On Fri, 06 Mar 2020 15:25:55 -0700
tekHedd wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 6, 2020, at 12:51 PM, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 05, 2020 at 02:09:37PM +0100, Didier Kryn wrote:
> > > Le 03/03/2020 à 23:37, tekHedd a écrit :
> > > >
> > > > So, I would consider rewriting polkit and dbus from scratch.
>
Quoting tekHedd (tekh...@byteheaven.net):
> Cool software doesn't really happen without the ability for apps to
> communicate and read/write the state of the system and communicate
> with other user level components.
If so, so what? This doesn't in any way suggest need for a new extra
system aut
Quoting Rainer Weikusat via Dng (dng@lists.dyne.org):
> But this is not the case. There's nothing which stops users from running
> their own, fully capable resolver locally[*] (or somewhere on a local
> network) and thus, not make a comprehensive browsing history available
> to any third party.
R
On 3/6/20 6:30 PM, fsmithred wrote:
> On 3/2/20 7:54 PM, fsmithred wrote:
>> We built beowulf installer images for armel, armhf and ppc64el. If you
>> have appropriate hardware, please test and report.
>>
>> armel (no mini.iso for these. I hope you know what to do.)
>> https://pkgmaster.devuan.org/
Le 06/03/2020 à 20:51, Hendrik Boom a écrit :
What are the actual requirements for a dbus-like system? Requirements
that would allow a completely different design?
There must have been requirements. At the time KDE had its own
middleware called DCOP and Gnome had or was developping its ow
