
range) degrades normal desktop use.
Lee
5:40 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Matt Henley schrieb:
On my box, I do have an example. If I use the kernel
set up for low
latency recording, the kernel modules required for vmware do not
compile.
I have installed VMW-Player two Weeks ago on UBUNTU dapper drake
preflight4 with active working rt-kernel - the VM-Modules built OK and
the Player works.
On 3/17/06, Lee Revell <rlrevell(a)joe-job.com>
wrote:
>On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 14:20 -0600, Matt Henley wrote:
>
>>But what if "fixing" the mainline distro degrades the performance for
>>things other than multimedia?
>>
>
>My experience is that it does not. I'd be interested to see any
>evidence that optimizing a system for multimedia (latency in the 1-2ms
>range) degrades normal desktop use.
>
>Lee
I agree - my ubuntu with rt-Kernel runs at least the same as flawless as
my Standard Suse 9.3
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFEGy4X1Aecwva1SWMRAgtVAJ9t2H9Mns4edxZmQTaVGWQKz5wtNQCdEeKp
IruonU07G183C139oJTwybw=
=LwAe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
5:52 p.m.
Hmmm. That was not my experience. I am not using ubuntu though. I
am using gentoo. I installed a stock 2.6.15 kernel and patched with
Ingo's patch. Rebuilt the kernel installed the nvidia modules. Then
I did a compile of the vmware modules via its configure script. It
complained about a missing spinlock and died. Will try it again over
the weekend with that in mind however.
I havnt seen any instability in the system. It has not degraded my
performance. However, I am not running the system as a server either.
I have installed VMW-Player two Weeks ago on UBUNTU
dapper drake
preflight4 with active working rt-kernel - the VM-Modules built OK and
the Player works.
18 Mar
18 Mar
4:17 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: "Multimedia Ubuntu" LONG
Matt Henley a écrit :
On my box, I do have an example. If I use the kernel
set up for low
latency recording, the kernel modules required for vmware do not
compile.
>
---------------
Other ex:
Agnula demudi is optimized for audio, it's not the better distribution
for video etc applications... Best solution; 1 distrib for 99%
applications + 1 distrib for low latency applications (ardour jack )
Mark Shuttleworth made the good choice no doubt at all.
As Linux = free software, i can't see where is the pb...
---------
What's this, then?
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/mediacenter/default.mspx
>
> They might not need it, but they do make it ;)
OK forget I mentioned Windows. My point remains valid WRT OSX...
Lee
--------------
arf (LOL)
winxp for professional audio work ?
good luck :) + Media center windows update: paste copy:
(from windows update) DRM inside.
Asta la vista baby :)
thanks Linux developpers thanks Debian RH etc Thanks Ubuntu/Mubuntu.
--------------------------
Mise à jour pour Windows XP Édition Media Center 2005 (KB910393)
Date de la dernière publication : 14/3/2006
Taille du téléchargement : 1.4 Mo
Installez cette mise à jour pour éviter que l'installation du Lecteur
Windows Media 10 remplace les fichiers de gestion des droits numériques
(Digital Rights Management [DRM]) installés par l'Ensemble de mises à
jour cumulatives 2 pour Windows XP Édition Media Center 2005 (KB900325).
Une fois cette installation terminée, vous serez peut-être amené à
redémarrer l'ordinateur.
Configuration requise
UC recommandée: Non indiqué.
Mémoire recommandée: Non indiqué.
Espace disque recommandé: Non indiqué.
Comment procéder à la désinstallation
Pour désinstaller cette mise à jour de logiciel, utilisez l'option
Ajout/Suppression de programmes.
Aide et support
http://support.microsoft.com
Plus d'infos
http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=56130
-------------------
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/910393
" CORRECTIF : contenu protégé ne peut pas non jouer après avoir installé
Update Rollup 2 pour Windows XP Édition Media Center 2005
Voir les produits auxquels s'applique cet article
TRADUCTION AUTOMATIQUE : Cet article technique a été traduit par un
système automatique, c'est-à-dire sans aucune intervention humaine.
Microsoft propose ce type d’articles en complément de ceux traduits par
des traducteurs professionnels. Ces articles sont destinés
principalement aux utilisateurs ne comprenant pas l'anglais en leur
proposant, en complément, une version française de l’information
technique fournie dans la version américaine et originale de l’article.
Pour plus de détails, veuillez consulter la page
http://support.microsoft.com/gp/mtdetails. Attention : Il est possible
que certaines parties de l’article ne soient pas traduites par le
système automatique et qu’elles soient restées rédigées en anglais.
Microsoft ne garantit pas la qualité linguistique des traductions et ne
peut être tenu responsable d’aucun problème, direct ou indirect, dû à
une quelconque erreur de traduction du contenu ou de son utilisation par
les utilisateurs.
Numéro d'article : 910393
Dernière mise à jour : vendredi 3 mars 2006
Version : 1.1
Symptômes
Contenu protégé ne peut pas non jouer après avoir installé Update Rollup
2 pour Microsoft Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005. Ce problème
s'applique à deux audio et vidéo a protégé le contenu si le contenu est
actif ou enregistré.
Lorsque vous essayez de jouer au contenu protégé, vous pouvez recevoir
le message d'erreur suivant :
C00D277F, erreur de protection de stockage sécurisé
Cause
Le package Lecteur Microsoft Windows Media 10 d'installation peut
remplacer certains fichiers Digital Rights Management (DRM). Les
fichiers incompatibles empêchent la lecture de contenu protégé.
Résolution
Une mise à jour prise en charge est désormais disponible auprès de
Microsoft. Nous recommandons que vous appliquez cette mise à jour sur
tous systèmes qui exécutent Update Rollup 2 pour Windows XP Media Center
Edition.
Cette mise à jour ne résoudra pas le problème sur les systèmes qui
rencontrent le problème. Cette mise à jour empêchera toutefois le problème.
Vous pouvez télécharger le fichier suivant à partir du Centre de
téléchargement Microsoft :
DownloadDownload the WindowsMedia10-KB910393-v4-x86-ENU.exe package now.
(http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=295F822B-957F-408E…)
...." etc
------------------------
1:09 a.m.
On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 03:12:27PM -0500, Lee Revell wrote:
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 14:52 -0500, Thomas Vecchione
wrote:
I just think it's much easier for developers and users to fix the
mainline distro so these tweaks are no longer needed than to create a
new project.
I don't read this as some kind of "let's forget about mainline and do our
own thing". Rather I read it as others have: let's put together media and
audio software that all works together and leave out the stuff we don't
need. I see your point, Lee, but there is nothing to stop the developers of
a slim-downed, more specific distro contributing back to mainline.
Jack
Sure, I
just don't see why a new Ubuntu flavor is required, rather than
actually finding and fixing the issues with the main branch. It's not
like we live in a closed source world where it's Microsoft or Apple's
way or the highway...
One of Ubuntu's bragging rights is its ease of setup and install, even
easier than Windows in most cases I have used it. Requiring tweaks in
order to use the audio as compared to a standard distro is part of what
can take away from that.
I dont really think it is the same thing as say, a completly different
distro. It is just precustomized versions of the distro for specific
purposes, meaning I dont have to put in these tweaks every time.
3:15 a.m.
On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 09:08:28PM -0800, Jack Bowling wrote:
I don't read this as some kind of "let's forget about mainline and do our
own thing". Rather I read it as others have: let's put together media and
audio software that all works together and leave out the stuff we don't
need. I see your point, Lee, but there is nothing to stop the developers of
a slim-downed, more specific distro contributing back to mainline.
Can you elaborate on "contributing back to mainline" ?
while your at it, can you elaborate on "slim-downed" ?
WRT "stuff you don't need" *all* distros support addition and removal of
packages.
ask your local sys-admin what he feels about supporting more than 1 flavor
of linux.
(its a lot of work to remember how to do conceptually the same thing on
all of the diff linuxes.(linuces whtever))
--
paul \ /
wisehart >/
<//////$>
|\|\|\
17 Mar
17 Mar
4:12 p.m.
On Fri March 17 2006 13:31, Lee Revell wrote:
OSX and Windows don't need a "Multimedia
edition" why should
Linux?
What's this, then?
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/mediacenter/default.mspx
They might not need it, but they do make it ;)
Rob
4:15 p.m.
On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 15:09 -0500, Rob wrote:
On Fri March 17 2006 13:31, Lee Revell wrote:
OK forget I mentioned Windows. My point remains valid WRT OSX...
Lee
OSX and Windows don't need a "Multimedia
edition" why should
Linux?
What's this, then?
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/mediacenter/default.mspx
They might not need it, but they do make it ;)
6770
days inactive
6774
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
30 comments
12 participants
participants (12)
-
Dana Olson -
Hartmut Noack -
Jack Bowling -
jazzride2006 -
Josh Lawrence -
Lee Revell -
listreader＠lupulin.net -
Matt Henley -
Rob -
Stephen Hassard -
Thomas Vecchione -
tim hall