On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 05:50:27PM +0200, hiro wrote:
A ports like system won't be very helpful most of the time, what about a
low end device like raspberry pi, have you ever thought of that?
Such low end devices are a waste of ressources and shouldn't be used any more.
I don't think that buy
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Charlton Head wrote:
> You might be able to do this with just the sbase tools, but I don't know how
> offhand as I pretty much know which of my programs are using TLS/SSL without
> needing special commands.
find -H /bin -type f -exec grep -lF TLS {} +
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 05:36:44PM +0200, Hans Ginzel wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 07:42:26AM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote:
> >Package systems are both a symptom and a cause of bloat. They only
> >exist because most software, along with its metastasizing dependencies,
> >is a pain in the ass to
On Thu 12 May 2016 at 08:36:44 PDT Hans Ginzel wrote:
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 07:42:26AM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote:
Package systems are both a symptom and a cause of bloat. They only
exist because most software, along with its metastasizing dependencies,
is a pain in the ass to compile.
The
On Thu 12 May 2016 at 08:36:44 PDT Hans Ginzel wrote:
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 07:42:26AM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote:
Package systems are both a symptom and a cause of bloat. They only
exist because most software, along with its metastasizing dependencies,
is a pain in the ass to compile.
The
On Thu, 12 May 2016 18:19:01 +0200
hiro <23h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What is suckless' response to this? Do we have enough manpower to
> maintain a webkit-shim, an archaic terminal emulator, a window manager
> AND an ssl library? cinap is trying to fix the latter problem on
> 9front, but it turns o
On Thu 12 May 2016 at 08:45:43 PDT hiro wrote:
Package systems are both a symptom and a cause of bloat. They only
exist because most software, along with its metastasizing dependencies,
is a pain in the ass to compile.
Actually compiling software the right way, without many dependencies
is qui
It seems the thread moved into somewhat "what is good
and what is bad".
In my opinion ports system is good, unless you compile
something big, i.e. gcc, gtk, firefox, office packages
(probably TeX, too) should exist in binary form.
My "sane distributions" list includes: Alpine, CRUX,
Gentoo/Funto
On 11 May 2016 at 11:56, Nick wrote:
> Any suggestions / thoughts?
Archlinux is very suckless software friendly.
Specifically, it's easy to write your own packages. You can manage the
suckless tools with the package manager (update, query content, etc.).
Example for st:
https://github.com/raphae
> PS: Think about the Heartbleed bug in openssl for example.
This is actually an excellent example. openssl has proven rather
worthless due to general quality issues (worse than just this one
heartbleed bug).
What is suckless' response to this? Do we have enough manpower to
maintain a webkit-shim,
> Copying the “shared/same code” into each program?
> But how to maintain updates of such code, e.g. security update?
9front shows this beautifully: just update OS and all programs from
the same repo.
btw, package management can be done very lightly, too. again, look at
tinycorelinux.
> What is the best way how to build a suckless system/distribution?
i wouldn't use linuxfromscratch
tinycorelinux is a better base imo.
> A ports like system won't be very helpful most of the time, what about a
> low end device like raspberry pi, have you ever thought of that?
Such low end devices are a waste of ressources and shouldn't be used any more.
> I don't think that buying a better computer for the sake of being more
> s
> Package systems are both a symptom and a cause of bloat. They only
> exist because most software, along with its metastasizing dependencies,
> is a pain in the ass to compile.
Actually compiling software the right way, without many dependencies
is quite an art these days, so yes, i want to shar
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 07:42:26AM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote:
Package systems are both a symptom and a cause of bloat. They only
exist because most software, along with its metastasizing dependencies,
is a pain in the ass to compile.
The correct solution isn't hiding those problems with a pac
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 08:00:43AM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote:
On Thu 12 May 2016 at 07:47:51 PDT Pickfire wrote:
A ports like system won't be very helpful most of the time, what about a
low end device like raspberry pi, have you ever thought of that?
I don't think that buying a better comput
On Thu 12 May 2016 at 07:47:51 PDT Pickfire wrote:
A ports like system won't be very helpful most of the time, what about a
low end device like raspberry pi, have you ever thought of that?
I don't think that buying a better computer for the sake of being more
suckless is even suckless, not ever
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 02:33:41AM +0200, hiro wrote:
let's maintain a list of of requirements a distro should fulfill.
perhaps we can make a nice table afterwards and see which OS fits
these requirements out of the box.
i'll start with this. convince me otherwise.
Is there a suckless version o
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 07:42:26AM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote:
On Wed 11 May 2016 at 17:33:41 PDT hiro wrote:
let's maintain a list of of requirements a distro should fulfill.
perhaps we can make a nice table afterwards and see which OS fits
these requirements out of the box.
i'll start with th
On Wed 11 May 2016 at 17:33:41 PDT hiro wrote:
let's maintain a list of of requirements a distro should fulfill.
perhaps we can make a nice table afterwards and see which OS fits
these requirements out of the box.
i'll start with this. convince me otherwise.
1. package system: packages having fe
>> 1. package system: packages having few, sane dependencies (early
>> tinycorelinux was excellent in this regard)
>
> directly contradicts
you can always have multiple packages, e.g. mpg123-oss, mpg123-alsa.
i dont see the problem.
call out flamewar or choose randomly to select a default one. don
>> 9. hip applications have to run out of the box: skype,
>
> Corporate need? 'd say Hangouts, and let the browser do it for one less
> package, and better Linux quality anyway.
Browser shit often is unstable (and i don't mean just the UI), skype
is quite usable on ubuntu though.
Linux quality wil
On Thu, 12 May 2016 02:33:41 +0200
hiro <23h...@gmail.com> wrote:
Good morning hiro,
> let's maintain a list of of requirements a distro should fulfill.
> perhaps we can make a nice table afterwards and see which OS fits
> these requirements out of the box.
> i'll start with this. convince me oth
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 02:33:41AM +0200, hiro wrote:
> 9. hip applications have to run out of the box: skype,
Corporate need? 'd say Hangouts, and let the browser do it for one less
package, and better Linux quality anyway.
> chrome,
Chromium.
> openoffice,
No pref libre/open?
> mplayer,
mp
let's maintain a list of of requirements a distro should fulfill.
perhaps we can make a nice table afterwards and see which OS fits
these requirements out of the box.
i'll start with this. convince me otherwise.
1. package system: packages having few, sane dependencies (early
tinycorelinux was exc
There's also CRUX [0] and tinycorelinux [1]. CRUX has more of a
BSD-style init system feel. There's also a CruxEX [2] which includes
a DE. However, I need to spin up a VM of AlpineLinux and see what
it's all about.
[0] https://crux.nu/
[1] http://tinycorelinux.net/
[2] http://cruxex.exton.net/
Arch Linux was suckless maybe in 2008. Today it's messy, confused and bloated.
For once, it was one of the first distributions to embrace Systemd.
I think these emails about "what's a suckless distribution" are always
bad, but I'll give my advice (research is on you).
>From most usable to least us
On 11 May 2016 at 06:56, Nick wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> A few nights ago my too-expensive laptop met with too-cheap wine and now
> it is a far-too-expensive brick. As it's therefore time for me to
> install a new OS on a new laptop, I was wondering what people would
> recommend. I've been using Debia
On Wed, 11 May 2016, Nick wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> A few nights ago my too-expensive laptop met with too-cheap wine and now
> it is a far-too-expensive brick. As it's therefore time for me to
> install a new OS on a new laptop, I was wondering what people would
> recommend. I've been using Debian S
I actually asked juan rp about that plist thing, he said it was
because he had experience with it on netbsd with proplib, which he
then ported as portable proplib:
https://github.com/xtraeme/portableproplib.
On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Teodoro Santoni wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 2016-05-11 12:56 GMT+02
Hi,
I am very happy using Arch. It is a rolling release but I have found it
very stable if you update often and take care of the AUR packages.
Cheers
Roy.
0n 05/11, Nick wrote:
Hi folks,
A few nights ago my too-expensive laptop met with too-cheap wine and now
it is a far-too-expensive brick.
Hi,
2016-05-11 12:56 GMT+02:00, Nick :
> Hi folks,
>
> A few nights ago my too-expensive laptop met with too-cheap wine and now
> it is a far-too-expensive brick. As it's therefore time for me to
> install a new OS on a new laptop, I was wondering what people would
> recommend. I've been using Deb
On Wed, 11 May 2016 11:56:41 +0100
Nick wrote:
Hey Nick,
> A few nights ago my too-expensive laptop met with too-cheap wine and now
> it is a far-too-expensive brick. As it's therefore time for me to
> install a new OS on a new laptop, I was wondering what people would
> recommend. I've been usi
33 matches
Mail list logo
