Re: Status of this ITP?
On Wed, 2004-12-08 at 19:36 -0800, Brian Nelson wrote: > On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 09:26:00PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: > > On Wed, 2004-12-08 at 11:30 -0600, Steve Greenland wrote: > > > On 08-Dec-04, 11:15 (CST), "Luis R. Rodriguez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [snip] > > > > Get off your ass. > > > > > > Ah. I see. Courtesy is not your strong point. > > > > His parents must not have taught him manners. Or he knows that > > he can't get beat up by people who don't see him face-to-face. > > Here, go find him: > > http://www.acs.rutgers.edu/directory/ Why thank you. > LUIS R. RODRIGUEZ > (STUDENT) > > > > > IID: > LRR32 > > > > > EMAIL ADDRESS: > > > Student: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > >POSTAL ADDRESS: > > Student: > 34739 RPO WAY > > > > >STUDENT > INFORMATION: > > School: >Rutgers College > > Academic > Major(s): >English > > Academic > Minor(s): > P Rican Hisp > Carib Study > > > Cinema Studies > > Year of > Graduation: > 05 -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Linux Core Consortium
The most high and most honorable Ian Murdock wrote: > Hi everyone, Hi Back at you. > Let me first say unequivocally that the LCC is very interested in > getting Debian involved. The question has always been: How do we do > that? It's one thing for a bunch of companies that can push down > decisions from the top and that already have a great deal in common > (Red Hat lineage, RPM-based package management, etc.) to join forces to > address a common problem; it's quite another for a decentralized > community project that evolved very differently over the years. Still, > I contend Debian shares those common problems (most notably, lack of > support from ISVs and IHVs), and furthermore, that the "common > cause" is much more achievable with Debian's support than without it. ISVs and IHVs want Binary, mainly that is because Microsoft and Apple have been dealing binary for decades. Binary is not what Debian is all about. For myself I will strongly oppose any shared binaries. I don;t want any RPM shoved down my throat. I would like to use see a shared usage of the same Source Core, built on the apropos systems for those supported archs. Debian Might be okay with that. But to demand Binary? Pfeh! > I've been thinking about the "obstacles" for a long time, and I'm > convinced they're not as large as they might appear at first glance. > The end goal of the LCC is actually very simple: to create a single > set of binaries that constitute an implementation of the LSB > standard; to use that single set of binaries as a "common core" > for as many Linux distributions as possible; and to develop the > common core in an open and collaborative fashion, so the end result > is owned by the community, not by one or two commercial players. Let us change this somewhat and see what you may think. The end goal of the LCC is actually very simple: to create a single set of source-packages that constitute an implementation of the LSB standard(with or without RPM) and strict policies; to use that single set of source-packages as a "common core" for as many Linux distributions as possible, again with a strict set of policies; to produce a implementation test kit to verify these "common cores"; and to develop the common core in an open and collaborative fashion, so the end result is owned by the community, not by any commercial players. > There's only one preconceived notion: that we need a single set of > binaries, because that's what ISVs and IHVs require for the result to be > viable. PUT THE BRAKES ON. Single set of Binaries, right there I'll be 110% opposed to this. As I am sure many in the Gentoo crowd and perhaps even some others (Linux From Scratch is another) will be against this. Repeat after me: Binary is not the way. Binary is not the way. > The LCC doesn't mandate the use of RPM (only to the extent the > LSB does, which Debian can already address). Which is exactly why Debian is not REALLY considered an LSB Distro. RPM and the "big players" policies are so inadequate thereby removing RPM as a viable alternative to package management for the LCC. My gosh tar.gz or tar.bz2 binaryballs would be immensely better than RPM in that regard. But let me keep saying Binary is not the way. Source for the core-packages, with an ABI/API/OTHER Test Kit to test compliance, should be what happens. > The LCC doesn't mandate > what "compatibility" means as regards package naming or library > versioning or anything else--it only says we need to agree on > *something*, because agreeing on something buys us a lot, whereas > continuing to differ on such minor things doesn't serve any purpose > other than to divide us and set the stage for one or two companies > to run away with commercial Linux via ISV/IHV certification lock-in. ISV/IHV don't quite understand what it really means to use these standards, they THINK they want these standards... but in reality they want thing mandated into the systems. That in and of itself hampers what really Debian, for that matter Linux is all about. It stifles revolutionary disruptive evolution. Debian is all about Stifling on Stable, but not elsewhere. Where you are leading Microsoft has already gone down that path. Look at how much of a NIGHTMARE it is to deal with different versions of the same Libraries with the same interfaces... but reacting differently and breaking many things. > If you're having trouble picturing how Debian might engage the LCC, > here's my ideal scenario: the source packages at the core of > Debian are maintained in collaboration with the other LCC members, > and the resulting binaries built from those source packages are made > available in both RPM and .deb format. Care would have to be taken to > ensure that the resulting RPM- and Debian-based versions of the common > core are compatible. Okay, he we are as Debian, with strict policies about packaging. If we could get the RPM based
Re: Linux Core Consortium
On Thu, 2004-12-09 at 21:35 -0800, Philip Miller wrote: > Greg Folkert wrote: > > Many reasons people come to Debian... Distributed Binaries is not one of > > them. > > If you think this isn't a reason to use Debian, I, as a long-time user, will > tell you that > you're dead wrong. I use Debian because there exist packages for most every > popular piece > of free software out there, and I will never have to use an untrusted binary > package to > install it conveniently. Even when it comes to installing software that's not > in the > Archive, I can safely install it from source, with the assurance that none of > its files > will be mixed in with any files installed by the package management system > (not the case > with most 3rd-party RPMS). Should umm, clarify, Distributed Binaries == Binaries Built and shoved into Debian by an External Entity or 3rd Party. I rarely, RARELY compile a package with dpkg-buildpackage. When I do, it is for a local modification to workaround a hardware, security or performance issue before it is patched or fixed in Debian. Typically the only 3rd Party Binaries I use are Games or Business Critical (non-free/commercial) applications as deemed by the PHBs that be. > I am doing some sysadmin work involving RedHat Enterprise Linux 3 systems, > and I will tell > you that they do a terrible job of maintaining a binary distribution. > Standing by > themself, let alone compared to Debian, they do no integration testing of the > packages > they release and distribute. For example, this past summer, after a new > server > installation, we had to build and install a local copy of Perl, because the > version they > distributed was completely incompatible with both mailscanner and amavisd-new > due to > module bugs. This sort of brown-paper-bag error in a release is unthinkable > in Debian, > precisely because of the QA that our exact distributed binaries go through > (and this > particular issue was actually caught in testing, as it should have been). I have done and continue to manage RedHat AS/ES installations. I do these primarily via ssh, one is on another continent, most are in the US, though states away though). I can tell you first hand the terrible fixes I have had to force onto some of those systems that just wouldn't work with Oracle or Tuxedo or Websphere or mainly becuase of this lack of QA from RedHat. Regression testing, or integration testing as you call it, is by far the best reason to come to Debian. When I think of Debian and Binary... those are Binaries Built by Buildd-s in the Debian Submission and Acceptance process. Not on lumpy.redhat.com or some other external host that I have zero real knowledge of. And for your Perl Issue, you could have just CPAN updated those Perl Modules. I have had to do that many times. There are certain things I like about RedHat... one is the rpmbuild setup. If one could employ policies in an RPM build that are applied to DEB builds... I'd think that 99.9% of the issues we speak about in RedHat would be solved. So, I guess you misread what I meant. Or I wasn't as clear as I should have been. Either way, you should now understand my position a bit better. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] REMEMBER ED CURRY! http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry Onerous congratulations on your conceptual development of obliteration concerning telephones, lobsters and fish! signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Linux Core Consortium
On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 12:50 +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 12:40:29PM -0500, Ian Murdock wrote:
> > Let me first say unequivocally that the LCC is very interested in
> > getting Debian involved. The question has always been: How do we do
> > that?
>
> I think there is one obvious answer to this question: 'Learn from
> history'.
>
> 1. Unix and UnitedLinux failed. LSB party succeeded but has no practical
> importance.
>
> 2. GNOME succeeded for the desktop.
>
> The reason why the above failed have already been outlined in this
> thread and one quote from Bruce sums it up pretty well: 'The members
> considered that they had proprietary value at the level at which they
> were collaborating.
>
> The reason why GNOME succeeded is because it builds a solid, predictable
> and free base for vendors and distributions to build on. Every major
> distribution which is interested (mostly RedHat, Novell and Sun) has
> people working on GNOME and collaborating with each other.
>
> The other reason why GNOME succeeded is because it spectacularly managed
> to reinvent itself to make it feasible for others to build upon it.
> Before those mentioned above used GNOME as their base, it was pretty
> much similar to what Debian is today: No proper release schedules,
> delays and not much of a broad and far-reaching vision.
>
> So I think the obvious conclusion to the above answer ('learn from history')
> is:
>
>
> *** The interested parties of the LCC should pick Debian as a base and
> Debian should make this possible. ***
W, that would be tough. But I like it. At least for Core.
> Rather than everybody just throwing all their stuff in together and
> mixing it up.
>
> Of course, this would also mean for Debian to change. Debian is free
> and solid today, but not predictable. Thus:
>
> * We should commit to strict release cycles of a base system others
>(and Debian itself) can build value upon.
So we would detach "Core" from everything else, perhaps we should also
then also define kernels with specific patches to accommodate certain
situations or applications. IOW have flavours of kernels be something
like:
kernel-image-
kernel-image-
kernel-image-
kernel-image-
kernel-image-
kernel-image-
kernel-image-
kernel-image
With those Distributions needing keeping the base-patchset up-to-date
and while the buildd machines compile for the architectures, While we as
Debian just continue on managing these patchsets to work on all arches.
This would require those other Distros to become more policy driven. How
would we split this out? Would we then have "Core Only DDs"? Would we
still have the ability to get security fixes out the door in time?
Should we do revision releases like say we do for Woody right now:
3.0r1/2/... would this work? Doing incremental security/major bug-fix
releases similar to the way Microsoft does it? (No not really, but the
idea is similar) Should we then have a "Core Only"
Stable/Testing/Sid/Experimental?
> * We should probably also commit to a set of core architectures which
>*need* to be bug-free on release, while the rest *should* be, but
>would not delay the release.
I disagree here, when WOULD they get worked on then? Release pending is
a good motivator. But as we see now, it is not *THE HOLY GRAIL* of
Motivators. Some of the *OLDER* not able to keep up as of now anyway
buildd machine arches might be candidates, but Dang what a way to slam
the door on them. (like 32bit Sparc, M68K, others)
> * We should look into having a reality-check with respect to licensing
>and the way we treat each other.
Now this... needs to happen anyway.
> On the other hand, this would also mean: The other partners should get
> involved into Debian development, both by getting their toolchain/base
> developers into the Debian project and possibly accepting Debian
> developers into their ranks.
Again, this should happen period.
> All this could not be done easily, but it is the only viable solution
> for a solid, free and predictable base system. There is no alternative
> to it.
Unfortunately, this I agree with you. It will make it the toughest thing
on the planet. A sub-structure of Buildd will need to make both DEB
packages as well as RPM, lest we not forget, TGZ/other packages mgmt
systems.
This is a big job, which I believe nobody will succeed on. Which is tooo
bad.
--
greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The technology that is
Stronger, better, faster: Linux
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Linux Core Consortium
On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 06:31 -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: > On Thu, 2004-12-09 at 23:15 -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > > John Goerzen dijo [Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 09:40:51PM -0600]: > > > > I think that tying core Debian packages to the Red Hat boat anchor is a > > > > horrible, horrible idea. > > > > > > I tend to agree with sentiments like this, but didn't Bruce mention > > > that we could participate in this organization even if we didn't take > > > their packages? That is, perhaps we could influence the direction to > > > a more useful one? > > > > > > If that is the case, it seems zero risk to me. > > > > Then we would be non-participants, we would be just bitchers, telling > > everybody how fucked-up their process and QA are. We would gain > > nothing, and we would lose as everybody would say that Debian refuses > > to play together with the guys after giving an initial 'yes'. And no, > > no ISV would certify Debian just because Debian sits and bitches. > > There are diplomatic ways to say, "your processes and QA are all > fucked up". > > We'll just have to send someone who knows how to do that. :) And just who the he(double-toothpick) would you suggest? Scott James Remnant? >:^) -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: New stable version after Sarge
On Tue, 2005-01-04 at 16:17 +0100, Paul van der Vlis wrote: > Martin Schulze schreef: > > Paul van der Vlis wrote: [...] > > At least that's been the case including sarge. Hence, such > > a sentence would not mean anything. > > > >>I can understand something like "Debian releases when it's ready", but > >>many people have to work together. Maybe it's better to say: "a package > >>releases when it's ready, but the deadline for the next Debian release > >>is a fixed date". > > > > What if the installer is broken at that time? > > Normally a broken installer does not come into testing (ehm, I don't > know for sure the installer is a normal package). > > For me, installing was never a big problem. You can use an old installer > and update. And a special installation (e.g. on soft-raid) you can > install first somewhere else and then copy it. No, this not good enough. How many MORE e-mails do you want on both Debian User and Debian Devel? It would hugely magnify the amount. > > What if the buildd network is busted at that time? > > What if n library transitions are in progress at that time? > > What if our archive suite lacks an important improvement which > >is a requirement for being able to maintain the new stable > >release? > > When there is a fixed deadline you can plan such things better to be > ready for the new release. What part of "Volunteers" don't you understand? We can't force ANYONE to do anything at anytime. > > Sure, you could still release, but would you really like to have > > such a release? > > I agree, quality is more important then the release date. So, then if quality is what Debian is all about, why bother proposing a fixed date. We are progressing through stages already, just that to fix everything... well there's that "Volunteers" word again. > >>You will understand that my most important point is security-support. > > > > Oh I forgot: > > > > What if security support for a new release cannot be guaranteed at > >that time? > Same answer. This is only an incremental problem of the whole release staging design, control and planning . Quality and Security are by far Debian MOST important end-user needed features. We provide this by complying with the Debian Social Contract and the Debian Free Software Guide, both of which are the definition of Debian. You should read them. Debian: the Install once and update from there distro. So really why does it matter? If you want a distro that is based on timely releases, there are quite a few out there. The only one I would use is Ubuntu. Being Debian based, there are quite a few things to be said about its quality, "perfect" is not one, "way ahead of most others" IS one. But, still they demand a 6 month release schedule. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: New stable version after Sarge
On Tue, 2005-01-04 at 14:58 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Quoting Thomas Jollans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Well, you could argue that debian branches are not perfectly named but: > > "stable" is best if you need *absolute* failsafety for critical jobs > > "testing" is best if you want a stable system with new(ish) software > > "unstable" is for everybody who needs the newest software, like me. > > > > honestly, I have never had problems (yet) with using sid for day-to-day > > stuff. If I needed something more production-ready, I'd use testing > > because you have (almost) garantee that the software will work and you > > will have security updates, too. (But not in the same quality as > > "stable", as I understand it. If I needed to run a always-needed > > very-important server on the internet, I would use "stable". > > > > I would strongly caution against using Sarge for a production system > until there is security team support. See this message I posted to d-u > when someone pointed out that they were running sarge on some servers: > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2004/12/msg03846.html I also commented in the thread, if you recall. I stated I run SID/experimental for certain things, Testing with updates from SID if need be... etc. The thing is, that unless you *really* know how and what you are doing with pinning and preferences and the mighty good reasons for doing them, you should stick with Stable for servers. People that think "ahhh, what could happen" or "Bah, I'm only one IP addr" or even the penultimate "Dude, I am running SID with Experimental Preferred that is SOOO 31337!" Are just asking for their machine to be ummm... cracked/whacked or put out of its misery. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: New stable version after Sarge
On Wed, 2005-01-05 at 10:45 +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote: > On Jan 04, Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > It shouldn't be forgotten that the biggest blocker after these things is > > probably a general failure to actually care all that much. How many > > people are actually behaving as if a release is just around the corner? > A very simple way would be to make them believe that this is true, and > this is going to be hard if it's not. > > Let's try a different approach: everybody should ask himself "is > something I am doing or not doing holding the release?". > And after fixing his own work then ask "who is left doing or not > something which is holding the release?", and start pointing fingers. > (Pointing fingers may not help speeding up the release, but will be an > useful distraction while we wait.) OK, exactly what are YOU NOT DOING, now? Come on, I know you CAN'T be that busy. You only maintain a few trivial packages... come on you could NMU the kernel-source-2.[4|6] fixing all th issues. To that extent, there is only a few hundred RC bugs. Me, You ask? I am already too busy to help out. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux P.S. Of course you hopefully realize, that this is a flippant remark. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Experimental gaim_1.1.1-2 for Alpha
I have built this package for alpha and it does indeed work. I have bundled it up in a tgz making it easier to D/L. But all the files are there as well for individual inspection. Along with the md5sums http://www.gregfolkert.net/experimental/ not an archive by any means, but available at your discretion. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Experimental gaim_1.1.1-2 for Alpha
On Wed, 2005-01-05 at 08:55 -0500, Greg Folkert wrote: > I have built this package for alpha and it does indeed work. I have > bundled it up in a tgz making it easier to D/L. But all the files are > there as well for individual inspection. Along with the md5sums > > http://www.gregfolkert.net/experimental/ > > not an archive by any means, but available at your discretion. BTW, someone pointed out I didn't sign the .changes file... ummm oops. First real try at building the packages for general consumption. My bad. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Experimental gaim_1.1.1-2 for Alpha
On Wed, 2005-01-05 at 23:18 +, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > Greg doesn't appear to be a Debian developer so neither of this > applies. The first paragraph is good advice in general, though. Apologies for not expounding on this point. Any further deeds done this way, will be disclaimed that I am not a Debian Developer. I just wish there was Debian Hardware/Software Vendor representative or something. So we could give blessings/help/advice/set-of-hands helping with ISVs and IHVs, understand the reasons behind Debian and how to USE the infrastructure to their advantage. Showing them the methods that make administrative things in Debian a piece of cake. And why they should support it, from both policy and quality standpoints. I guess, you would call these Sales Representatives or Systems Engineering Sales Support or Pre-Sales Technical Support or something in the Commercial & Government Sectors. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Always run dpkg --dry-run -i before running dpkg -i!
On Thu, 2005-01-06 at 17:30 -0500, William Ballard wrote: > On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 11:28:55PM +0100, Sebastian Ley wrote: > > Btw: Leaving old packages build from -source packages around would quite > > well > > do the trick. But I suppose W.B. wants to call more people assholes before > > invoking brain functions... > > Right: I have to do all this special stuff to fix things that break > because for god's sake the source package isn't going to help me out. > > For some strange reason with source packages Debian has decided "aw > the RPM model's not so bad. Just don't fuck up!" There is a reason for build-dep, it only install the needed things to compile. There is a reason there is a package called: module-assistant I have previous to its introduction, sweat bullets when ever I did the things it does... so much so that I created a shell script to remind me of all the steps. Asking me questions along the way. I nearly always have a second term open to the machine I am working on... to double check many things. Tonight, I nearly screwed the pooch. On one of my production machines, I was doing cleanup like I normally do... well my Lab-Boxer mix 8 month old puppy (not small by any means) decided it want to play. She out her playtoy on my keyboard as I was going to remove /lib/modules/2.4.26/kernel/drivers/net/ipv4/netfilter/ I got to: /lib/modules/2.4.26/kernel/drivers/net/ipv4 when she drop the toy on my numeric-pad enter key. Since this was an RPM machine... I always keep those custom compiled packages around, usually about 3-4 versions. I was able to look at the config, saw that I had compiled in all of ipv4 except the netfilter. So I was cool. Still I could have re-installed the kernel RPM. I also, keep a HUGE repository of Debian packages, my autoclean actually does a copy of all the files it is going to delete to an nfs mount. That way I can always sneaker net the packages over if I gotta. Sorry WB, but the argument you started (by you) was lost when you did not CYA. Why do we have to pay with bearing crudeness for your, albeit accidental, mistake. It is annoying to have this stuff happen, but as with all things, we tend to become complacent with things and drop our standards/guards down a bit. When we get bit, it hurts. We do it over and over and over again. Me, I do stuff blindly, mainly because I know I can recover my mistakes. Doing the self->foot(shoot)... well its not always easy to swallow especially when you have limited resources at the locale you might be at (Like Ma's home, or the CEO's Home Office) -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Always run dpkg --dry-run -i before running dpkg -i!
On Thu, 2005-01-06 at 18:46 -0500, William Ballard wrote: > On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 12:32:50AM +0100, Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo wrote: > > No, you should use module-assistant tool, which is a high level tool > > If I have installed module-assistant and ndiswrapper-source and have > not installed ndiswrapper-utils and install ndiswrapper-modules > the modules-assistant way, what happens? > > Does it (a) break during install (b) tell me it won't install correctly > or (c) download and install it for me? (c) Download and install it for you. Used it many a time to install nvidia stuff, being one of the particular ones I do, do regularly. It grabs all the GL stuff and nvidia utils. > > Yup, it is called Debian Policy. > > Funny, the author of module-assistant just said there is no > policy for 3rd policy modules. He said there's some stuff, > but not as categorically full stop as you said it. > > Funny, huh. There is no policy for 3rd party. But, use the tools available and help yourself alot. I resisted module-assistant until I used it. Took me 3 times to make sure I was actually seeing what I was seeing. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: apt-get should be able to install packages "directly"
On Thu, 2005-01-06 at 23:54 +0100, Blade wrote: > That's the normal way. This way allows me to install dozens of > module-source packages and build module packages from them for Debian > kernels, without having to install a half GiB of additional software > that I really do not need. > > What we really need is the apt-get extension mentioned here a while ago > that would allow you to run apt-get on local packages (without > generating a local repository as described by Michel here). Exceptional, supercalifragilisticexpealidocious, Uber ultra, massively, extra special, like duh already SECONDED! -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Always run dpkg --dry-run -i before running dpkg -i!
On Thu, 2005-01-06 at 19:09 -0500, William Ballard wrote: > On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 06:55:47PM -0500, Greg Folkert wrote: > > (c) Download and install it for you. > > You're right, but there's still one problem: > It breaks first and *then* fixes it. > By the time it's broken, your old network card no longer > works and you can't connect to an apt repository to fix it. > > Doesn't this put network card source packages in a > special category? I mentioned this in my bug report. > > m-a should see if it's going to break before it breaks > > Now you're going to say: "keep around old packages in > case it breaks, what are you stupid? it's the kernel! > keep backups" > > and I'll say: you knew before-hand it was going to > break, why'd you break it? > > The temporary apt-repository is the only reliable > solution. m-a is solving a problem I don't have. Fine then, don't use it. It'll pull the deps before it install the modules and unloads them and re-loads them. If you want to keep shooting self in foot please do so quietly. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Always run dpkg --dry-run -i before running dpkg -i!
On Thu, 2005-01-06 at 19:25 -0500, William Ballard wrote: > On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 07:13:02PM -0500, Greg Folkert wrote: > > Fine then, don't use it. It'll pull the deps before it install the > > modules and unloads them and re-loads them. > > I just didn't realize this crap was so brittle. > > So many ways to fix brokenness when I just don't know why dpkg even > bothers starting it knows it can't finish. Sure you can say it's > for experts but half-installing something you know the dependencies > aren't there should be a Forced option, not the default. > > The solutioun as everybody has said and how I started this thread > is just don't trust dpkg anymore than you trust rpm. > > apt-get direct packages or temporary apt repositories for me Well, at least we all have learned from your "mistake" Too bad it happened. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: mplayer, the time has come
On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 11:46 +0100, A Mennucc wrote: > hi > > I have uploaded a new version of the 'mplayer' package for Debian, > namely version 1.0pre6-1 > > (Unfortunately it does not show yet in the new queue at > http://qa.debian.org/~anibal/debian-NEW.html > but it is also accessible at > http://tonelli.sns.it/pub/mplayer/sarge > ) > > I REALLY think that the time has come for mplayer to be part of Debian What about the Packages for mplayer that Christian Marillat has been providing for years? Have you even discussed this with him? > > > --- HISTORY and CURRENT STATUS > > There have been two main problems keeping mplayer out of Debian: > licenses and copyrights. > > Licenses: > the upstream code contains some code that is protected by > (more or less) actively enforced licenses: > DeCSS code to decode encrypted dvd; > ffmpeg and OpenDivx code to en/decode MPEG4. > > Solution: > the DeCSS is deleted from the package proposed for Debian > (for this reason, I upload mplayer as a native package); > whereas ffmpeg is not a problem anymore : the package 'ffmpeg' > is in Debian already. > The OpenDivx code is not there any more, see in section E.2 of docs, or > http://www.mplayerhq.hu/DOCS/HTML/en/mplayer-binary.html > > Copyrights: at some time in the past, a lot of code was added to mplayer > without keeping due track (as GPL requires); this spurred a long > and wild thread in debian and mplayer lists, about 5 years ago. > > Solution: lately, the mplayer team did a long and detailed work to track down > the origin of all the code in MPlayer; the results are in the 'Copyright' > file. > > > --- PLEA > > Please, please > > I acknowledge that, in the past, there were many problems that > prevented mplayer from entering Debian; these problems sometimes > spurred flaming threads; I think that these problems are now solved; > but some people would still write mails as > "mplayer is a copyright mess" or > "mplayer is so encumbered by patents it will never go in Debian". > > Please forget the past problems and check this package as it is now. > > --- POPULAR SUPPORT > > there have been many voices asking for mplayer to be in Debian > > Jan 05, F Dannemare: > " what is now holding back >software such as mplayer/mencoder, transcode and mjpegtools from >entering Debian?" > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/01/msg00721.html > > Goswin von Brederlow : > "At least I would like to know whats up with mplayer now that ffmpeg is > in Debian." > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/02/msg00136.html > > Jul 2004 , L Kaplan: > "I didn't find any package for MPlayer on the main repository. I checked > its license and found it to be GPL v2 > (http://www.mplayerhq.hu/homepage/design7/info.html) > Any reason that it won't have a package?" > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2004/07/msg01522.html > > Jan 04, D Shearer, Re: Top 5 things that aren't in Debian but should be :-) > "mplayer will definitely make the top 5, it illustrates some of the >bottle-necks of Debian or better, of the upstream. When two perfect ones >meet ;) " > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2004/01/msg00820.html > > M Krafft > "So can we package it now for Debian?" > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/07/msg00942.html > > Moreover there have been many many ITP for mplayer. > > --- HISTORY > > the history of the effort to have MPlayer into Debian is a lng one; > we have uploaded many packages; the second-but-last time I prepared and/or > uploaded a package was in > Jul 2003 : http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/07/msg01633.html > we received some feedback and we corrected all problems in mplayer 0.90 > Mar 2004 : > there was a nice and contructive thread started by > http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/03/msg00235.html > which suggested that mplayer was ready to be accepted > (but for a minor concern expressed in >http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/03/msg00243.html > that was not considered too bad to reject the package). > > I then uploaded a package mplayer 1.0.cvs20030324-1 > that was refused (in Aug 04) because > /usr/share/doc/mplayer/copyright was incomplete; I uploaded a > corrected version , and never received a reply. > > > a. > -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: mplayer, the time has come
On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 06:52 -0500, Greg Folkert wrote: > On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 11:46 +0100, A Mennucc wrote: > > hi > > > > I have uploaded a new version of the 'mplayer' package for Debian, > > namely version 1.0pre6-1 > > > > (Unfortunately it does not show yet in the new queue at > > http://qa.debian.org/~anibal/debian-NEW.html > > but it is also accessible at > > http://tonelli.sns.it/pub/mplayer/sarge > > ) > > > > I REALLY think that the time has come for mplayer to be part of Debian > > What about the Packages for mplayer that Christian Marillat has been > providing for years? > > Have you even discussed this with him? Obviously from other remarks I am a Buffoon. Surely all the work he has done is worth something, thinking about using his stuff for a base to work from. But, obviously, Buffoonism are me. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: all new Debian diagram - now with less chaos!
On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 02:27 -0500, Kevin Mark wrote: > Hi debianista, > > after my initial work on a diagram, and the comments and the work of > madduck, I had some time to redo my diagram to produce a totally new > concept. any comment appreciated. > > http://kmark.home.pipeline.com/newdebian.png > http://kmark.home.pipeline.com/newdebian.dia Not to find fault with something that will clear up much confusion in the Debian Sphere of Being, but I am wonder where the contributions back to upstream are in this picture? Where should it go? I don't know. Debian is one of the largest contributors to upstream(s), with bug-fixes, feature adds and improvements in code cleanliness. As well as being upstream for many things. Also, shouldn't it also be noted the distributions that are based on Debian that give-back to upstream (like Ubuntu and the plugin-dev and pmount thing). Given I don't know if it warrants, as it would be a user submission with patch to the DBTS. Other than that, I think its very good looking, I don't have the knowledge to judge whether it is accurate of not. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: "The Debian exim 4 packages suck badly" on exim-users@exim.org
On Thu, 2005-02-17 at 16:36 +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
[...let's all get along outside Debian please snippage...]
> Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> >To: Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >From: Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >Marc Haber writes ("Re: Bug#276126: [exim] allow headers_remove|add options
> >to be given multiple times"):
> >> I am pretty well aware that Debian is unpopular with exim upstream
> >> [...]
> >
> >Debian is rightly unpopular with Exim upstream because the Debian
> >Exim4 packages have a vastly overcomplicated and buggy configuration
> >generator which causes hassle upstream, and because the Debian Exim
> >maintainers have badly managed the communications with upstream.
Debian is unpopular Many places where Debian has changed the "globbed"
config. Many people HATE little bitty files to make things work. Me,
best thing since Sliced Bread. Except I'd rather see --keepcomments as
default and changed to --removecomments. My only gripe, pretty minimal.
> Other readers, please take a look at #295391 before participating in
> the flamewar.
I for one would LOVE to see Ian produce an exim4 configurator... why not
make one for Webmin. The current thing in Webmin only does monitoring.
That way, it COULD be use standalone (with a wrapper) or with Webmin.
Or Ian, could just look at this configuration setup as a way to keep
Hosting Providers happy as dropping a file into routers, basically can
setup a whole virtual domain. I use it that way. Best part is when they
leave, remove the router and they are gone. I also have split up configs
for other mail apps and Webservers, domain specific [PHP|Perl|
Pyhton]/[pgsql|mysql] settings for Apache too. Drop the file in the
right spot... voila all done.
If you cannot see how making it bigtime massive sitehosting friendly...
is a bad thing at all. You *DO* have an option to just use the Bigfile
anytime... make sure the the file /etc/exim4/exim.conf is there and not
a symlink.
--
greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The technology that is
Stronger, better, faster: Linux
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: "The Debian exim 4 packages suck badly" on exim-users@exim.org
On Thu, 2005-02-17 at 14:24 -0800, Blunt Jackson wrote: > On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 19:31:20 +, Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Scripsit Blunt Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > As a general note, I find it annoying, frustrating, and confusing > > > whenever ANY debian package has a substantially different > > > installation or configuratin mechanism than the mechanism documented > > > by the software publisher. > > > > Perhaps Debian is not the distribution for you, then. We have always > > prioritized constistency across the entire Debian OS over adherence to > > what upstream authors somehow chose to do. > > Obviously there's a balance. I wasn't looking for flames. I believe I > did explain *why* debian was my distribution of choice even so. > > > I maintain one package whose upstream author apparently thought that > > $PATH would be a good place to look for a system-wide configuration > > file. I changed that to look in /etc instead, which makes the > > configuration mechanism in Debian substantially different from > > upstream's. You may find this annoying, frustrating and confusing, but > > it's how Debian operates. > > And clearly, *this* is a scenario in which the upstream author was way > outside the *unix* standard way of doing things. I'm not saying > there's any clear-cut answer, other than to hope that both upstream > developers and debian package maintainers use common sense. > > One distinction is in applications that the majority of users just > want to work out of the box, and forget about. If I had to tweak the > configuration of every application on my servers, I would be a > frothing maniac. But there are some biggies, some very well known > applications, that, when installed for any practical purpose, > generally require somewhat sophisticated user oversight. Exim is one, > Apache is another. Mysql is a third. I put in the time to figure out > the debian way of doing Exim (and I'm still not sure I understand it, > but at for now I have it working). There was a substantial amount of > hair pulling and cursing due to the disparity between what I saw on my > hard drive and what I saw in the online documentation. Okay, then generate the "old fashioned"Huge config file with --keepcomments and If you don't remove the banners for each file you will know which on the baddy. Also, if you need to re-order the routers (the only one out side of routers that need ordering is acl) then it is easy to do by simply changing the number/letters at the beginning of the files name. I DO NOT see what is so different from /etc/exim4/exim4.conf as compared to /var/lib/exim4/config.autogenerated, especially if you use --keepcomments. there really *IS* no difference. The pieces are just packaged in small manageable ones to aid in the updating of. Docs especially are like that Phil Hazel doesn't update them every time he bumps the release. Marc Haber and Andreas Metzler are doing a great job with exim. > After that > experience, when I installed apache and mysql, and saw they were doing > their own thing as well, I decided I didn't want to learn go through > the same frustration with applications I already knew pretty well. I > removed the debian packages, and compiled my own from the upstream > developers. Note that removing the debian packages did not remove all > their config files and so forth, there was a fair bit of manual > cleanup afterwards -- but I'm not using the stable distribution, so I > don't expect perfection. > > As for you, Florian's snide comment: > > > Just because the configuration file is called /etc/exim4/exim4.conf > > instead of /usr/exim/configure? Oh dear. > > No, it was the stuff like this that made me pull out my hair: > > domainlist local_domains = DEBCONFlocal_domainsDEBCONF > > How do I figure out where that DEBCONF stuff is coming from? What it means? When you use "update-exim4.conf --keepsettings" the generated fully populated is available at /var/lib/exim4/config.autogenerated. Also, any debconf setting are in the file: update-exim4.conf.conf things like DEBCONFlocal_domainDEBCONF is changed to the setting(s) in that file. Also, one other thing, look at the main directory in the config... it has about 3 files in it. Those three files are the important ones that define "default actions" for exim to take. Many of those are also can be managed by debconf as well. > Of course, it didn't help that during the install I didn't quite know > what I was doing, so based on the advice of the install program I > chose the big-file-install, which *was* what I wanted, but I forgot > that I had done that, so when I went to look at the exim config and > found, as the exim website told me I would find (because I was on > debian), a gazillion little bitty config files, I got started figuring > them out, editing them, and not realizing why it made no difference. > Suggestion to exim package people: if someone chooses the big config > file, don't eve
Re: "The Debian exim 4 packages suck badly" on exim-users@exim.org
On Fri, 2005-02-18 at 06:54 +0100, Marc Haber wrote: > On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 10:01:45 +1100, Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >If something like this is different, then not only should Debian > >supplied documentation reflect the change, but a list of differences > >should appear in README.Debian. > > One thing I have learned in the last 24 hours is that people do not > bother to read available documentation, regardless of where it is > stored. You have to hurl it right into the user's face. > > I begin to understand the blurb of rants that cdrecord prints on > invocation. Indeedly-do. Many people cannot find it then. Some people just WANT THE ANSWER, don;t wanna learn anything to mayhaps fix it easy in the future. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: "The Debian exim 4 packages suck badly" on exim-users@exim.org
On Thu, 2005-02-17 at 20:08 +0100, Marc Haber wrote: > On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 12:16:24 -0500, Greg Folkert > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Except I'd rather see --keepcomments as > >default and changed to --removecomments. My only gripe, pretty minimal. > > And fixed soon. #295735. Wow, I didn't even consider it a problem. I just edited the scripts to do it by default.. :) Now I don't have to. Thanks Marc. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: pwc-source headed for unstable this weekend
On Fri, 2005-02-18 at 20:35 +0100, Eric Lavarde wrote: > Hi, > > (I assume everybody is on -devel, like I am, and as it seems the problem > sits between keyboard and chair, no bug report either). > > This might very well be, as I didn't compile the kernel myself (I just > use the standard kernel-image-2.6.10-1-k7 package) but used > kernel-source-2.6.10 with the .config from the image package, make > oldconfig and make dep (which I was told is deprecated, so). That is exactly what the package "kernel-headers-2.6.10-1-k7" is for, it depends on "kernel-headers-2.6.10-1" and creates the symlink proper for thrid party and external modules to use. > > So, basically, your saying that the right way to do this kind of things > is to use the corresponding kernel-headers package, and apt-get tells me > that I need as well kernel-kbuild to build "out-of-tree kernel modules" > which seems to be exactly what I need. Yes, he is correct. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting
On Tue, 2005-03-15 at 00:58 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > Hi Aurélien, > On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 10:56:51AM +0100, Aurélien Jarno wrote: > > Steve Langasek a écrit : > > >The much larger consequence of this meeting, however, has been the > > >crafting of a prospective release plan for etch. The release team and > > >the ftpmasters are mutually agreed that it is not sustainable to > > >continue making coordinated releases for as many architectures as sarge > > >currently contains, let alone for as many new proposed architectures as > > >are waiting in the wings. > > Would it be possible to have a list of such proposed architectures? > > I think this has already been answered, by someone who knows better than > I. > [snip] > > > >Architectures that are no longer being considered for stable releases > > >are not going to be left out in the cold. The SCC infrastructure is > > >intended as a long-term option for these other architectures, and the > > >ftpmasters also intend to provide porter teams with the option of > > >releasing periodic (or not-so-periodic) per-architecture snapshots of > > >unstable. > > My primary desktop machine is an i386, but it was sometimes ago and for > > a limited period of time and hppa machine, because my i386 had problems. > > It allowed me to continue my work on Debian packages. In the case this > > new infrastructure is set up, does upload from a SCC architecture to > > unstable would still be allowed? If no, source only upload must be > > allowed again. > > Since non-RC (release candidate) architectures are going to be in the > same unstable tree as the RC architectures (uploads to ftp-master, > etc.), I don't see any reason that this would be disallowed. > > > >- there must be a sufficient user base to justify inclusion on all > > > mirrors, defined as 10% of downloads over a sampled set of mirrors > > AFAIK, only i386 currently meet this criterion. > > Of the architectures currently in sarge, that's correct. It's assumed > that amd64 will easily meet this 10% mark for etch. (If it doesn't, > then the cut-off probably has to be re-thought, since it doesn't make > much sense to have a 1/11 split between ftp.d.o and scc.d.o, > *particularly* when the 11 archs together *would* most likely account > for > 10%.) > > > BTW, I am not sure this is really a good way to measure the use of an > > architecture, mainly because users could use a local mirror if they have > > a lot of machines of the same architecture. How about using popcon *in > > addition* to that? > > This isn't being used to measure the use of the architecture; it's being > used to measure the *download frequency* for the architecture, which is > precisely the criterion that should be used in deciding how to structure > the mirror network. Okay, I have to comment here, seeing that I personally have at two separate locations, two complete mirrors, that I use nearly everyday. They only update when a change in the archive is detected. That means *MY* $PRETTY_BIG_NUMBER of usages of my own mirrors in each locale will mean nothing. I do my own mirror(s) so as to reduce the load on the Debian network. I actually scaled back what I use, now only having 5 arches I support, SPARC(and UltraSPARC), Alpha, HPPA-RISC, PowerPC and x86(Intel and otherwise). I dropped IA64 a while ago and will pickup X86_AMD64 when it become part of Sid Proper. How would you address the fact the bulk of my usage is not even seen by your network. > > >To be eligible for inclusion in the archive at all, even in the > > >(unstable-only) SCC archive, ftpmasters have specified the following > > What about experimental? > > experimental would also be available. > > > >architecture requirements: > > I would add as for the core set architecture: > > - there must be a developer-accessible debian.org machine for the > > architecture. > > This gets a little tricky for non-RC architectures, because if it's not > already (or currently) a released architecture, we have no stable distro > that can be installed on it, which means we have no security support for > it; without security support, DSA isn't willing to maintain it, which > means they probably aren't going to want to put a "debian.org" name on > it, either -- and they certainly won't want to give it privileged access > to LDAP. > > You could say that "there must be a developer-accessible machine for the > architecture" without specifying "debian.org"; but I'm not sure that we > should *require* this, either. Particularly for ports that are waning > and are not expected to become RC architectures in the future, I think > porters should be free to decide whether to spend the effort on > maintaining such a machine since its absence only hurts that port, not > the release. I am currently in the process of acquiring rotated out of production machines for 3 of the 5 architectures I support. I make a run to the right-coast of the US once every 2 months and pickup sometimes 10 - 4-
Re: apply to NM? ha!
On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 22:45 -0500, SR, ESC wrote: > good bye. Nice of you to stop in for tea. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: apply to NM? ha!
On Tue, 2005-01-25 at 16:02 +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > Romain Francoise wrote: > > And Debian wouldn't be fun without a few enmities, we wouldn't have great > > posts like http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/07/msg01308.html or > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2001/12/msg8.html... > > Huh, and here was me thinking those were perfect examples of the sort of > idiocy that just sucks the fun right out of Debian. I thought it was tongue in cheek myself. Yes, they do suck the "fun" out of Debian. Unfortunately, these are occurring at a regularly tested rate. Let us hope that the steady trend will decline in the near and long future. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] REMEMBER ED CURRY! http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at the playfield. -- Thane Walkup signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Release-critical Bugreport for June 10, 2005
On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 16:00 +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 10:34:07AM -0400, Greg Folkert wrote: > > I guess this can go... or be changed to not be so specific. > > No, it can't go. Note that it has been changed to talk about etch, not > sarge. There's no reason to stop squashing high-severity bugs just > because we aren't in a freeze any more. > > Also, please don't quote the entire long list when replying to it. Usually I don't quoth the whole thing. Thought I'd clipped it, too. Glad to see it change to address Etch, I guess I unconsciously thought it'd go away. My bad, I'll pay even yet more attention. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bash /dev/tcp and /dev/udp
On Fri, 2006-11-24 at 13:12 -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 11/24/06 11:54, Jon Dowland wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 08:25:27AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: > >> On 11/24/06 06:06, Jon Dowland wrote: > >>> I think that having the shell re-implement netcat to be > >>> a violation of "do one thing and do it well". > >> Hmmm. A large, complicated shell like bash broke that > >> stricture long ago, no? > > > > Absolutely: but that doesn't give it a free licence to > > continue doing so :) > > Sure it does. How long ago did Perl stop being just a Practical > Extraction and Report Language? Ron, please stop that urban legend. Perl is Perl not P.E.R.L as you say. I have been corrected for saying that, by more than one Perl Monk, also by Mr. Wall. Perl is Perl. It has no meaning other than Perl. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Dropping GStreamer 0.8 for etch
On Wed, 2006-12-06 at 22:05 +0100, Helge Kreutzmann wrote: > Hello, > On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 09:41:11PM +0100, Daniel Baumann wrote: > > Loïc Minier wrote: > > > - goobox: gnome.org module that did not see any new upstream release > > >since november 2005 and seems to be completely superseded by > > >sound-juicer; Daniel Baumann seems to continue maintenance of this > > >source > > Well, I haven't tried sound-juicer, but according to the (very brief) > package description, it is a ripper, and not a player. The main aim of > goobox is to play CDs on those systems where no direct link between > the CD drive and the audio hardware exists (like, e.g., on my ibook). When I > searched late 2004 for a good audio program to do this I ended up with > goobox. If indeed sound-juicer *plays* audio CDs nice as well, I'll > try it. The Direct link (using ground, left and right) is typically called "Redbook Audio" or at least that is what it was called around the time the games "Descent" and the "Crusader" series (No Regrets and No Remorse versions) were NEWLY released. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bug#402266: RFP: sxemacs --
On Sat, 2006-12-09 at 08:56 +0300, Kirill A. Korinskiy wrote: > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist > > * Package name: sxemacs > Version : 22.1.6 > Upstream Author : > * URL or Web page : http://sxemacs.org/ > * License : GPL > Description : > So, the old addage: UNIX, a process that runs under emacs. Needs to be changed: Debian, a process that runs under sxemacs. That is after reading the main page: * SXEmacs is my Window Manager. * SXEmacs is my login shell. * SXEmacs is my image viewer. * SXEmacs is my mp3 player. * SXEmacs balances my cheque book. * SXEmacs can do the math. * SXEmacs lets me communicate with my friends. * SXEmacs helps me with my databases. * SXEmacs makes VC comfortable. * SXEmacs helps with my security. Plus the features sxemacs has that xemacs dunnah. Nice. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: ITP: nspeed -- Prints the currently incoming and outgoing traffic in kb/s of a NIC on the console, no more, no less
On Sat, 2006-12-23 at 13:38 -0500, Joey Hess wrote: > André Appel wrote: > > nseepd is a shell script which prints the kb/s which are currently > > beeing received and transmitted by a NIC in a direct way only using > > simple shell commands. No superuser rights required. All other tools I > > found displayed continuous the incoming / outgoing rate or many other > > thins. All I needed was a short information of how much is going in and > > out at the moment, displayed once. > > That seems like it would be a nice addition to ifdata in the moreutils > package. Indeedly. I find it very much similar in feel, simplicity and general applicability. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Debianized ndiswrapper-source is better on SourceForge
On Mon, 2005-01-10 at 19:59 +0100, de Bladen wrote: > In the meantime, begin to recompile Debian with staticaly linked > packages. That is very important, you know. That evil libc causes such a > mess of tight coupling, one could become crazy from just imaging all the > possible consequences!!!1 What?!!! You mean Debian Isn't statically linked for everything? OMG, SCO will be happy to know their plan worked! -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: LVM packages up for adoption
On Mon, 2005-01-17 at 09:28 +, Patrick Caulfield wrote: > What with a change of circumstances and lack of time recently I don't honestly > think I'm doing a good enough job on the LVM packages, so I'm offering them up > for adoption to anyone who thinks they can do a better job. > > The packages are: > > lvm2 - in active development, upstream helpful but often busy. > device-mapper - largely stable. occasional releases. > lvm10 - stable. no more upstream development at all. > lvm-common - native package. small number of bugs need sorting out > multipath-tools - in active development, upstream very helpful. > > If nobody wants them I'll continue to do the best I can with the time > available. Why not ask for Co-Maintainership? And I don;t believe you have been doing *THAT* bad of a job. Sure, a bit slower than you'd like. But give up? -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Debian should not modify the kernels!
On Sat, 2003-09-27 at 18:12, Herbert Xu wrote: > Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> This thread has been going on for a while, and I think the general > >> voice has been that security backports and other vital patches are > >> totally alright for kernel-source. However, I think the general > >> agreement is that feature backports are not okay. That's what > >> kernel-patches are for. > > That has not been my impression at all. > > As I have said before, kernel-source's primary purpose is for building > default Debian kernel images. Thus it should contain all the patches > necessary so that the images are uniform across architectures. So which of the 11 platforms _REQUIRE_ the IPSEC backport? If any, what is the rational that they *REQUIRE* that piece. > Having said that, I do understand that users will use it for building > custom images. But the presence of kernel-patch-debian fixes that > situation. You can easily obtain a vanilla kernel that you can apply > patches too. > > Now for those who want to get rid of just the ipsec patch, that can > be done as well. Just download it from the URL specified in the README > file and unapply it. > > If someone wants to make a kernel-patch package out of it, go right > ahead. Would that then allow you to NOT include it in the kernel-source package, but then make it a "standard" patch to be installed by default then? And have a Variable "NO_IPSEC_PATCH" or something similar so that kpkg doesn't apply it... but does apply other patches. > > What I'd really like to hear is a reaction from Herbert to: > > Osamu Aoki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > | Can your patch file to be more modular like X package? It is a big > > | chunk. > > > > Which could make both sides happy. Instead of one big patch containing > > bugfixes, security fixes and feature additions to make them separately > > available in the kernel-source-package. > > Again this is something that I have already stated my position on. > This is simply unmaintainable due to the complex relationships between > patches. > > In any case, the kernel-source package's README file should contain all > the information you need to extract any particular patch that you're > interested in. But exactly why should this particular patch (IPSEC backport) cause so much grief for the patch system, if it were to be so standard? -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] REMEMBER ED CURRY! http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry Your eyes glow like naked livers burning in the sun. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Debian should not modify the kernels!
On Sat, 2003-09-27 at 23:10, Herbert Xu wrote: > Greg Folkert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > So which of the 11 platforms _REQUIRE_ the IPSEC backport? If any, what > > is the rational that they *REQUIRE* that piece. > > As for the criteria for inclusion, I have already outlined some simple > rules earlier in this thread. I would recommend you to read it if you > are interested. Yes but those criterion fail to mention why it is required in the Debian Kernel Source. I understand it should be in the default Binary images... but as for inclusion into the default source, still begs the question _why_ is it required, as your simple statement doesn't cover that. As far as benefits it provides *I* can see it being beneficial, but still fail to see why since the entire "thrust" of Debian is all about choice and not including everything by default and making some things optional. I really have no problem with the distributed Binary Kernels including this patch, but do think additional feature should be included as a patch *to* the source, not *for removal*. And, just for grins and giggles here, if lets say that 90% of the patches available to the patch system were, in fact, actively maintained and have been/are candidates for inclusion in the Kernel by the Kernel Core Team (err maybe just Linus) would you then be including all of them as included patches and backports to the Debian Kernel source 2.4? One more thing, why have you not included the IPSEC piece in the 2.2 Source then? > >> If someone wants to make a kernel-patch package out of it, go right > >> ahead. > > > > Would that then allow you to NOT include it in the kernel-source > > package, but then make it a "standard" patch to be installed by default > > then? And have a Variable "NO_IPSEC_PATCH" or something similar so that > > kpkg doesn't apply it... but does apply other patches. > > No, the purpose of such a kernel-patch package would be to allow a user > to easily obtain the IPSEC patch should they wish to either apply it > to a vanilla kernel, or unapply it from the Debian kernel. > > Its existence is orthogonal to whether this patch is included in the > Debian kernel source. Again, why should it be orthogonal, seems opposite about why we even HAVE the Kernel Patching in kpkg at all then. Let us go back to using patch then. > > But exactly why should this particular patch (IPSEC backport) cause so > > much grief for the patch system, if it were to be so standard? > > I do not believe that this patch has caused excessive grief for the > benefits that it brings. In fact, conflicts between the Debian kernel > source and random kernel patches floating around are a fact of life. > > For example, the grsecurity patch has had a history of conflicts with > various patches in the Debian kernel source. Most of those patches that > caused conflicts were in fact essential security fixes. You can review > this for yourself by visiting to the BTS entry for the grsecurity > package. To be honest you are very right in this, in general though, why should you add insult to injury on this by making the the situation worse? Granted grsecurity and a few other patches, really "screw" with the source quite a bit, but I still fail to see why these need to be included by default Might just be we agree to disagree? And if I felt compelled to... could I maintain a kernel-source that only has bug and security fixes in it with no additional features added? Would you sponsor it? (Rhetorically asked) -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] REMEMBER ED CURRY! http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry Your eyes are much like milky pools of pantyhose. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Debian should not modify the kernels!
On Sun, 2003-09-28 at 12:08, Marco d'Itri wrote: > On Sep 28, Greg Folkert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Yes but those criterion fail to mention why it is required in the Debian > >Kernel Source. I understand it should be in the default Binary images..
d-i milo missing (might have fix)
On Tue, 2003-09-30 at 12:18, Joey Hess wrote: > The alpha port still has boot issues. In particular, we still lack the > source to milo. This is unresolved. Despite this, CD images are in > progress. Which version of milo are you referring to? I still have 0.13 through 0.27 laying around. Will that help? -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] REMEMBER ED CURRY! http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry An ocean-going tin of crosseyed mussels could never match the melodious burblings of your sister's husband. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: d-i milo missing (might have fix)
On Tue, 2003-09-30 at 13:11, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 12:49:29PM -0400, Greg Folkert wrote: > > On Tue, 2003-09-30 at 12:18, Joey Hess wrote: > > > The alpha port still has boot issues. In particular, we still lack the > > > source to milo. This is unresolved. Despite this, CD images are in > > > progress. > > > > Which version of milo are you referring to? > > > I still have 0.13 through 0.27 laying around. Will that help? > > You tell us. :) So far, no one has stepped forward to manage the MILO > side of things. Dealing with aboot is easy; it's packaged in Debian, so > pulling it from the archive when building CD images is straightforward. > MILO, OTOH, is not packaged at all, and (if my knowledge is current) has > a rather grotesque build process due to its use of a stripped-down Linux > kernel as the second-stage bootloader. Getting it somewhere that it can > be smoothly incorporated into the d-i builds is a challenge, one that's > likely to only be overcome by someone with a vested interest in the > MILO-dependent subarchs. Quick question then... how do I get on the mailing list that develops the d-i? I don't see a specific one on lists.d.o. (I could be blind though) I have a DEC Alpha 1000/4 and a DEC Alpha 2100/4 (sable) that could be stand a linux install on them. Currently I have no valid license of OSF/1 or Tru64 for them, except a 1 user "root-only" license. The 2100 would be the nasty one to get it to work on. They both require milo, the sable has never booted linux "proper" ever, as it's is the "early version" I am interested in helping out. But be warned, I come from a HARDWARE background not a programming one. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] REMEMBER ED CURRY! http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry I should welcome flagellation by your ovoviviparous torso. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: no time for all debian tasks was: interacting with the press
On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 17:57 +0200, Olaf van der Spek wrote: > On 7/14/05, Christian Fromme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Anand Kumria wrote: > > > > > Thanks for your comments -- however I don't think anyone should be able > > > afraid to point out when a debian developer is obviously not able to > > > satisfy all the Debian-related demands on their time; let alone their > > > committments. > > > > First of all, in my opinion your mail never should have gone to -devel, > > but only to Martin Schulze and maybe to Branden Robinson. > > Why can't this be discussed in public? There are probably more people > concerned about this then only him. Initially it is far better to air ones dirty laundry in the privacy of your own house than out in the Public. Due mainly to the fact of yellowish stains, brown streaks and in-human smells, or in other words Bringing to your attention before you embarrass him before a multitude of people. If then nothing comes of it, then start the airing publically. There in lies the rub. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] For technology that is Strong, Better, Faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: congratulations to the X team!!
On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 00:42 -0700, Sean Perry wrote: > I just updated to X.org. With apt. Automatically. Woohoo!! I mean full > on xserver-xorg too. I did not touch ANYTHING. > > X team you rock. This is why I started using Debian 7 years ago. This is > what keeps me here. > > One and only one snag. purging the xfree86-common package failed because > it was trying to run update-rc.d remove while the config still existed. > > Beers to those I meet in person. (Or something else more to your liking, > and at a similar cost (-: Yes! I am in the same boat and as ecstatic about said X.org X server. But, I don't see the rendering problems others see. Of course I have an Oxygen card. Old, costly, but still damn fast 5 years later. Faster in some operations than the new ATI and nVidia cards. But generally overall slower than them, but not much. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] For technology that is Strong, Better, Faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: no time for all debian tasks was: interacting with the press
On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 21:25 +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote: > On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 12:03:00PM -0400, Greg Folkert wrote: > > On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 17:57 +0200, Olaf van der Spek wrote: > > > On 7/14/05, Christian Fromme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Anand Kumria wrote: > > > > > > > > > Thanks for your comments -- however I don't think anyone should be > > > > > able > > > > > afraid to point out when a debian developer is obviously not able to > > > > > satisfy all the Debian-related demands on their time; let alone their > > > > > committments. > > > > > > > > First of all, in my opinion your mail never should have gone to -devel, > > > > but only to Martin Schulze and maybe to Branden Robinson. > > > > > > Why can't this be discussed in public? There are probably more people > > > concerned about this then only him. > > > > Initially it is far better to air ones dirty laundry in the privacy of > > your own house than out in the Public. Due mainly to the fact of > > yellowish stains, brown streaks and in-human smells, or in other words > > Bringing to your attention before you embarrass him before a multitude > > of people. > > How exactly do you know that he didn't? Do you read Joey's mail for him? > > [That goes for all you other people saying the same thing] Common Courtesy states that one should also mention personal communications, even if completely ignored by the person(s) in question. Even though Anand Kumria mention recent personal conflict with Martin, this still does nothing in the way of informing us of Netiquette being properly maintained. It is also not an excuse to cut this part out of being done period, nor of mentioning it being either way. Personally, I would have mentioned the dates and times of the e-mails/phone calls/snail-mails in the preface of the d-d-a list mail. But, then again, I am not (by far) an average person. I guess I should *FORCE* myself to have less than respectable expectations for these type of attacks^Wcriticisms. And, BTW, How do I know, officially, I don't know if he did or didn't try to contact Martin. And Yes, I read your e-mail, as well Andrew. And I too, have been guilty of doing the same thing and have also been admonished. Why stop now, trying to make d-d or d-d-a more civil, it would be hard to make less civil, on average. (of course you know I don't read yours or Martin's e-mail, as this is "tongue in cheek" mode and is a forever written in stone as a sysadmin commandment, "thou shalt not read thine users e-mail") -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] For technology that is Strong, Better, Faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Steve Kemp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Please check your Debian E-Mail.
I was finally able to acquire an SSP Build Host for you. If you are still interest. Please contact me. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] For technology that is Strong, Better, Faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bugs in default GNOME etch?
On Tue, 2007-01-16 at 20:22 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 05:55:53PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 05:22:51PM +0100, Tim Dijkstra wrote: > > > On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 17:03:15 +0100 > > > Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Just FYI, I *personally* would prefer an evince entry in the menu as > > > > well, but I prefer keeping close to the usability policy defined by > > > > upstream. > > > > Well we shouldn't keep ourselves hostage of stupid upstream behaviour, > > > should we? > > > Contrary to us, GNOME (in this case RedHat) actually employs usability > > experts. Who are we to think we know better? > > Real users with brains, instead of the idealized "ooh I'm afraid of > computers eek a mouse kill it kill it!!!" novice idiots who are the > exclusive target of all modern usability testing? How dare you spake badly of the glorious teachings of the exalted Havoc Pennington. SANE DEFAULTS! > All computer usability studies I've seen in the past 4 or so years have > focused entirely on how a user who has never seen the interface before is > able to accomplish tasks, with no consideration given to the long-term > efficiency of the interfaces that happen to have the lowest initial learning > curve. Thus their goal is to help win market share, not to help make users > more productive, and should be shunned as the near-sighted marketing crap > they really are. Praise $YOUR_DEITY! There is another that feels this way. It is also evident others do as well, because of much the customization stuff that used to be in Gnome 1.4, is being brought back using all these new add-ons, being window managers and effects adders, coloring styles controls, window placement based on what they do... etc. > Cheers :), Indeed. Cheers! -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bugs in default GNOME etch?
On Sat, 2007-01-20 at 02:50 +0100, Michael Banck wrote: > On Fri, Jan 19, 2007 at 02:27:23PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote: > > Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> Well we shouldn't keep ourselves hostage of stupid upstream behaviour, > > >> should we? > > > > > > Contrary to us, GNOME (in this case RedHat) actually employs usability > > > experts. Who are we to think we know better? > > > > Actual users? > > I'm not quite sure what your point is. Are you asserting the GNOME > usability engineers are not actually using GNOME? I would assert they are not listening to their former BIGGEST fans and users. You can easily find droves rants/discussions of current GNOME users very disgruntled with the REMOVAL of features that previously were there. Some users are now FORMER GNOME users due to these removals. For myself personally GNOME 1.4 was very well featured. Though it wasn't "put together" as well as 2.16 is today. The removal of the easy to use mechanisms to change behavior has been a thorn in my side something awful. This trend to initial users having a "safe" experience is just about killing me. If you take a look at all the project trying to "add" those things being taken out by the GNOME team and its usability experts with the drone of "SANE DEFAULTS" and then taking away the means to change them once you get past the safeness of that... the noise to me is deafening. They routinely and as if by willful decisions, ignore the "mid-level user" to "power user" as *NOT* being the target audience. At least acknowledge that by help the beginning users... please DO NOT HARM or HINDER these learned user. well, to be honest, I only use GNOME now because as an integrated desktop, at the moment: It is "THE SUCKEST THE LEASTEST" If you do not understand my meaning, think if Devil's Pie, the power-toyz add-ons, this recent addiction with eye-candy again (much similar to what GNOME and SAW-FISH/MILL could already do years ago. While, I praise the GNOME teams for the timely march on-ward, I also curse them for the ignorant ways of calling balderdash to anything to improve the computing experience of the "very skilled user" or "power user" I am sorry, I've read to much from other people on this subject. I've also voiced my opinion from time to time... in rants. But the progress I still see (yes progress, but what kind I don't know) is disappointing. That is all for now. And probably quite a while, unless someone gets my ire up on the subject again. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bugs in default GNOME etch?
On Sat, 2007-01-20 at 11:51 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Le samedi 20 janvier 2007 à 04:30 -0500, Greg Folkert a écrit : > > I would assert they are not listening to their former BIGGEST fans and > > users. You can easily find droves rants/discussions of current GNOME > > users very disgruntled with the REMOVAL of features that previously were > > there. Some users are now FORMER GNOME users due to these removals. > > Features. Features, features, features. Do you only want features, > without even knowing whether they are useful? Sorry, usability is not > about features. Are you telling me that these features I keep see getting removed are *NOT* about usability for me? OK, functionality to me... Functionality for me determines my usability. It I have to use some archaic command like (btw I don't really mind them *IF* they are well documented) but like: gconftool-2.3-1-9.mark32 -a2 -r4 --/usr/sbin/someothercommand \ \-\-optionforexternalcommand -32 --etc -e -t-c \ --corruptmysettingsplease I'm not really thrilled. > I, for one, thank those usability engineers for removing these tons of > useless USELESS, maybe to many. Remember in GNOME 1.4 there was a "expertise setting" for the amount and number of settings shown? I do. Sure, as a default provide only the basics. But let me install the "medium" or "power" or "stupidly-insane" settings user. It doesn't hurt to partition them that way... why remove them IF the basic user won't have access to them until they realize there is other config managers for the medium or power or insanity-based users. > features that clutter menus, desktop, applications, and dialog > boxes. You s/You/Some/ > can gain much productivity by removing them, and that doesn't > only account for newbie users. There is still work to do, e.g. by > looking at the insane list of capplets. Sure, continue driving the people that made GNOME popular early on. Good plan. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bugs in default GNOME etch?
On Sat, 2007-01-20 at 14:13 +, Ross Burton wrote: > On Sat, 2007-01-20 at 06:34 -0500, Greg Folkert wrote: > > Are you telling me that these features I keep see getting removed are > > *NOT* about usability for me? OK, functionality to me... Functionality > > for me determines my usability. It I have to use some archaic command > > like (btw I don't really mind them *IF* they are well documented) but > > like: > > If you have any particular pet features that have been removed in GNOME > and you can make a valid case for their re-inclusion, then file a bug. > Contrary to popular belief GNOME isn't about removing as many features > as possible. I understand that Ross. But, I would be ONE of those NON-Target users so often used to defend the decisions/directions of the almighty Havoc's teachings. Sorry Ross, but I long ago gave up trying to change minds (about 2.4ish to 2.6ish) when I saw that they were set in fast setting concrete. Yes, I know you are one of the ones at least trying to help the situation. I have (err, have had) your burtonini repository in my sources.list in the past. So I do know your place and your work. In any case, I see lots of bugs that needs fixing, as the easiest way to fix then is to remove the offending feature that isn't *REALLY* needed once the usability experts jump on it. Yes, I also know, that I have not opened any bugs, but who am I in the GNOME community? I'll tell you who... a big fat nobody. The powers that be, that read these GNOME wishlist/case justification bugs look at me... see "bug filed by a bug, squash it" as I have zero rank to them to change the mind of the GNOME team. Oh, just to be sure, I've had some real doozies with a few on the GNOME team. One explained to me... EXACTLY how much impact a single Power User filing a bug for re-inclusion or halting removal of said features... it increases the fervor at which this stuff is rejected.(1) So, unless something has drastically changed since ~2003-2005 time frame, I seriously doubt (know) I won't have any impact to scratch my itch, even *IF* I included a PERFECT set of patches. I truly thank you for your efforts to help those of us cast aside, not being in the target audience, to be more comfortable and productive in the GNOME Desktop Environment. 1 == Now mind you I can't find the reference to it at the moment. And really I am not inclined to devote more than the 10 minutes I've spent looking for it. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bugs in default GNOME etch?
On Sat, 2007-01-20 at 21:16 +0100, David Weinehall wrote: > On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 06:34:18AM -0500, Greg Folkert wrote: > > On Sat, 2007-01-20 at 11:51 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: > > > Le samedi 20 janvier 2007 à 04:30 -0500, Greg Folkert a écrit : > > > > I would assert they are not listening to their former BIGGEST fans and > > > > users. You can easily find droves rants/discussions of current GNOME > > > > users very disgruntled with the REMOVAL of features that previously were > > > > there. Some users are now FORMER GNOME users due to these removals. > > > > > > Features. Features, features, features. Do you only want features, > > > without even knowing whether they are useful? Sorry, usability is not > > > about features. > > > > Are you telling me that these features I keep see getting removed are > > *NOT* about usability for me? OK, functionality to me... Functionality > > for me determines my usability. It I have to use some archaic command > > like (btw I don't really mind them *IF* they are well documented) but > > like: > > gconftool-2.3-1-9.mark32 -a2 -r4 --/usr/sbin/someothercommand \ > > \-\-optionforexternalcommand -32 --etc -e -t-c \ > > --corruptmysettingsplease > > You *do* know that there is a graphical gconf-editor, right? > > [snip] Umm yes, a clumsy replacement for a former GOOD configuration system. Sure, it has paths and other junk... many things are not able to be edited or added in gconf-editor. gconf-editor is a pile of crap. No better than the cli ones. I have regularly had my GCONF stuff partially corrupted in any case. Associations go away, programs crash spontaneously, I look for bugs... find the exact same things I have. Solution or workaround? remove *ALL* user gconf and gnome settings. Literally nuke them. I sure love a (un-)reliable configuration system being pushed on me this way, piece of crap. Regularly, I get a Fresh desktop to configure... WEE! Come on, continuous refreshment is REALLY good for someone that needs to get work done... yeah wasting time fixing things to work the way he wants. Or, I can just adjust the way I work to be a NEW USER all the time... *GREAT* I now get to work like a completely useless computer user... to get my stuff done! YEAH! Way to go TEAM GNOME! This happens FAR to often to be unrelated and rare. Or maybe I guess I really am a troublesome user. Pardon me while I wipe up the severe sarcasm spillage. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bugs in default GNOME etch?
On Sun, 2007-01-21 at 18:06 +0100, David Weinehall wrote: > On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 09:32:07PM -0500, Greg Folkert wrote: > > On Sat, 2007-01-20 at 21:16 +0100, David Weinehall wrote: > > > On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 06:34:18AM -0500, Greg Folkert wrote: > > > > On Sat, 2007-01-20 at 11:51 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: > > > > > Le samedi 20 janvier 2007 à 04:30 -0500, Greg Folkert a écrit : > > > > > > I would assert they are not listening to their former BIGGEST fans > > > > > > and > > > > > > users. You can easily find droves rants/discussions of current GNOME > > > > > > users very disgruntled with the REMOVAL of features that previously > > > > > > were > > > > > > there. Some users are now FORMER GNOME users due to these removals. > > > > > > > > > > Features. Features, features, features. Do you only want features, > > > > > without even knowing whether they are useful? Sorry, usability is not > > > > > about features. > > > > > > > > Are you telling me that these features I keep see getting removed are > > > > *NOT* about usability for me? OK, functionality to me... Functionality > > > > for me determines my usability. It I have to use some archaic command > > > > like (btw I don't really mind them *IF* they are well documented) but > > > > like: > > > > gconftool-2.3-1-9.mark32 -a2 -r4 --/usr/sbin/someothercommand \ > > > > \-\-optionforexternalcommand -32 --etc -e -t-c \ > > > > --corruptmysettingsplease > > > > > > You *do* know that there is a graphical gconf-editor, right? > > > > > > [snip] > > > > Umm yes, a clumsy replacement for a former GOOD configuration system. > > My mention of the gconf-editor wasn't about whether it's a good or bad > way of configurating a system, just pointing out that your arguments > would be more credible if you didn't use contrived examples to make > seem more complicated than they are. Then why mention it at all? My contrived example is plausible. > > Sure, it has paths and other junk... many things are not able to be > > edited or added in gconf-editor. gconf-editor is a pile of crap. No > > better than the cli ones. > > > > I have regularly had my GCONF stuff partially corrupted in any case. > > Associations go away, programs crash spontaneously, I look for bugs... > > find the exact same things I have. Solution or workaround? remove *ALL* > > user gconf and gnome settings. Literally nuke them. > > Fascinating. That's *never* happened here. Ever. Oh, sorry. I guess this is my bad, I guess *I AM* the only one. In that case. Then move along now, nothing to see here, keep you eyes to yourself > > [snip] > > Oh, and by the way, there's very few things I've ever lacked in ways of > configuration in GNOME; in fact, the only thing I can think of is how > focusing works in metacity. It's implementation of sloppy focus is > quite lousy IMHO, but then again, not even changing the focus setting > through gconf helps that, since it's a lousy implementation, not lack of > configurability that causes my grief. I guess you have tricked yourself into working like a newbie. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bugs in default GNOME etch?
On Mon, 2007-01-22 at 15:12 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Le samedi 20 janvier 2007 à 21:32 -0500, Greg Folkert a écrit : > > I have regularly had my GCONF stuff partially corrupted in any case. > > Associations go away, programs crash spontaneously, I look for bugs... > > find the exact same things I have. Solution or workaround? remove *ALL* > > user gconf and gnome settings. Literally nuke them. > > You're not forced to listen to any dumb wannabee who tells you to clean > your settings everytime you have a problem. Yeap, you are right. I am dumb. But let me ask you this, are you telling me that I need to spend *MUCH* more time to fix the settings than to remove them and reconstruct my desktop. I guess my time isn't worth anything. I bow to your obvious better knowledge. Come on Joss, are you *REALLY* that obtuse? -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bugs in default GNOME etch?
On Mon, 2007-01-22 at 17:30 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Le lundi 22 janvier 2007 à 09:59 -0500, Greg Folkert a écrit : > > Yeap, you are right. I am dumb. > > I was not sure of it, but this mail just convinced me you are. > > > But let me ask you this, are you telling me that I need to spend *MUCH* > > more time to fix the settings than to remove them and reconstruct my > > desktop. > > How do you expect developers to fix bugs that happen in a certain > configuration if you simply wipe it out instead? I guess you are an obtuse useless developer, as you clipped out the context. Choosing to only make snide remarks to nit and picks, conveniently chosen to make me look like I don't know what I am talking about. I am telling you right now, that the BUGS of which I experience, I "discover" the bugs in bugs.d.o. Exactly the same problems... workarounds offered by the developers are typically non-existent and typically are tagged "not reproducible" and closed with admonishment to the bug-submitter. Now you'd expect that from Debian, being the way Debian works. But I switch to GNOME, I find them same or similar derned bugs in bugzilla.g.o. Also with things like WONTFIX (being obsolete or feature removed)or Not Reproducible or other ways to close the them . I guess, GNOME snobbism flows out from the core. I hope you realize what your are doing. Its comments like you have made that keeps the reputation of the GNOME team and GNOME Distro teams it the negative when you try to belittle and try to humiliate the people that would like to use the product of your labors. It is more and more clear the whole GNOME developer "gang" is just that. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bugs in default GNOME etch?
On Mon, 2007-01-22 at 19:32 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Oh, right. Now, you're blaming GNOME for the way Christian Marillat used > to deal with bugs. Fine. I bow GNOME Overlord. > People who use the software and report bugs when they find some are more > likely to get support than those bashing on irrelevant mailing lists and > spreading unclear accusations. > > You think you can make GNOME better by spreading rumors. I think I can > make GNOME better by co-maintaining the packages. Believe it or not, the > latter approach is more efficient. I now welcome you, as my extreme GNOME Overlord. I guess this attempt is done. Same as it ever was. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: update on binary upload restrictions
On Wed, 2007-01-24 at 19:10 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 09:15:44PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: > > > [2] Unfortunately there was very little notice of goedel's move and it > > > was originally scheduled only to take a couple of days but was > > > unavoidably delayed by external factors. > > > I hope that one of the offers of hardware for an alpha buildd that > > resulted in the meantime will be followed up on, so we get some > > redundancy? > > Has already been followed up on. Tim Cutts has graciously offered the use > of a 4-way ES45 system, which I expect DSA will be getting access to within > the day. (Oh, and this is hardware that it wasn't even possible to run > Debian on until a month and a half ago, and the box was only recently > decommissioned -- lest anyone try to play the "DSA should have accepted this > a long time ago" card...) But the DSA shoulda done it 3 years ago... you know before this idea even came up. Regardless that it was only available 6 weeks ago. meh, stupid realistic time-lines... who needs them. Anywho, that is awesome. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bugs in default GNOME etch?
On Fri, 2007-01-26 at 15:15 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: > For programming languages, I prefer the one that makes programmers > easily understand all code written by others. For desktop environments, > I prefer the one that provides the cleanest and most efficient UI. YMMV. Wow, my extreme GNOME Overlord wants a desolate landscape, made of colored concrete, with concrete furniture and everything set in concrete. Concrete made the of the Finest Hoover Portland, Italian Marble Aggregate and the finest black sand from Wainapanapa beach. Amazing. Since I have changed my habits to work like a new user, my productivity has skyrocketed during the time which I was usually "configuring" my desktop. Though, I still have to recover my productivity on the time after this point. That has plummeted drastically and continues to mull about there. Sorry, I must refrain... last punch, I swear. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at the playfield. -- Thane Walkup signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bugs in default GNOME etch?
On Fri, 2007-01-26 at 20:02 +0100, Mike Hommey wrote: > On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 12:48:47PM -0500, Greg Folkert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > On Fri, 2007-01-26 at 15:15 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: > > > For programming languages, I prefer the one that makes programmers > > > easily understand all code written by others. For desktop environments, > > > I prefer the one that provides the cleanest and most efficient UI. YMMV. > > > > Wow, my extreme GNOME Overlord wants a desolate landscape, made of > > colored concrete, with concrete furniture and everything set in > > apt-get install kde If you haven't followed the whole thread, butt out. I use GNOME because it SUKCETH TEH LEASTEST. KDE is far worse, IMO. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at the playfield. -- Thane Walkup signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: request
On Tue, 2007-02-13 at 16:44 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 09:30:40AM -0800, a sh wrote: > > hi > > I want debian etch sorce code and desktop picture. > > I have advertisment purppose. > > if it's possible for you please sent to my mail. > > thank > > Your mailbox probably isn't large enough to receive over 10G of source > code. You can download what you want using "apt-get source"; you may > have to add a "deb-src" line to /etc/apt/sources.list before that'll > work, though. See "man sources.list" for details. I'll bet your outgoing mail service pukes on it. Except for those of us that run our own service (and have enough bandwidth to service it), I'd expect that for any person's service provided by an ISP. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at the playfield. -- Thane Walkup signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: fluxbox
On Wed, 2007-02-14 at 01:30 +0300, Dmitry E. Oboukhov wrote: > Hi! > There's the following problem with the fluxbox package. > > The locale in the etch distributive ia already set into UTF-8 as > default. Fluxbox has been maintaining UTF-8 for a long time. > > From July in experimental/ there had been 0.9.15version with > full maintaining of UTF-8. > > But in spite of the sent bug > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=397482 > maintainer shows no sign of life and doesn't pay attention on > personal messages. Dmitry, experimental isn't for putting things into Sid or Testing or Stable. I am sure yoush hasn't done a thing with it, as Experimental packages don't need to be maintained, period. Experimental is experimental. If you don't understand what the word means, please go look it up. In terms of Debian, it MAY be used for testing new ways to package things. It may also be used to put newer versions into the pool without screwing up a freeze. But your July issue is far before the Etch Freeze. Which in turn means (to me) it was either a courtesy thing that got put in Experimental, or that it isn't as easy as you'd think to "fix it up" to get that or a newer version into Etch. Perhaps, doing the upgrade from Woody-Etch would break, or maybe the version in Sarge is completely incompatible and has to be handled gingerly and is causing lots of heartache. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] I don't mow my lawn anymore. I just intimidate it into not growing. Though it is quite hard to intimidate grass, it has been around a long time and has quite an attitude about it. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: fluxbox
On Wed, 2007-02-14 at 10:15 +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: > Greg Folkert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [...] > > I am sure yoush hasn't done a thing with it, as Experimental packages > > don't need to be maintained, period. > > Bullshit. Experimental is a playground, not a graveyard for development > releases. It's supposed to be used as a testing ground for unstable, so > you better try to maintain the package in experimental before moving it > to unstable at some point. True that. BUT show me where the requirement for maintaining a package in Experimental is *REQUIRED*. You yourself just said it is a playground. Experimental packages fall out of experimental upon "NVIU", whether or not the experimental package was actually used to make the newer version in unstable. Yes, it is a shame, but experimental is kind of like sourceforge. Sourceforge has a "Ba-Million" projects, 8 of which have activity.(1) (1) Yes, I was know I was exaggerating. Its more like 20... ;-P -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at the playfield. -- Thane Walkup signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
GNOME and usability.
Seems I am not the only one that believes GNOME is limiting. Linus Torvalds has submitted patches. I am betting they get ignored or rejected with "to complex for our idiot users". Yes, Joss could you please explain this away for me? -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at the playfield. -- Thane Walkup signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: GNOME and trolls
On Mon, 2007-02-19 at 16:20 +0100, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > That said, he should have just used reportbug and let the maintainers > work it out :) s/work\ it\ out/reject\ it\/won\'t\ fix\ it/ Sorry, but when I see things like this: http://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/desktop_architects/2007-February/001125.html being well thought out and then Mr. Perky Pants responding they way he does... serves very well to prove a point. Denial and "We are fine and well on our way!" has made me even more convinced the whole of any GNOME Team eats Havoc teachings like it was mana from $YOUR_HEAVEN, further degrading the whole GNOME experience for a user. I guess, even when someone really does try to be level headed and cool about the whole thing, they get shutdown exactly the same way I do... just a bit more gentle. As of today, I have switched to a different DE. Though I still use some of the GNOME integration, XFCE v4.3.99.2 has nearly everything I have been stripped of or never will be added in GNOME. Compositing that just works Triggers and Events Adjustable snap Multiple adjustments to smart window placements Light on resources (by more than 75% in some cases) Easily changeable defaults for many applications Friendly "pointy-clicky" settings managers for _all_ settings Friendly inter-operation with KDE and GNOME Stays out of my way when doing tasks Other things I don't care to add to this list. There are somethings that GNOME has the XFCE doesn't, but I can easily live with those missing (maybe I just haven't looked enough). And what caused me to switch? No not this little spat 'tween Linus and GNOME's dev team, but one of those "Never seen by Joss" happenings. I don't have it handy, but gconf was terminated as it was segfaulting and restarting 5+ (maybe more) times a second and then gnome-panel and nautilus and most other things needing a settings daemon choked. And no, this wasn't on a login, it just happened when I was watching a DVD using totem. I tried to logout and back in... but it continued to happen. Even a reboot (I though maybe some libraries may have been corrupted in memory) might fix it. Nope. So, I guess I am that black-sheep of the GNOME userbase that has magical "never before known or seen" problems. Adios to GNOME. At least the parts I can leave behind, which is most of it. And, to those of you that have responded to me privately in the past about my rants on Debian-Devel regarding GNOME being not apropos... don't bother this time. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at the playfield. -- Thane Walkup signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Nice use of profanity...(Re: GNOME and trolls)
On Mon, 2007-02-19 at 20:27 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: > > If you could also shut the fuck up, that would be even better. I see you have a great command of the language. Really... I'd expect nothing better. You should realize that you are just making a better and better case for how much the GNOME teams alienate the users they are supposedly service. I feel sorry for you Josselin, you have my pity. Your judicious clipping of context is quite good, you should really farm that out and make money off that. Sorry, but you keep helping my line, the more red faced you get. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at the playfield. -- Thane Walkup signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: bugs.d.o down (was: wiki.debian.org disk problems resolved)
On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 17:37 +0100, Sam Hocevar wrote: > On Wed, Feb 14, 2007, Ryan Murray wrote: > > wiki.debian.org has been moved to a new host with lots of available > > disk space, so updates should be fine now. For the first 90 minutes > > after the move exim wasn't running, so updates during this period > > would have failed to send notifications. > > > > If any problems are found with the move, please contact debian-admin > > with details. > >Hi! There must have been a problem with the move because bugs.d.o and > wiki.d.o have been down the whole day while no maintenance was planned > (or there's a problem with -devel-anounce, too, I don't know). I get both, lickety split. Both are up and available. This problem/move was done 8 days ago. I suspect your ISP has bad caching for its DNS resolution. Proper DNS stuff: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ dig bugs.debian.org ; <<>> DiG 9.4.0rc2 <<>> bugs.debian.org ;; global options: printcmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 44084 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 3, ADDITIONAL: 3 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;bugs.debian.org. IN A ;; ANSWER SECTION: bugs.debian.org.186 IN A 140.211.166.43 ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: debian.org. 1204IN NS klecker.debian.org. debian.org. 1204IN NS raff.debian.org. debian.org. 1204IN NS rietz.debian.org. ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: raff.debian.org.14365 IN A 192.25.206.59 rietz.debian.org. 36866 IN A 140.211.166.43 klecker.debian.org. 14365 IN A 194.109.137.218 ;; Query time: 30 msec ;; SERVER: 208.64.37.170#53(208.64.37.170) ;; WHEN: Thu Feb 22 12:02:45 2007 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 158 Hope this helps. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at the playfield. -- Thane Walkup -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: On maintainers not responding to bugs
On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 14:46 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Le jeudi 01 mars 2007 à 14:33 +0100, Eduard Bloch a écrit : > > > I'm not the one who said maintainers don't admit they need help. > > > > And I am not the one who said that Mozilla/KDE/GNOME have enough > > manpower. > > Who said that? > > > Don't put words into my mouth. > > How about these words: > And how do you help a maintainer that does not admit that he > needs help? > > Are they yours, or not? If not, you should consider signing your emails, > as someone is trying to fake you on mailing lists. Lets all start the "Pile-On Joss" thing again and watch him explode. Hi Joss! How are you doing? Hope you are well! -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at the playfield. -- Thane Walkup
Re: Maintainers
On Mon, 2007-03-05 at 10:33 +, Howard Young wrote: > I know of a way that maintainers could be increased substantially (I > expect hundreds to many thousands a year). > I am not sure of the specifics but I have little doubt that in the end > it would work. > It will likely take more than four years to implement and only work in > England. Exactly what are you proposing? -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at the playfield. -- Thane Walkup -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Compiling Debs on AMD vs. Intel and 32bit vs. 64bit
On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 11:03 -0400, Michael S. Peek wrote: > Hi gurus, > > I'm looking to buy or build an install host -- one machine dedicated to > building and serving a local repository for the purposes of > installing/upgrading/maintaining other Debian hosts throughout our > organization. The problem is, I'm a little clueless when it comes to > hardware, and I want to make sure that I'm not about to shoot myself in > the foot. Some of the packages in my local repository require > compiling. Do I need to worry about AMD vs. Intel and/or 32-bit vs. > 64-bit when building my install host? (A machine that generates *.deb > files that are only good on *that* one machine is useless to me.) > > How do you guys deal with this in your organizations? > > Thanks for your input, I am not a DD, but my approach would be to buy 64bit AMD or Intel hardware (amd64_x86(sic?) covers both architectures). I would then make a 64-bit build environment in a chroot, then a 32-bit build environment in a chroot. After that it is a SMOP (not not really but, I digress) to get the buildd in each environment to do its job. Of course, you could also setup XEN or Vserver environments. And for clarity, IA32 cover 32-bit Intel and works for AMD 32-bit processors. IA64 is the Itanium series of processors, amd64 cover the AMD K8/Opteron processors AND the Intel emt64* Intel processors. Intel lost out on that nomenclature. I am sure others will either correct me or elaborate or both. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at the playfield. -- Thane Walkup -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Compiling Debs on AMD vs. Intel and 32bit vs. 64bit
On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 21:21 +0100, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: > Heya, > > And for clarity, IA32 cover 32-bit Intel and works for AMD 32-bit > > processors. > > > > but ia32 will just work fine on amd64 architectures. > You can decide if you want to run a 32 or 64bit Linux on amd64/emt64. > Both ways have their advantages and drawbacks. Choose whatever you need. Did you read the message I responded to? You answered exactly no part of it. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at the playfield. -- Thane Walkup -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: pthread has error on Debian Etch
On Sun, 2007-03-25 at 00:45 -0400, Kevin Mark wrote: > On Sun, Mar 25, 2007 at 01:17:23AM -0400, Mohsen Pahlevanzadeh wrote: > > > > My distro is Debian Etch. > > kernel is 2.6.18 > > I have post it to pthread mailing list,They said me that i reinstall > > libc6-dev package,i reinstalled it,But i see given errors. > > Please help me > > Yours,Mohsen > After about 1 minute of a google search for 'pthred_create example' > I found this: > http://www.amparo.net/ce155/thread-ex.html > I was able to make your homework function using the 2 threads with about > 2 minutes of effort, having never programmed using pthreads. If you want > the answer, I'd be happy to email you it :-) Don't. He posted it on Debian Devel. You are to only one that responded. It took me about 2 minutes as well, and *I* don't even do C. BTW, the libc devel list, brushed him off, I think he even used the IRC and asked the question there trying to get "the answer" -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at the playfield. -- Thane Walkup -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Second call for votes for the debian project leader election 2007
On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 15:16 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > > >> 1) fix software that interprets incoming mails > > > >There is nothing wrong with the software that interprets > > incoming mails; the mails that fail actually fail cryptographic > > checks since they have been masssaged by the MUA/MTA afterwards, > > because the MUA did not do the encoding _before_ signing the body. > > > >> 2) issue an alternate ballot where 'ë' in Raphaël is simplified as > >> 'e' (and we agree that this is the same person as Raphaël) > > > >Which would mean that anyone sending in the current official > > ballot would get their vote rejected, since the integrity checks will > > fail. I am not a proponent of hacking away at unrelated software to > > ameliorate bugs in other software; the problems here seem to be using > > bad MUA software that can't, in this day and age, handle signed mail > > using accented chanracters. > > > >> 3) do not accept DPLs with non-ASCI names. ;-)) > > > >Sure, if you think that is better than fixing broken MUAs. > > I guess you missed the double smiley. > > OK, if you do not accept my suggestions, what about > > 4) Write a rock safe HowTo that enables DDs who are comfortable >using of broken MUAs in their day to day live to vote. > > I'm obviousely hit by two broken MUAs (pine, mailx) and not > willing to spend more then 10 minutes just to send my vote. Do what Lars did: >From memory (my shell history isn't long enough), here's what I did: 1. Copy ballot to text file (vote.txt). 2. Edit it for my voting preference. 3. Sign with gpg: gpg --clearsign vote.txt 4. Send: mail -s vote < vote.txt.asc [EMAIL PROTECTED] I work in a UTF-8 environment, in case that matters. -end Lars suggestion -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at the playfield. -- Thane Walkup
Re: 64-bit transition deadline (Re: Etch in the hands of the Stable Release Managers)
On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 22:55 +0200, Michael Banck wrote: > On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 02:13:07PM -0400, Matthias Julius wrote: > > I don't think it needs win64-only games. > > Please remember that this is debian-devel and not some general > discussion list. HA, that is going in the "context is everything" quote list, of course... with the context snipped. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at the playfield. -- Thane Walkup signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Debian qualified as a OMG operating system
On Mon, 2007-04-16 at 17:57 +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote: > Emanuele Rocca píše v Čt 15. 03. 2007 v 10:33 +0100: > > Hi guys, > > > > quoting http://wiki.debian.org/DebianSystem#systemadministration > > > > "Debian has been qualified as a OMG operating system for administrators, > > primarily because of its ease of use, security and straight-forward > > common sense usage." > > > > What is a "OMG operating system"? > > > > In my head OMG could mean: > > > > 1) Object Management Group > > 2) Oh My God > > That would be rather Oh My Goddess :-) > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oh_My_Goddess! > > but in this case it;s most propably Object Management Group. > http://www.omg.org/ No. Debian is an "OH, MY GOD it is that easy, system!" -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at the playfield. -- Thane Walkup signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Intent to take over: tilda
On Mon, 2007-04-16 at 22:58 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi, > the maintainer of tilda (Zak Elep) seems disappeared :) I wrote him a > lot of e-mails and he never answered me. > > I like this useful program, I use it every day, that's why I've built > tilda[1] with the new upstream version and maybe I found already a > sponsor. > > I think it's time to do something and I intent to take over the > package. On debian-mentors we discussed[2] about it, and Bart Martens > has proposed this idea. > > Do you think there's maybe some reason for don't do it? :) > > Cheers, > Davide Truffa. > > [1] http://www.catoblepa.org/debian/ > [2] http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2007/04/msg00113.html > > P.S.: Yes, even this time I inserted Zak Elep in Cc: ;) Not to be a stick in the mud... but I show this: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ apt-cache show tilda Package: tilda Priority: optional Section: x11 Installed-Size: 100 Maintainer: David Moreno Garza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Architecture: i386 Version: 0.09.2-1 [snipped the rest] So, I am not sure I understand. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at the playfield. -- Thane Walkup signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Intent to take over: tilda
On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 02:25 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Greg Folkert ha scritto: > > > Not to be a stick in the mud... but I show this: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ apt-cache show tilda > > Package: tilda > > Priority: optional > > Section: x11 > > Installed-Size: 100 > > Maintainer: David Moreno Garza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Architecture: i386 > > Version: 0.09.2-1 > > [snipped the rest] > > > > So, I am not sure I understand. > > Sorry, I forgot to say that, on 6 Oct 2006, David Moreno Garza > has orphaned[1] it and Zak Elep has become the new maintainer. > > [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=391405 Thanks, I must have missed that. Clarification understood. Thanks David and Magnus. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at the playfield. -- Thane Walkup signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Proposal for a new CDD sub-project: Debian4Business
On Wed, 2007-04-18 at 15:24 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I would like to start a new sub-project called Debian4Business or perhaps > Debian-Office.I have a slight preference for the first name, but this is > discussable of course. Since your are using Debian as a base, have at it. Do you best. > I have a small company, that provides legal services. About 6 months ago (I > use > linux for more than 8 years already) all desktops are running Linux now. The > people using those desktops have no prior linux experience. I have tried > several > distributions, but with every distribution I see problems appear with the > people > that use it. These problem appear because no distribution is really focused on > business use within small and mid-sized companies. I'd like to know what kind of problem. Just because there are problems with Debian, doesn't mean you can submit wishlist bugs to help make things better for your specific issues you see. > Of course there are some distro's with exactly this goal, however they are > usually commercial products/forks. Probably all very good distro's but also > awfully expensive, and that makes them not very interesting for small- and > mid-sized companies. Like... which ones? How do we know which ones you are talking about when you don't specify. Ambiguity really doesn't do anyone any good. > I believe there is definetely a 'market' for a business oriented linux based > on > open source/GPL/Debian social-contract, maintained for and by it's users > instead > of a commercial base. The open source/GPL/DSC concept works for individuals, > so > why it wouldn't/couldn't work for businesses? There are already Distro's that do exactly as you say, but maybe perhaps use CentOS or Gentoo as a base. There are ones that provide these things in a Debian platform too. > My goal with this project is to create a CDD that provides it's users with the > tools they need to easily install and use the things a small and mid-sized > business needs in their working environment. This goes for both server and > desktop tasks. A small and mid-sized company often doesn't have a permanent > system manager, that's exactly why things have to be simple. Of course it > should > also include the common office tools, like an office package (openoffice), > email, > groupware, etc etc. Debian has "profiles" already. You can search for your applications available to Debian using "aptitude search yoursearchterm" aptitude search groupware gives (showing only meta packages, or primary packages with deps) egroupware phpgroupware But then that misses many of the packages you can build a groupware setup with, like evolution, webcal, exim, etc... > I would very much like to hear the opinions of the developer community. > The first -and very important- step to be taken is to form a group of people > that > support this goal and are willing to work on it. Well, there is already work in these kinds of areas, though mainly aimed at the "system admin areas", much of the ground work has been done though. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ aptitude search dpsyco p dpsyco - Debian packages of system configurations p dpsyco-base - Base package for the debian packages of system configurations p dpsyco-cfengine - Automate applying of cfengine configs p dpsyco-devel- Tools to create configuration packages p dpsyco-lib - Libraries for the debian packages of system configurations p dpsyco-mysql- Automate administration of access to mysql p dpsyco-patch- Automatically patch the debian file-system p dpsyco-samba- Automate administration of access to samba p dpsyco-skel - Automatically install a add-on skeleton p dpsyco-ssh - Automate administration of access via ssh p dpsyco-sudo - Automate administration of sudo privileges You could create suck a package, something like dpsyco-sm-bus-desktop dpsyco-sm-bus-server dpsyco-sm-bus-egroupware dpsyco-sm-bus-accounting dpsyco-sm-bus-legal dpsyco-sm-bus-publishing dpsyco-sm-bus-backup I mean the options are endless with 20 some thousand packages in Debian. > If there are no major objections I will start to get things going. Have at it man. Many would love to help you, but a basic frame of reference would be good to start on. And understand you need not build a whole distribution, just a good subset of installed packages and maybe some "sane" defaults. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at the playfield. -- Thane Walkup signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: spam from bugs.debian.org
On Wed, 2007-04-25 at 17:01 +0200, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote: > Perhaps we should really propose a "Day of No Spam-Filtering" on > lists.d.o. ;-) Umm, is there enough BANDWIDTH ON THE ENTARWEB to support that? /me thinks not -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Installation Desktop Option.
On Thu, 2007-04-26 at 02:25 +0930, Stef Daniels wrote: > Greetings, > I am a happy user of the Debian GNU\Linux > Distribution. I would like to pose a question to the developers, who > may be able to provide the following option: > > Could an option for the installation of a default of KDE, Xfce, or > Gnome Desktops for the installer as their preferred Desktop? I > understand Gnome is the default desktop, however, could this made > available? > > Any replies, reasons or comments greatly received.. Like these: http://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/4.0_r0/i386/iso-cd/debian-40r0-i386-kde-CD-1.iso http://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/4.0_r0/i386/iso-cd/debian-40r0-i386-xfce-CD-1.iso Or something different? -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at the playfield. -- Thane Walkup signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bug#421107: ITP: torbutton -- iceweasel/icedove extension enabling 1-click toggle of Tor usage
On Sat, 2007-04-28 at 15:45 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > Le Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 04:16:29PM +0200, Jérémy Bobbio a écrit : > > Package: wnpp > > Severity: wishlist > > Owner: "Jérémy Bobbio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Torbutton is a 1-click way for Iceweasel/Icedove users to enable or disable > > the > > browser's use of Tor. > > Hi, > > maybe you can remind what Tor is ? http://tor.eff.org/ HTH. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at the playfield. -- Thane Walkup signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Topic Generally, Off Topic specifically
I have to apologize publicly on my choice of language. I have been contacted by a few people (some from Debian, others being list subscribers) asking to me to consider the wide ranging areas and breadth of people subscribed to this list. Considering this on when using language that cause one's "mind's eye" to depict terrible images, to please reconsider that language. Recently, I've had words with a few Trolls that bite the hands that try to help them. I've not been able to detect them as this early enough. For this I am sorry. I will think two, three, four or more times before considering to get engaged with them. Using this, I will proceed to either completely ignore them, or give them the standard "Read The Fine Manual" (with a link to it) or a link to Eric S. Raymond's (and edited by Rick Moen) FAQ on "Asking Smart Questions" or Both. I believe many will be happy, in that I will reduce my posting frequency. And for those wanting to reply to this, please _do not_, it is not meant to be replied to. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Bug#422137: ITP: 09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0 -- l33t h4x0r numb3r
On Thu, 2007-05-03 at 20:28 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist > Owner: Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > * Package name: 09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0 > Version : 09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0 > Upstream Author : MPAA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > * URL : http://www.mpaa.org/ > * License : Non-free > Programming Lang: Hex > Description : l33t h4x0r numb3r > > This package contains the "09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0" number. It > is a very cool number, which, among other things, can be used by a wide > range of HD-DVD deciphering applications. > > A small library is provided to access this number in applications. The > get_09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0 C function returns a pointer to a > 16-byte structure containing this number. Josselin, I had you pegged all wrong. This R0xX0rZ -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at the playfield. -- Thane Walkup signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: where to find linux-kbuild-2.6.21?
On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 21:25 -0500, David Moreno Garza wrote: > Ludovic Rousseau escribió: > > I installed linux-image-2.6.21-1-686 from > > http://kernel-archive.buildserver.net and I would like to also install > > linux-headers-2.6.21-1-686 (to build some modules for the Apple MacBook > > Pro not included in the Debian kernel). > > > > The problem is that linux-headers-2.6.21-1-686 depends on > > linux-kbuild-2.6.21 but I can't find this package anywhere. > > > > Where is linux-kbuild-2.6.21? > > AFAICT, linux-image-2.6.21 hasn't hit Debian yet. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ dpkg -l | grep 2.6.21 ii linux-image-2.6.21-1-k7 2.6.21-1~experimental.1~snapshot.8516 Linux 2.6.21 image on AMD K7 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ apt-cache policy linux-image-2.6.21-1-k7 linux-image-2.6.21-1-k7: Installed: 2.6.21-1~experimental.1~snapshot.8516 Candidate: 2.6.21-1~experimental.1~snapshot.8516 Version table: *** 2.6.21-1~experimental.1~snapshot.8516 0 500 http://kernel-archive.buildserver.net trunk/main Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status HTHs. I have the same issue. I can't install linux-headers-2.6.21-1-k7 without linux-kbuild-2.6.21. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key: 1024D/B524687C 2003-08-05 Fingerprint: E1D3 E3D7 5850 957E FED0 2B3A ED66 6971 B524 687C Alternate Fingerprint: 09F9 1102 9D74 E35B D841 56C5 6356 88C0 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Announce: DebianArt.org
On Sun, 2007-05-13 at 17:07 +0200, David Weinehall wrote: > Didn't your AM tell you? All Debian developers are required to be > impervious to humour, irony, puns, simile, or for that matter rational > thinking. Where do I sign up for this? As I already have traits, I should be a shoe-in and should be able to bypass the "waiting period" for Debian Developers. I can skillfully package up programs suites, badly with typos and wrong locations, to conform to the "new developer" status. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key: 1024D/B524687C 2003-08-05 Fingerprint: E1D3 E3D7 5850 957E FED0 2B3A ED66 6971 B524 687C Alternate Fingerprint: 09F9 1102 9D74 E35B D841 56C5 6356 88C0 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Debian desktop -situation, proposals for discussion and change. Users point of view.
On Mon, 2007-05-14 at 14:55 +0200, Mgr. Peter Tuharsky wrote:
> Ask somebody, what distro would he install at desktop for novice or
> M$ refugee?
For me the choice is clear. I use Debian for myself. I choose to support
Ubuntu for people that do not want as many choices. This is what M$
refugees think they want. Ubuntu is channelized into a few "platforms"
as you put it. It has:
Ubuntu == GNOME Desktop Environment ("platform")
Kubuntu == KDE Desktop Environment ("platform")
Xubuntu == XFCE Desktop Environment ("platform")
Each is release accordingly to the "GNOME" release schedule, as that is
the driving force behind Ubuntu's release schedule. This release
schedule is 6 months.
> Why many are choosing Ubuntu instead of Debian, and even worse,
> abandon Debian in favor of Ubuntu?
The same reason many people choose Fedora Core or Mandriva or Gentoo or
because they can. I abandon Debian for other
people, only because it has a (as you put it) more "friendly" support
system.
> Why do most people consider Debian to be user-unfriendly and
> server-oriented distro?
It is a misnomer that Debian is all about "elitism" or that it is hard
to install or that the developers/mailing lists don't speak "newbie-ese"
or that it doesn't support "new hardware" really well. I have to tell
you the only thing in that list that *might* be right is the hardware
thing for "stable". Stable... more on the stable/ testing/ unstable/
thing in a bit.
> Debian developers often see "Ubuntu the enemy" and are mocking it as
> inferior technology. However, they fail to see, what does the Debian
> really offer to desktop users eventually.
Sure, there is a bit of friction. Not "Ubuntu is TEH 3N3MY, 7HR0W R0XX
47 7H3M! D13! D13! D13!" or "Argh, there mateys, we be sailing up the
port side of the "Ubuntu", prepare the starboard side cannons!"
Nothing of the sort. Ubuntu and Debian have a tremendously different set
of motivators for releases and development.
Debian, is all about volunteers, free and Free software and
policy to implement them without much ado. This also has to
occur across 10 or so Hardware architectures at the same time.
Ubuntu, is all about volunteers, free and Free software, except
where is interferes with the release schedule and the "quality"
of the user experience. And it only supports three hardware
architectures. And apparently soon, only 2 as Apple dropped
PowerPC as an architecture. AND it is supported by a commercial
entity.
> They fail to understand, why are they using Ubuntu happily and
> reference it to novices. It seems, that desktop users don't see Debian
> fitting their needs. What are the means?
It is more about the fact that Ubuntu is indeed a niche OS. Debian runs
on a plethora of Hardware Architectures and is consistent across those
architectures.
> The answers:
> 1, needs
> 2, release cycle philosophy
> 3, community
> 4, priorities
>
> As many see, all of them are different in server and in desktop world,
> and many times Debian chooses to dictate the users "we know the best
> what You need" instead of listening to them.
Why then are there 28000+ packages in Debian? If Debian only dictates,
why then are there *FAR* more packages available for install than in
*ANY* other Distribution? How many Window Managers? How many alternative
packages to do the same thing, like word processing, editors, music
clients, rss feed readers, web-browsers? I could go on for days, but I
hope you get my point.
Come on, we know the answer, you can say it.
> Let's think a while about the current situation. First define, what I
> need from my _desktop_, being an ordinary power user:
>
> a, The system must work well with available hardware, automatically
> and "naturally"
This depends on *MANY* things. Primarily the Kernel. But also side
projects to deal with vendors that produce *WINDOWS ONLY* device
drivers. Case in point Wireless drivers. NDIS wrapper is a very good
attempt to cover this. There are other device manufactures that only
develop Windows drivers only. This is a case of "Why bother, Windows
cover 90%+ of the field"
> b, Stable without (too many) crashes
Do you realize Debian's stable is classified as this:
Stable means stable package list. No changes in API and ABI
names or versions. This means no newer versions will ever make
it into "stable". It is in "maintenance mode". This makes a very
good setup for those wishing for "Rock Solid" machines. Doesn't
crash. "too many" comes from the "Windows World", does not
typically apply to Debian's Linux.
> c, Applications should work generally
Okay, what specifically does not work in Debian? I have a few obscure
problems, but they are obscure. Currently in Sid, I have an xnest
problem, but it was only just introduced, will be fixed very shortly. I
don't see your "should work generally", mine just *D
Re: Debian desktop -situation, proposals for discussion and change. Users point of view.
On Tue, 2007-05-15 at 21:43 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Tue, 15 May 2007, Mgr. Peter Tuharsky wrote: > > > We're going OT, however my experience based on last two Debian > releases: > > testing becomes quite "stable in means of usability" somewhere half > year > > before it's released as "stable". The sooner before the stable, the > rapidly > > increasing is the chance that the snapshot that You have will not > be > > installable at all, will have dependencies severely broken, etc. > > In several mails you claimed testing as broken. This is completely > orthognal to my experience. I'm using testing since its existence > on most of my boxes. To that, I run Sid/unstable on 90% of everything I have. Stable on those machines that cannot have problems. > Only production servers are running stable and I keep my fingers from > running unstable (except of chroots). I haven't seen an unstable problem that was a problem for more than a couple of days... and mostly had workarounds in any case. > So were is the proof for you statement. What are the numbers of the > bugs you might have reported against packages in testing? Could you > please a bit more verbose about your problems in testing because > nobody else made it to my radar that testing is that unusable. Perhaps > I missed something ... I've asked for specific examples. > Kind regards > > Andreas (writing from a laptop that runs testing. ;-)) Cheers from a Sid+Experimental machine. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key: 1024D/B524687C 2003-08-05 Fingerprint: E1D3 E3D7 5850 957E FED0 2B3A ED66 6971 B524 687C Alternate Fingerprint: 09F9 1102 9D74 E35B D841 56C5 6356 88C0 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: where to find linux-kbuild-2.6.21?
On Fri, 2007-05-11 at 01:44 +0100, Stephen Gran wrote: > This one time, at band camp, Ludovic Rousseau said: > > Le 10.05.2007, à 00:25:32, Stephen Gran a écrit: > > > > > > I have always just asked them on IRC on #debian-kernel. > > > > Have you done this time again? > > If not, could you? (I do not use IRC.) > > I have now. I just did as well. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key: 1024D/B524687C 2003-08-05 Fingerprint: E1D3 E3D7 5850 957E FED0 2B3A ED66 6971 B524 687C Alternate Fingerprint: 09F9 1102 9D74 E35B D841 56C5 6356 88C0 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Debian desktop -situation, proposals for discussion and change. Users point of view.
On Thu, 2007-05-17 at 07:56 +0200, Mgr. Peter Tuharsky wrote: > Michelle Konzack said: > > You forger that DOWNGRADING is officialy NOT SUPPORTED by Debian. > > That should be changed anyway, since security upgrades occasionally > break things too. You keep saying this, I haven't seen this in Sarge at all. Sarge has had HOW MANY security updates that broke things? Etch's security updates including the Kernel upgrade had no noticeable problems... but of course the two *OBSCURE* issues reported affect you, right? You keep trying to HIT these things home, but the more you do this, the more you look foolish. These problems are mainly Woody and before, except for the LONG release time for Sarge. The Woody security updates for Mozilla was REALLY HARD. I am beginning to understand that you want Debian with completely new "userland" programs. That would be Testing or "CUT" as Joey Hess has promoted. You could also use "Sidux", which is a distro that uses sid as the base and does minor stabilization. http://sidux.com/ -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key: 1024D/B524687C 2003-08-05 Fingerprint: E1D3 E3D7 5850 957E FED0 2B3A ED66 6971 B524 687C Alternate Fingerprint: 09F9 1102 9D74 E35B D841 56C5 6356 88C0 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Debian desktop -situation, proposals for discussion and change. Users point of view.
On Fri, 2007-05-18 at 08:17 +0200, Mgr. Peter Tuharsky wrote: > >Lennart said > >> Peter said > >> If You and several people claim they haven't met such problems with > >> testing, I can live with that. I also heard people whose experience was > >> different, and my personal one is closer to them. That's all. > > > > All it takes is one package that has a dependancy problem to prevent > > hundreds of other packages from upgrading or installing fully. It looks > > like everything is broken, when all it really is is just one missing or > > broken package. When you know how to read what the upgrade system tells > > you you can usually deal with it or put the right things on hold for a > > few days while the missing package makes it in to testing. > > Well, if You actually use the computer for daily work, it's not that > easy to "put things on hold" ;-) You've already said you want the latest and greatest. In this case then, you've already gotten testing installed. You are typically _MUCH_ newer than stable. The things on "hold" are typically just newer versions of what you already have. Newer by small versions, typically just fixing small issues. And the fact your "It looks like everything is broken" is far from the truth and in my opinion "not genuine". Users should never see this in the first place, especially on a managed machine. They never do on a Windows machine, except when it breaks, which is quite often. Holding these packages is not a sign of BROKEN packages, it is a sign that the package management system is working. It is preventing a *BROKEN* machine. But then the USER never sees that, remember Linux machines are multi-user all the time. The admin should be doing all of this maintenance tasks behind the backs of the user, most updates being handed into testing are going to trivial updates in any case... until (the next paragraph) Now in testing, if some BIG comes along and needs to be hinted into testing, you'll never see that problem, as all the programs needed will drop into testing at once. This the user may see, they may have the machine rebooted on them. Just like Windows, but FAR FAR FAR less often. Even then, most of the time, though, the user only has to log out and then log back in, without rebooting. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key: 1024D/B524687C 2003-08-05 Fingerprint: E1D3 E3D7 5850 957E FED0 2B3A ED66 6971 B524 687C Alternate Fingerprint: 09F9 1102 9D74 E35B D841 56C5 6356 88C0 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: apt-get
On Fri, 2007-05-18 at 21:34 +0200, Amir Tabatabaei wrote: > On Fri, 2007-05-18 at 12:29 -0400, Jose Luis Rivas Contreras wrote: > > You should try using aptitude, it does what you want ;-) > > Just a friendly question: Why is this feature not added to apt-get, too? > It is so useful and there are a lot of people (like myself) who are > soo satisfied with apt-get that they can't miss it. You aren't soo satisfied with apt-get if you are complaining about its lack of recc or sugg. aptitude does what you want... really and truly. It was really hard for me to switch to using aptitude, but now since I have, I get annoyed when I use apt-get, although I use apt-get regularly on a certain machine. I'd still like to use aptitude, but the person I do the work for won't change. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key: 1024D/B524687C 2003-08-05 Fingerprint: E1D3 E3D7 5850 957E FED0 2B3A ED66 6971 B524 687C Alternate Fingerprint: 09F9 1102 9D74 E35B D841 56C5 6356 88C0 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: rampant offtopic and offensive posts to debian-user
On Fri, 2007-05-18 at 18:08 -0400, Kamaraju S Kusumanchi wrote: > Joey Hess wrote: > > > Frans, Cord, Martin, Pascal, > > > > I'm writing the listmasters because reading debian-user has become > > nearly unbearable for me (one of the sadly few DDs who bothers to read > > our user lists) due to volume and offensiveness/repetativeness of > > offtopic posts there. > > I would like to help in whatever way I can to stop these OT posts. I have > previously complained about it. But the OT posters never seem to listen. > There were only a bunch in the beginning, of late the number of OT posters > is also increasing. Now that the complaint is coming from a DD, I hope that > some action/policy will be laid out... > > Greg Folkert (http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2007/05/msg01282.html) > even made a mockery of people complaining about OT posts. That is just sad. It was a mockery, but if you'll notice I have scaled back my involvement with really *ANY* thread that is off topic. It was a mockery and sort of a poke at people to slow it down. I just did before any newbie or others could complain. I had hoped that laughing about it would help. But apparently it offended the likes of you. Can you honestly say that I have been as blatant doing OT as I was, waiting for Etch to release, back in February/March? Please don't start throwing mud, it'll just get ugly. But then again, maybe I should twitfile you? > What makes this whole issue difficult is that these people hijack threads > and make them OT. While I may be interested in the original thread, it > becomes unreadable in the due course. > > Moreover, the OT posters are pretty knowledgeable about Debian (atleast they > know a lot more than myself). So I cannot even killfile them since then I > would not benefit from their non-OT posts. It is a choice you have to make. Twit them and ignore them completely, or not and just ignore the OT threads by twiting the thread. > > I've in the past threatened to leave -user > > entirely, and I have in fact moved a lot of my attention to providing > > support on forums.debian.net[4], but I would prefer that Debian > > articulate a policy of not tolerating this kind of behavior. > > > > It's so sad that these OT posters are driving away people like you. I have > always enjoyed (learned a lot from) your posts on this mailing list. I guess you'd rather see the OT posters go away. There are about 30 of us. Though, I "got the hint" with Neil Sumner reporting me to the DPL, after I told him to STFU, in worse words than that. Though he had been including me in *EVERY* correspondence, with "gee you are MUCH better at handling conversation than Greg Folkert. I sure hope everyone isn't like him." After a few messages like that, coming to me provately, I basically kept telling him to stop sending me private mail... which he didn't. I exploded on him publicly. My bad, I apologized and moved on. I believe that since OT has become a BIG problem, self-moderation or "thinking/re-reading" before *you the sender* send is a much better option than banning people. Although, if D-U became subscriber posting only based... along with the other lists, SPAM killing would become MUCH easier, allowing resources to used otherwise. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key: 1024D/B524687C 2003-08-05 Fingerprint: E1D3 E3D7 5850 957E FED0 2B3A ED66 6971 B524 687C Alternate Fingerprint: 09F9 1102 9D74 E35B D841 56C5 6356 88C0 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: rampant offtopic and offensive posts to debian-user
On Fri, 2007-05-18 at 16:27 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 06:42:48PM -0400, Greg Folkert wrote: > > I guess you'd rather see the OT posters go away. There are about 30 of > > us. Though, I "got the hint" with Neil Sumner reporting me to the DPL, > > after I told him to STFU, in worse words than that. > > > Though he had been including me in *EVERY* correspondence, with "gee you > > are MUCH better at handling conversation than Greg Folkert. I sure hope > > everyone isn't like him." After a few messages like that, coming to me > > provately, I basically kept telling him to stop sending me private > > mail... which he didn't. I exploded on him publicly. My bad, I > > apologized and moved on. > > Congratulations on managing, in 6 short paragraphs, to take a thread about > off-topic postings and divert it to something unrelated. Thanks, I'll shut up now. I sent a priv-message to him. Never see it again. > > I believe that since OT has become a BIG problem, self-moderation or > > "thinking/re-reading" before *you the sender* send is a much better > > option than banning people. > > The listmasters only have control over one of these solutions. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key: 1024D/B524687C 2003-08-05 Fingerprint: E1D3 E3D7 5850 957E FED0 2B3A ED66 6971 B524 687C Alternate Fingerprint: 09F9 1102 9D74 E35B D841 56C5 6356 88C0 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: where to find linux-kbuild-2.6.21?
On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 16:14 -0400, Greg Folkert wrote: > On Fri, 2007-05-11 at 01:44 +0100, Stephen Gran wrote: > > This one time, at band camp, Ludovic Rousseau said: > > > Le 10.05.2007, à 00:25:32, Stephen Gran a écrit: > > > > > > > > I have always just asked them on IRC on #debian-kernel. > > > > > > Have you done this time again? > > > If not, could you? (I do not use IRC.) > > > > I have now. > > I just did as well. Yea! Showed up today. Though an update on the 2.6.21 kernel, headers and such had to go in as well. :) Thanks you all! now I can test. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key: 1024D/B524687C 2003-08-05 Fingerprint: E1D3 E3D7 5850 957E FED0 2B3A ED66 6971 B524 687C Alternate Fingerprint: 09F9 1102 9D74 E35B D841 56C5 6356 88C0 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: apt-get
On Fri, 2007-05-18 at 21:06 -0700, Daniel Burrows wrote: > On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 04:19:28PM -0400, Greg Folkert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > was heard to say: > > It was really hard for me to switch to using aptitude, but now since I > > have, I get annoyed when I use apt-get, although I use apt-get regularly > > on a certain machine. I'd still like to use aptitude, but the person I > > do the work for won't change. > > Greg, > > Why was it hard for you to switch to aptitude? Nothing technical. Training of the fingers and a misconception. Typing "aptitude vs apt-get" was the killer for me. It took me a good month to get there. Even now I still type "apt-get" once about every 10 times, accidentally. Early into Woody, I did not like the default actions of aptitude, until I realized I could fix most of the problems by just realizing the completeness of options aptitude has vs. apt-get. Not that I am saying apt-get is a bad tool, just that aptitude is a drop-in replacement and does everything apt-get does... except MORE, so much more that I am kicking myself for refusing to use it for so many years. I thank the "lot of you", causing me to force fix my fingers. It has saved me much work in the past while. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key: 1024D/B524687C 2003-08-05 Fingerprint: E1D3 E3D7 5850 957E FED0 2B3A ED66 6971 B524 687C Alternate Fingerprint: 09F9 1102 9D74 E35B D841 56C5 6356 88C0 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Reasons for recommends and suggests
On Sat, 2007-05-19 at 00:16 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > On Fri, 18 May 2007 19:43:31 -0400, Felipe Sateler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > Don Armstrong wrote: > >> For example, in the case you're talking about, you'd have to explain > >> that ucf would like to be able to use debconf-loadtemplate from > >> debconf-utils utils when it's running as root just in case its > >> templates have become corrupted. Now, you and I may know what > >> debconf-loadtemplate does, what a template is, and why ucf would be > >> worried about corruption of its template database, but I can't > >> imagine making this intelligible to even an intermediate Debian user > >> in less than 5 lines. Hell, I took 3 lines here to say something > >> about it that I only understand because I read /usr/bin/ucf. > > > But then you could just say: "Useful in case template databases get > > corrupted". There is no need to go and explain details. Just a general > > idea is useful enough. If I were to read that, then I'd say: "Well, I > > guess database corruption means something bad, and I want to recover > > from that whenever possible. Lets install debconf-utils." I don't need > > to know which specific script is being used, what templates are, why > > there is a database of them, and how that database may get > > corrupted. I just know that debconf-utils would be useful in case of > > malfunction. Since malfunction costs more than bandwidth and disk > > space, I'll install it. > > Without going into arcane details, you have been told that, in > the maintainers opinion, you should be installing debconf-utils when > you install ucf, unless yours is an unusual installation, and you know > what you are doing. Dear Felipe, You are getting this advice strait from the proverbial "Horses Mouth", as Manoj is the listed maintainer of the package "ucf", I'd have to guess his advice is a golden opportunity to get free, the most expensive advice you'll ever receive. Just trust him, he truly isn't *evil*. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key: 1024D/B524687C 2003-08-05 Fingerprint: E1D3 E3D7 5850 957E FED0 2B3A ED66 6971 B524 687C Alternate Fingerprint: 09F9 1102 9D74 E35B D841 56C5 6356 88C0 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [OT] disucssions about off-topicness in -user on -devel.
On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 10:05 +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote: > On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 07:04:01AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > > Le Mon, May 21, 2007 at 11:02:21AM +0300, Andrei Popescu a écrit : > > > > > > IMHO forcing people to take off-topic discussions out > > > > By the way, isn't debian-devel an off-topic place for this discussion? > > I'm just following the official procedure to request a new mailing-list. > > [quote] > The listmasters reserve the right to ask for consensus on debian-devel > and / or debian-project lists first. If you are aware your request is > questionable, you can speed up the process by discussing the matter even > before filing the bug. > [/quote] > > BTW, I already filed the whishlist bug (#425439). Already been opposed by Cord. Just so you know. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key: 1024D/B524687C 2003-08-05 Fingerprint: E1D3 E3D7 5850 957E FED0 2B3A ED66 6971 B524 687C Alternate Fingerprint: 09F9 1102 9D74 E35B D841 56C5 6356 88C0 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: rampant offtopic and offensive posts to debian-user
On Fri, 2007-05-18 at 16:41 -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > Frans, Cord, Martin, Pascal, > > I'm writing the listmasters because reading debian-user has become > nearly unbearable for me (one of the sadly few DDs who bothers to read > our user lists) due to volume and offensiveness/repetativeness of > offtopic posts there. I've in the past threatened to leave -user > entirely, and I have in fact moved a lot of my attention to providing > support on forums.debian.net[4], but I would prefer that Debian > articulate a policy of not tolerating this kind of behavior. > > Out of 2861 posts to -user this May, 407 (one in seven) have been labeled > OT.[1][2] Their content has included jems like these. Anyone who has spent a > while on the internet can probably fill in the surrounding mega-threads[5] > from these excerpts. [snipped] a TON of examples and justification, not because I disagree but out of the message I write here for policy. This is my last response to anyone on this subject, at least on any mailing list. I have to go to one of the finest writers I know of, George Orwell for some kind of self moderation policy. From “Politics and the English Language” we get a very good set of writing tips: A scrupulous writer, in every sentence that he writes, will ask himself at least four questions, thus: 1. What am I trying to say? 2. What words will express it? 3. What image or idiom will make it clearer? 4. Is this image fresh enough to have an effect? And he will probably ask himself two more: 1. Could I put it more shortly? 2. Have I said anything that is avoidably ugly? One can often be in doubt about the effect of a word or a phrase, and one needs rules that one can rely on when instinct fails. I think the following rules will cover most cases: 1. Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print. 2. Never use a long word where a short one will do. 3. If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out. 4. Never use the passive where you can use the active. 5. Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent. 6. Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous. Here ends my comments on OT-ness. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key: 1024D/B524687C 2003-08-05 Fingerprint: E1D3 E3D7 5850 957E FED0 2B3A ED66 6971 B524 687C Alternate Fingerprint: 09F9 1102 9D74 E35B D841 56C5 6356 88C0 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Debian should not modify the kernels!
On Mon, 2003-10-06 at 15:39, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.09.22.1207 +0200]:
> > Let's create a package called "linux-2.4.22" or
> > "linux-2.4.22-pure-vanilla-source-for-you-to-patch" with a script which
> > does exactly this.
>
> I oppose. Let's get rid of kernel-{source,image,etc.} and provide
> linux-kernel-*. Then provide kernel-patch-debian and
> kernel-patch-ipsec as separate packages!
A-Freaking-MEN.
kernel-patch-2.4.x-debian would be rather large as well.
kernel-patch-2.4.x-ipsec makes things better.
kernel-source-2.4.x would then be able to be kernel.org schtuff
But, this would alleviate SOME of the problems. This would be NO DOUBT
very helpful. The Binary Kernel (as in the archives could have any an
all patches you see fit Herbert)
Would it NO doubt make entirely MUCH more sense, to only have to D/L the
Source Code once. It would definitely reduce the bandwidth needed for
making successive revisions of the "patched" kernel much less storage
required as well.
Please... At least consider the things that are being said(typed)...
that you patently refuse to even consider.
--
greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
REMEMBER ED CURRY! http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry
Cher ami, votre tendre chapeau a heurte trois de mes phalanges avec une
grace incomparable.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Debian should not modify the kernels!
On Tue, 2003-10-07 at 09:51, Colin Watson wrote: > On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 09:48:32AM -0400, Greg Folkert wrote: > > Would it NO doubt make entirely MUCH more sense, to only have to D/L the > > Source Code once. > > Would it be POSSIBLE to LOSE the Zippy-style CAPITALIZATION, please? Would it be *POSSIBLE* for you to *CHOP* off your arms? I have been posting like that for years. If you knew me personally, you'd understand, it goes with the way I speak or tell stories. I can provide you examples showing over 10 years of it being my norm. And you are about the... first one to be annoyed and voice it. Colin, this crap about the Kernel Source has gotten me wanting to express my views with more notice in them. It has become more of a pain to fix Herbert's proactive measures with "feature enhancements" rather then just getting things done. Sure I like IPSEC in the stack... but when I want to patch it in. 2.6.x is a different story. kill-file me if you don't like the cApItIzAtIoN. (at least it is not |-|4xX0rZ tYp3 and is readable.) -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] REMEMBER ED CURRY! http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry You have the vocabulary of an aspidistra in panic. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Hardcoding of .la file paths in .la files
On Tue, 2003-10-14 at 04:38, Daniel Kobras wrote: > To name but a few. Just because there's little incentive to use static > linkage when building Debian packages doesn't mean that we should > deprecate it. Unless you're willing to convince the admin of the > beowulf cluster next door to install libyoddafoo on several hundred > nodes for me. Okay, where do I show up? And do you think I'll need the Thumb-Clamps as well as the Spiked Ball-Buster, Sawed-Off Shotgun and the Dirty Smelly Sweat Socks? -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] REMEMBER ED CURRY! http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry Solitamente, quando emani profumi, mi ricordi lamette circonflesse. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: kernel package names (was Re: Package libc6-dev depends on linux-kernel-headers)
On Wed, 2003-11-05 at 20:14, Jonathan Dowland wrote: > On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 11:13:28AM -0600, Ryan Underwood wrote: > > > Before that realization, it seemed like the type of random cruft that > > sometimes gets pulled in on dist-upgrade; a name change would help > > alleviate that initial perception, IMO. Why not libc6-linux-headers? > > I'm in two minds whether or not to ask this, but I've been wondering > about the naming scheme for linux packages - kernel-*. Why not > linux-kernel-* or linux-* ? If alternative kernels in debian become > more popular, is there a potential for confusion in the future? Here we GO again... Martin Kraaft? Herbert Xu? among others... Ready for another "heated" debate. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] REMEMBER ED CURRY! http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Digital Alpha 2100 Sable 233MHz
I have a DEC Alpha 2100 Dual Processor with 256MB Memory and ~60GB of drives space. It currently doesn't have any OS on it (well Tru64 Runtime Only no User licenses) I have a 1.5MBps SDSL line with a pretty good connectivity, but is shared with the business it would be located at. I guess, the question comes... would it be usable for Debian building/development of the Alpha port? -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] REMEMBER ED CURRY! http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Digital Alpha 2100 Sable 233MHz
On Sun, 2003-11-09 at 15:47, Greg Folkert wrote: > I have a DEC Alpha 2100 Dual Processor with 256MB Memory and ~60GB of > drives space. It currently doesn't have any OS on it (well Tru64 Runtime > Only no User licenses) > > I have a 1.5MBps SDSL line with a pretty good connectivity, but is > shared with the business it would be located at. > > I guess, the question comes... would it be usable for Debian > building/development of the Alpha port? Forgot... Dual 233MHz EV4. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Howto reconfigure alsa-modules-2.4.22-1-k6
On Tue, 2003-11-18 at 14:17, Otto Wyss wrote: > > Otto Wyss dijo: > > > dpkg-reconfigure alsa-modules-2.4.22-1-k6 > > > > > > but this doesn't show the driver list again! Okay getting dselect out, > > > purge the package and install it again. But now the list isn't shown > > > either. How do I get the driver list from this package? > > > > > dpkg-reconfigure alsa-base > > > > Anyway, this message would have fitted better in debian-user > > > First it was an oversight, sorry. But now I think the alsa packages are > more broken. After successfully using dpkg-reconfigure alsa-base I got > the following error messages: > > depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in > /lib/modules/2.4.22-1-k6/alsa/snd-pdaudiocf.o > depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in > /lib/modules/2.4.22-1-k6/alsa/snd-vx-cs.o > depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in > /lib/modules/2.4.22-1-k6/alsa/snd-vxp440.o > depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in > /lib/modules/2.4.22-1-k6/alsa/snd-vxpocket.o At this point I would just remove those files. They are not needed by your machine. Unless those are the devices you are running. But seriously just remove them and re-run update-modules. There are some funky things I have always (nearly always) seen with those modules. Even in the OSS setup they are difficult to get properly compiled. > I get the same messages when using update-modules. My alsa configuration > looks good: > > ### DEBCONF MAGIC > # This file was automatically generated by alsa-base's debconf stuff > > alias char-major-116 snd > alias char-major-14 soundcore > > options snd major=116 cards_limit=4 > > alias sound-service-0-0 snd-mixer-oss > alias sound-service-0-1 snd-seq-oss > alias sound-service-0-3 snd-pcm-oss > alias sound-service-0-8 snd-seq-oss > alias sound-service-0-12 snd-pcm-oss > > alias snd-card-0 snd-ice1724 > > alias snd-slot-0 snd-card-0 > alias sound-slot-0 snd-slot-0 > > and lspci shows > > 00:0b.0 Multimedia audio controller: IC Ensemble Inc ICE1724 [Envy24HT] > (rev 01) > > So what's wrong now? Nothing. And from you Conf, it shows your card does not use those modules anyway. File a bug report for the alsa maintainer and see what comes of it. -- greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED] REMEMBER ED CURRY! http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry Your unexpected explosion entangles us in a web of premature umbrellas and precocious timepieces. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
