[Closed - Leaked PR1.2] Info and Discussion thread - Page 53 - maemo.org

Joorin | # 521 | 2010-05-03, 15:28 | Report

Originally Posted by abill_uk View Post

I am old school and i use old shool wording for many things i am NOT a Linux developer or coder but there again i dont have to be to realise just what a complete mess Nokia made even allowing this N900 to be released because if they had only known the consquences i doubt they would have released it.
Yes i do realise the OS is in fact the rootfs but i also assumed you lot realised this and yes the complete OS means exactly that in your wording the rootfs, i said for a very good reason and that reason was it is for sure being re-programmed during installs of proggs from this community but there again i honestly thought you lot would not be so exacting and just realise what i was saying.

fatalsaint has already commented but I'll add some details.

If you know that you're not up to speed with a technology, go on a quick Google adventure. Actually google the words you're about to use and see if what you're saying is at least in the right field. And if you're corrected, google the correction to learn even more and accept that you were wrong and move on with the added knowledge. When it comes to computers (or science in general), the details are oh so important.

When it comes to you thinking that it's "a big problem" that applications that are installed will place files on the root partition, I can only repeat that you are wrong. Again, this is, typically, how Linux systems work. Installed applications have specific places where they should be placed to be in tune with the rest. There has gone a lot of time and effort into planning the best way to separate applications, data and configurations in Linux systems and Debian is a pretty good example of this.

So, enjoy your, now, even better N900 and go on a Google adventure like the rest of us have to do all the time to keep up.

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Joorin For This Useful Post:
Fargus, fatalsaint, Texrat

Texrat | # 522 | 2010-05-03, 15:29 | Report

Originally Posted by Laughing Man View Post

and GeneralAntiles (although he rarely shows up now).

Hey, good point! I'm dragging his sorry @$$ in here. Why shouldn't he be punished with the rest of us?

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Texrat For This Useful Post:
fatalsaint, telecomgeek79

fatalsaint | # 523 | 2010-05-03, 15:29 | Report

Originally Posted by Laughing Man View Post

And ysss, Gerbick, and GeneralAntiles (although he rarely shows up now).

Ah yes, I forgot ysss. Sorry Ysss!!

I haven't really seen Gerbick or GA in this particular one.. maybe I just got too fury-eyed to pay attention.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to fatalsaint For This Useful Post:
ysss

fatalsaint | # 524 | 2010-05-03, 15:33 | Report

Originally Posted by Joorin View Post

When it comes to you thinking that it's "a big problem" that applications that are installed will place files on the root partition, I can only repeat that you are wrong. Again, this is, typically, how Linux systems work. Installed applications have specific places where they should be placed to be in tune with the rest. There has gone a lot of time and effort into planning the best way to separate applications, data and configurations in Linux systems and Debian is a pretty good example of this.

It's done on Windows too, actually... the most common drive to install anything is C: - which is *gasp* - the rootfs (typically) for a windows install!

C:\Program Files to be exact... and that's quite a bit like /opt for us.. it's a special place you're *supposed* to put software. (though, not everyone does

)

Except that /opt for us actually more similar to installing software to the D: drive.. which is usually a better practice as well. Not filling up the C: drive is definitely a good idea.

In any case.. you are correct that this is typically just "standard" procedure.

telecomgeek79 | # 525 | 2010-05-03, 15:40 | Report

Originally Posted by vickyg View Post

Answer me one question do you know the current status of PR 1.2 @ Nokia HQ.

When was the last time you came to know the status and what was the status of it.

Why it was not communicated to other members of community?

vickyg.

uhmm... the first question. NO

second question. I never knew the status. I don't know what the status was at the time I didn't know it.

third question. uhmmm.. since I didn.t know the status, nor what the status was when I didn't know it, I can not tell you why I didn't tell the community.

uhmm vickyg. was the questions you had directed at me?

Darkwolf | # 526 | 2010-05-03, 15:44 | Report

Yay for sudden thread merging.
Ok, so my post went POOF into thin air as I cannot locate it back anymore.
So I am going to ask again.

For those with PR1.2 .... is the font kerning bug in the browser fixed?
It's when you zoom in and zoom out on text and the spacing between the characters goes all funny, making a big mess of everything.
It was on the fix list for PR1.2 and I wonder ot it's included in this version of PR1.2?

Siddarth | # 527 | 2010-05-03, 15:48 | Report

Is there basic VIDEO CALL SUPPORT OTHER THAN SKYPE!!!! in 3G network!!!

egoshin | # 528 | 2010-05-03, 15:54 | Report

Originally Posted by SD. View Post

WHY I DOWNGRADED TO 1.1.1

[LIST][*]We don't know if the leaked version does anything malicious, which could on a timer. Calling 1-900 numbers seems to be popular with cellphones, but then there's the general risk of getting your passwords and credit card information stolen

To create a debian file which HAS a reprogrammed cell/3G chip to some new firmware the author at least needs access to Nokia internal documentation and code. To fix a lot of bugs which are still listed in bugzilla the author should be a genius.

Taking that into account - a leaked PR1.2 is definitely a Nokia product.

fatalsaint | # 529 | 2010-05-03, 15:57 | Report

Originally Posted by egoshin View Post

To create a debian file which HAS a reprogrammed cell/3G chip to some new firmware the author at least needs access to Nokia internal documentation and code. To fix a lot of bugs which are still listed in bugzilla the author should be a genius.

Taking that into account - a leaked PR1.2 is definitely a Nokia product.

True, but all one needs to be is an employee of Nokia and have malicious intentions to take one of PR1.2 builds, modify it, and then "leak" it.

For example: The build is over a month old right? What do you think he could have been doing to it in that month?

.

I mean honestly.. if you're a Nokia employee and you want to "get back" at the company, or "support open source!", or whatever misguided ideological philosophy this guy was operating under - wouldn't you release the latest build? Why a month old one?

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to fatalsaint For This Useful Post:
casper27, sjgadsby, Texrat

ysss | # 530 | 2010-05-03, 15:58 | Report

wait sarcasm wut?
Is that my clique?

The Following User Says Thank You to ysss For This Useful Post:
fatalsaint