From siblingbashful at aarli.com  Thu Feb  1 11:38:10 2007
From: siblingbashful at aarli.com (Lynn Gordon)
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 15:18:10 -0120
Subject: Stranger grabs ladder, saves toddler from fire Video
Message-ID: <01c74614$2ed85c10$6c822ecf@siblingbashful>

Good day.
We will try it today morning, restricts has been removed, market are waiting for explosion.
And today this company will start to grow fast.
We hope you didnt sell you shhares yet. 
Because today we will try to push up the charts and get additional investors from there.

Cooommpany: WEST EXCELSIOR ENT (WEXE at PK)  
Priccee: $0.60 
Symmbbol: WEXE 


Company need aprox 250k $ to finish it's new project.
After thet price will go to the sky.6B69773275456E79337377696633776A746675687178786E6B666A69746C
Watch WEXE traddde on Feb 1! 
This one will definitely be a runnner!




From skipperedvolunteer at accenture.com  Tue Feb  6 10:49:22 2007
From: skipperedvolunteer at accenture.com (Benito Wiley)
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 14:49:22 -0060
Subject: Pure rise expect.
Message-ID: <01c749fd$fd31a070$6c822ecf@skipperedvolunteer>



LOM LOGISTICS INC (Other OTC: LOMJ at PK)   
 
Last: $1.75    
Momemtum: Buy very strong.     
   
 
This one will soar like lastone. Look at news from the company.





From mike at kth.se  Mon Feb 12 07:26:58 2007
From: mike at kth.se (Mike Hammill)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 13:26:58 +0100
Subject: ata 66 and blue and white g3
In-Reply-To: <25A6721B-183F-460B-BD71-110620316B4A@yahoo.com>
References: <20061102064111.70619.qmail@web53609.mail.yahoo.com>
	<1162469424.16618.96.camel@enki.eridu>
	<25A6721B-183F-460B-BD71-110620316B4A@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <1171283218.5143.39.camel@monkey.michael.hammill.name>

Dear James,

I have four B&W G3 running, two on Gentoo, one on FC6, and one on
Ubuntu.  I took a quick check around and see that they are all running
with small (< 80 GB) disks.  Some B&W Macs had bad IDE controllers:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_and_white_Power_Macintosh_G3

and there are some sites out there that help you tell if your machine
falls into this category:

http://lowendmac.com/ppc/g3c.shtml

(look for "402" on the controller).  I remember trying to install SuSE
on a B&W with a large new hard drive and it just about drove me insane.
Everything _seemed_ to be going fine, then suddenly just hung up (and
various, unpredictable places).  I think I always got "time out" errors
though.

My suggestion would be to get the ATA controller your leaning toward,
but without funds it might be tempting to seek out some old, smaller
hard drive for a Linux/Mac boot and use an external Firewire drive for
storing larger files/apps.

Just my 2 cents.
/Mike




From james_l_rooker at yahoo.com  Mon Feb 12 20:47:51 2007
From: james_l_rooker at yahoo.com (james rooker)
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 17:47:51 -0800 (PST)
Subject: ata 66 and blue and white g3
In-Reply-To: <1171283218.5143.39.camel@monkey.michael.hammill.name>
Message-ID: <196237.73741.qm@web53614.mail.yahoo.com>

Mike and any others interested in what works with this
problem--

Here is what I did that worked:

Remember I have a smaller drive that had MacOSX
installed on it with a
HighATA patch that enabled MacOS 10.4 to read larger
drives past the 137gb barrier -- it worked fine with
only MacOSX but played hell with Linux installers.

small drive: 20gb
large drive: 300gb

Using the MacOS 10.4 disk utilities from the smaller
drive I was able to
make a partition on the large drive that was the same
size as the small drive boot partition -- and then use
Apple Disk Utility to do a backup and restore of the
small drive to that partition on the large drive that
was still bootable in the end and still had the
HighATA patch...

Once I verified that MacOS would boot from the
restored image on the large drive -- then and only
then I could have other larger data partitions on the
large drive and I could format the smaller drive for
linux and the linux install actually worked to the
smaller drive.

So now I have the small 20gb WD drive booting linux
with yaboot
and the large drive boots MacOSX Tiger. Had tried this
once before without luck but 10.4.8 upgrade in MacOSX
did something to Disk Utilities and it worked. When I
first asked the question I had been trying to use the
large drive for linux and keep the smaller drive as
MacOSX -- that did not and does not work.

The Problem with my approach is I have to keep an
8.5gb first MacOSX
partition on the large drive to boot from or reinstall
MacOSX to...and patch that with the HighATA software
patch so that it will read the other larger partitions
on that drive properly...Otherwise it reads a 300gb
drive as if it were just a 137gb drive.

If I ran the entire G3 as just a linux box then as of
FC5 there are openfirmware patches in the kernel that
will handle large drives properly.

Anyway sorry for the long reply but figured the list
might need this info for someone else later
on...Thanks Mike for your interest and reply I
appreciate that you responded even so long after I
made the initial plea for help.

James Rooker
--- Mike Hammill <mike at kth.se> wrote:

> Dear James,
> 
> I have four B&W G3 running, two on Gentoo, one on
> FC6, and one on
> Ubuntu.  I took a quick check around and see that
> they are all running
> with small (< 80 GB) disks.  Some B&W Macs had bad
> IDE controllers:
> 
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_and_white_Power_Macintosh_G3
> 
> and there are some sites out there that help you
> tell if your machine
> falls into this category:
> 
> http://lowendmac.com/ppc/g3c.shtml
> 
> (look for "402" on the controller).  I remember
> trying to install SuSE
> on a B&W with a large new hard drive and it just
> about drove me insane.
> Everything _seemed_ to be going fine, then suddenly
> just hung up (and
> various, unpredictable places).  I think I always
> got "time out" errors
> though.
> 
> My suggestion would be to get the ATA controller
> your leaning toward,
> but without funds it might be tempting to seek out
> some old, smaller
> hard drive for a Linux/Mac boot and use an external
> Firewire drive for
> storing larger files/apps.
> 
> Just my 2 cents.
> /Mike
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Fedora-ppc mailing list
> Fedora-ppc at lists.infradead.org
>
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/fedora-ppc
> 



From james_l_rooker at yahoo.com  Thu Feb 15 17:58:23 2007
From: james_l_rooker at yahoo.com (james rooker)
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 14:58:23 -0800 (PST)
Subject: should we be worried or status fedora ppc
Message-ID: <240395.39848.qm@web53607.mail.yahoo.com>

I have just been reading about Ubuntu's decision to
deprecate their ppc version of Ubuntu for future
releases -- at least part of said decision was a cost
issue -- related to number of users who actually use
ppc Ubuntu...

I have also just been reading that the mainline Debian
project has been going through a similiar decision
process regarding debian ppc.

I am encouraged that the Sony PS3 uses a Cell CPU --
which has a modified ppc core to it -- thus it can run
Fedora PPC and does judging from videos on YouTube...

I tried to report that I use Fedora PPC using that new
hardware report tool from the Fedora Project
page....but that failed for some reason...

Thus the question: Are we in any danger of Fedora PPC
being deprecated or stopped in the near future? Also
who do we need to petition to stop any poisonous
thinking along these lines among leaders of the Fedora
Project?

I admit I have selfish reasons for asking all this...
I run a dual boot
MacOSX Tiger/Fedora Core 6 PPC Blue and White G3 that
I built from parts off ebay in a leftover PC Case from
a Burned out AMD Athlon.
I could and probably will build more of these for a
few people I know if I can still find OS and software
that will run on them.

Thanks for your time-
James Rooker




From jkeating at redhat.com  Thu Feb 15 18:10:51 2007
From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating)
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 18:10:51 -0500
Subject: should we be worried or status fedora ppc
In-Reply-To: <240395.39848.qm@web53607.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <240395.39848.qm@web53607.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <200702151810.52039.jkeating@redhat.com>

On Thursday 15 February 2007 17:58, james rooker wrote:
> Thus the question: Are we in any danger of Fedora PPC
> being deprecated or stopped in the near future? Also
> who do we need to petition to stop any poisonous
> thinking along these lines among leaders of the Fedora
> Project?

The leaders of the Fedora Project have discussed making ppc a "secondary" arch 
when we have the infrastructure in place for secondary arches to exist and 
function well.  David Woodhouse has stated that he would be more than happy 
to be the arch maintainer for PPC as a secondary arch once the infrastructure 
is in place and proven to work.  This may not be until the Fedora 8 
timeframe.  Until then we will continue to produce a PPC port of Fedora for 
all 1% of our users (:

-- 
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/fedora-ppc/attachments/20070215/dcafb2ba/attachment.bin 

From james_l_rooker at yahoo.com  Thu Feb 15 18:31:19 2007
From: james_l_rooker at yahoo.com (james rooker)
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 15:31:19 -0800 (PST)
Subject: mkvmlinuz kernel query
Message-ID: <804520.79387.qm@web53611.mail.yahoo.com>

On a G3 when I try to compile my own ppc kernel...the
make zImage command generates a vmlinux file that ends
up between 30-45MB in size....From personal testing
that vmlinux file with an initrd generated by the
mkinitrd command will boot and run linux just fine on
my machine...but make zImage normally should result in
a vmlinux file and a compressed vmlinuz file...It
never makes the vmlinuz file at all. If I try to use
the normal make bzImage command instead of just make
zImage --
then I get an error which states: "no rule to make
bzImage" -- I understand that on a 64bit G5 that make
bzImage works just like it does on an x86 compile...

>From reading some debian kernel info and contrasting
it with redhat-style kernel compile info -- I
understand that ppc debian has a mkvmlinuz command
that will take uncompressed vmlinux file and a ramdisk
or initrd and make a working vmlinuz file with the
proper pivot point in it.

Is there a mkvmlinuz command or equivalent for Fedora
PPC?

Is there some special command I need to do on a G3
before I do the  "make zImage" to get a working
vmlinuz from a working vmlinux?

I normally use a copy of a config file from a working
fedora kernel...
then edit it to my needs...then copy to .config in
/usr/src/linux and  do
make oldconfig...make modules...make
modules_install...make zImage in that order... 

Thanks-
James Rooker 


From james_l_rooker at yahoo.com  Thu Feb 15 18:40:11 2007
From: james_l_rooker at yahoo.com (james rooker)
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 15:40:11 -0800 (PST)
Subject: should we be worried or status fedora ppc
In-Reply-To: <200702151810.52039.jkeating@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <476826.81921.qm@web53611.mail.yahoo.com>

Does secondary status mean it will be harder to get
ppc rpm packages? Or harder to get ppc version iso
images?
Guess we should be hoping the PS3 use as a linux box
really takes off or XBOX 360 gets hacked to use ppc
linux -- so that the powers that be may see fit to
keep ppc arch in the mainstream. Does Fedora PPC get
any real help at all from IBM or YellowDog considering
both use ppc linux and fedora as a base quite
extensively??

Thanks-
James.

--- Jesse Keating <jkeating at redhat.com> wrote:

> On Thursday 15 February 2007 17:58, james rooker
> wrote:
> > Thus the question: Are we in any danger of Fedora
> PPC
> > being deprecated or stopped in the near future?
> Also
> > who do we need to petition to stop any poisonous
> > thinking along these lines among leaders of the
> Fedora
> > Project?
> 
> The leaders of the Fedora Project have discussed
> making ppc a "secondary" arch 
> when we have the infrastructure in place for
> secondary arches to exist and 
> function well.  David Woodhouse has stated that he
> would be more than happy 
> to be the arch maintainer for PPC as a secondary
> arch once the infrastructure 
> is in place and proven to work.  This may not be
> until the Fedora 8 
> timeframe.  Until then we will continue to produce a
> PPC port of Fedora for 
> all 1% of our users (:
> 
> -- 
> Jesse Keating
> Release Engineer: Fedora
> > _______________________________________________
> Fedora-ppc mailing list
> Fedora-ppc at lists.infradead.org
>
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/fedora-ppc
> 



From jkeating at redhat.com  Thu Feb 15 18:43:13 2007
From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating)
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 18:43:13 -0500
Subject: should we be worried or status fedora ppc
In-Reply-To: <476826.81921.qm@web53611.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <476826.81921.qm@web53611.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <200702151843.13609.jkeating@redhat.com>

On Thursday 15 February 2007 18:40, james rooker wrote:
> Does secondary status mean it will be harder to get
> ppc rpm packages? Or harder to get ppc version iso
> images?

Not so much.  It just means that builds on the primary arches won't fail if 
the build fails on a secondary arch, so it will be up to the community built 
around the secondary arch to ensure that the arch continues to work.  The 
secondary arch group will also be responsible for spinning their release, but 
the tools we provide make that very easy.

> Guess we should be hoping the PS3 use as a linux box
> really takes off or XBOX 360 gets hacked to use ppc
> linux -- so that the powers that be may see fit to
> keep ppc arch in the mainstream. 

I really don't see that as adding a significant amount of users.

> Does Fedora PPC get 
> any real help at all from IBM or YellowDog considering
> both use ppc linux and fedora as a base quite
> extensively??

Not so much.  IBM does some help with the RHEL stuff I think, but not so much 
Fedora that I've seen.  It has been mostly up to our internal engineers to 
fix things on PPC when they go wrong.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/fedora-ppc/attachments/20070215/e494ed1b/attachment.bin 

From jkeating at redhat.com  Fri Feb 16 09:18:54 2007
From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating)
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 09:18:54 -0500
Subject: should we be worried or status fedora ppc
In-Reply-To: <1171635218.4003.187.camel@zod.rchland.ibm.com>
References: <476826.81921.qm@web53611.mail.yahoo.com>
	<200702151843.13609.jkeating@redhat.com>
	<1171635218.4003.187.camel@zod.rchland.ibm.com>
Message-ID: <200702160918.55077.jkeating@redhat.com>

On Friday 16 February 2007 09:13, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-02-15 at 18:43 -0500, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Thursday 15 February 2007 18:40, james rooker wrote:
> > > Does secondary status mean it will be harder to get
> > > ppc rpm packages? Or harder to get ppc version iso
> > > images?
> >
> > Not so much.  It just means that builds on the primary arches won't fail
> > if the build fails on a secondary arch, so it will be up to the community
> > built around the secondary arch to ensure that the arch continues to
> > work.  The secondary arch group will also be responsible for spinning
> > their release, but the tools we provide make that very easy.
>
> Right.  However, the community will also need to provide it's own
> hosting and build infrastructure, which it currently doesn't have to do
> today.  This is something that a few of us are working on.

Perhaps not.  The PPC builders may be able to stay where they are, just become 
secondary arch builders.  Hosting for the arch may be provided by Fedora as 
well, just in a different directory.


-- 
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/fedora-ppc/attachments/20070216/af9ae41c/attachment.bin 

From jyoung5 at us.ibm.com  Tue Feb 20 17:32:54 2007
From: jyoung5 at us.ibm.com (Jerone Young)
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 16:32:54 -0600
Subject: [BUG] Unable to create Prep partition for IBM js20 blades
Message-ID: <1172010774.22591.54.camel@thinkpad>

Figured I would bring this to everyones attention:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229231



