Quentin Harley wrote:
> Susan Dridi wrote:
>> Right, I understand that and the only reason I wrote is that I think
>> this problem could be a deal breaker for users with firewire sound
>> cards. I keep the testing sources in apt, and would be glad to report on
>> a beta installation from the point of view of a regular user who is
>> handy with Google but not a systems girl. Once firewire is working, that
> Thanks. That is also what a beta is for. Feedback.
> I don't know about you, but I would love to install the official release
> of 3.0, and all the hardware I own just to work.
> At them moment the only hardware I am having trouble with is:
> 1) Nvidia 3rd party driver (known issue)
> 2) raw1394 module for 2.6.29
> 3) Initial setup for video is missing. I have to chmod the /dev/raw1394
> to 777 every time I boot at the moment.
> Besides that ( and the odd missing package ) things are looking up for
> me at least!
You say you are not a systems girl.
I have learned a lot from your mails. Also, you "always"
take the time to consider "which" list to post to.
Thanks! :-) It helps a great deal here.
The Beta is showing great promise.
4) Availability to pass boot options at install?
5) F-spot & Mono applications?
6) Main Menu > Other menu. Remove or customize.
7) FreeWheeling needs feedback on exit of application.
(post on forum). 64 Studio 3.0 Beta 2 released.
8) Kernel upgrade path is problematic.
I suppose the kernel error can be expected when "all in all"
the bigger picture of the changes to the beta are considered.
Long time support, stable base, and new kernel. :-)
Well worth the effort, time, and investment for future releases.
64studio stable, sounds great to me.
64studio-devel mailing list