On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 20:06:02 +0200
Antoine via Dng wrote:
> On Wednesday, 14 April at 16:13, tito via Dng wrote:
> >
> >Hi,
> >thanks for your time and effort. My question was rather practical,
> >so let me rephrase it: is there a robust way to detect from a script
> >if buster non-free and contr
On Wednesday, 14 April at 16:13, tito via Dng wrote:
Hi,
thanks for your time and effort. My question was rather practical,
so let me rephrase it: is there a robust way to detect from a script
if buster non-free and contrib repos are enabled in
/etc/apt/sources.lists so that I can add the same r
Le 15/04/2021 à 16:01, Hendrik Boom a écrit :
>> Yes, but the end result of enforcing free software purism is a lot of
>> those so exposed give up and install Windows. I don't blame them. A few
>> times I've found it *really* hard to install when the installer just
>> says "you might need nonfree d
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 10:16:08PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
> aitor said on Wed, 14 Apr 2021 22:28:59 +0200
>
> >Hi Steve,
> >
> >On 14/4/21 15:02, Steve Litt wrote:
> >> I think free software purist snobs drive more people back to
> >> Windows than cleanse people of their non-free ways.
> >The
aitor said on Wed, 14 Apr 2021 22:28:59 +0200
>Hi Steve,
>
>On 14/4/21 15:02, Steve Litt wrote:
>> I think free software purist snobs drive more people back to
>> Windows than cleanse people of their non-free ways.
>The adversary of the fsf isn't Windows, but the propietary software in
>general
al3xu5 said on Wed, 14 Apr 2021 19:53:59 +0200
>Tue, 13 Apr 2021 22:03:02 +0200 - tito :
>
>
>Wed, 14 Apr 2021 09:02:54 -0400 - Steve Litt
>:
>[ Extra OT comment START
>
>> Stating it the inverse way, I HATE these installs that bomb because
>> there's no FSF-satisfying drivers, firmware or soft
fsmithred via Dng said on Wed, 14 Apr 2021 09:57:38 -0400
>On 4/14/21 9:50 AM, Hendrik Boom wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 09:02:54AM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
>>> tito via Dng said on Tue, 13 Apr 2021 22:03:02 +0200
>>>
>>>
2) should non-free and contrib repos be added to sources.list
I’m not sure if this is a good way to do it but when Ubuntu is upgraded to a
new version the release upgrade tool disables all third-party apt sources and
PPA sources by commenting them out in the sources.list/sources.list.d files and
notifying the user this has been done. The user then has to e
Hi Steve,
On 14/4/21 15:02, Steve Litt wrote:
I think free software purist snobs drive more people back to
Windows than cleanse people of their non-free ways.
The adversary of the fsf isn't Windows, but the propietary software in
general wherever it may come from.
In this context, whether a pro
On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 19:53:59 +0200
al3xu5 wrote:
> Tue, 13 Apr 2021 22:03:02 +0200 - tito :
>
>
>
> > Two serious question arise now?
> >
> > 1) should echo "ALWAYS_SET_PATH true" > /etc/default/su
> > be added to the script to restore old su behaviour or
> > should that be left to
On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 16:01:02 +
g4sra via Dng wrote:
> >
>
> > This might be a good one to ask the users.
> >
>
> > fsmithred
> >
>
>
> Agreed.
>
> But if you did want to do it programmatically without parsing every
> sources.{d/*,conf}... Ask apt what it is cacheing...
>
> if [ -n "$
Tue, 13 Apr 2021 22:03:02 +0200 - tito :
> Two serious question arise now?
>
> 1) should echo "ALWAYS_SET_PATH true" > /etc/default/su
> be added to the script to restore old su behaviour or
> should that be left to the user
I think it should be left to the user, using the buster "p
>
> This might be a good one to ask the users.
>
> fsmithred
>
Agreed.
But if you did want to do it programmatically without parsing every
sources.{d/*,conf}...
Ask apt what it is cacheing...
if [ -n "$(apt-cache policy | grep 'buster/non-free')" ]; then
echo "yes include non-free repo"
On 4/14/21 10:15 AM, tito wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 09:57:38 -0400
> fsmithred via Dng wrote:
>
>>
>> It's currently opt-out. You must select Expert install to avoid
>> non-free and to choose your sources. Something about how the
>> installer works makes it easier to do it this way rather than
On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 09:57:38 -0400
fsmithred via Dng wrote:
> On 4/14/21 9:50 AM, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 09:02:54AM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
> >> tito via Dng said on Tue, 13 Apr 2021 22:03:02 +0200
> >>
> >>
> >>> 2) should non-free and contrib repos be added to sources.
On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 09:50:17 -0400
Hendrik Boom wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 09:02:54AM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
> > tito via Dng said on Tue, 13 Apr 2021 22:03:02 +0200
> >
> >
> > >2) should non-free and contrib repos be added to sources.list
> > >or should that be left to the user
>
On 4/14/21 9:50 AM, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 09:02:54AM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
>> tito via Dng said on Tue, 13 Apr 2021 22:03:02 +0200
>>
>>
>>> 2) should non-free and contrib repos be added to sources.list
>>>or should that be left to the user
>>
>> I'm not sure whether
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 09:02:54AM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
> tito via Dng said on Tue, 13 Apr 2021 22:03:02 +0200
>
>
> >2) should non-free and contrib repos be added to sources.list
> >or should that be left to the user
>
> I'm not sure whether my answer is responsive to your question or n
tito via Dng said on Tue, 13 Apr 2021 22:03:02 +0200
>2) should non-free and contrib repos be added to sources.list
>or should that be left to the user
I'm not sure whether my answer is responsive to your question or not,
but here goes...
I believe enough non-free and contrib stuff should b
> >
> > >V 1.4
> > >
> > >now with supported DE's:
> > >
> > >1) GNOME
> > >2) LXDE
> > >3) LXQT
>
> V 1.5
>
> now with supported DE's:
>
> 1) GNOME
> 2) LXDE
> 3) LXQT
> 4) XFCE
>
> and minor fixes and improvements.
>
> Ciao,
> Tito
>
v 1.6
now with supported DE's:
1) GNOME
2) LXDE
20 matches
Mail list logo
