Re: [Dng] Puppy Linux-related thoughts - was Re: API: was (for who knows what reason): Dng Digest, Vol 6, Issue 75

Apollia wrote: > I've also increasingly been considering trying to build my own Linux from > scratch, probably using this website as a guide: > http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/ There are more automated ways to do this: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/alfs/ You may be interested to know that Gobo

Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet

On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 11:08:58PM +0200, Lars Noodén wrote: > On 22.03.2015 22:00, KatolaZ wrote: > > Well, we might all agree on despising the systemd-nonsense on a > > technical level, but nobody can say it's not free software without > > being considered a fool. The systemd-nonsense is distribu

Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet

On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 10:39:11PM +0100, devuan...@spamgourmet.net wrote: > > I think everyone is in agreement that they fulfill the letter of the > > license. The spirit may be lacking especially in regards to access. > > Being an enormous, interdependent hairball simply puts the code out of > >

Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet

On Mon, 23 Mar 2015, KatolaZ wrote: > On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 10:39:11PM +0100, devuan...@spamgourmet.net wrote: > > RMS admits that he wrote GCC as an interdependent hairball, simply to > > make it impossible to reuse parts of it in commercial applications. So > > I doubt that RMS will end up con

Re: [Dng] Devuan commitments - will trade-off be applied?

Le 21/03/2015 17:52, Go Linux a écrit : On Sat, 3/21/15, Miles Fidelman wrote: Subject: Re: [Dng] Devuan commitments - will trade-off be applied? To: dng@lists.dyne.org Date: Saturday, March 21, 2015, 11:25 AM Didier Kryn wrote: We all agree that Devuan was born to be systemd-fr

Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet

On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Jaromil - jaro...@dyne.org wrote: > On Mon, 23 Mar 2015, KatolaZ wrote: >> This sounds strange and new at the same time, since GCC was indeed >> designed to be portable and ported to several architectures since from >> the beginning. Do you have any quote by RMS o

Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet

On Mon, 23 Mar 2015, devuan...@spamgourmet.net wrote: > I did argue for some of things I think are sensible, just like > everybody else here. All of them can be implemented _without_ systemd > (and I have or had them running that way). Yes, one of the ideas I > like was first proposed by Lennart, b

[Dng] Puppy Linux-related thoughts - was Re: API: was (for who knows what reason): Dng Digest, Vol 6, Issue 75

Hello, speaking of lightweight Linux distros with a systemd-free choice. There is also AntiX. The main developer behind it seems also not to be happy about how Debian Jessie users are forced to use SystemD: http://antix.freeforums.org/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5280 (if anyone is more interested abo

[Dng] Moderation: was rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet

On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 11:18:39 +0100 Jaromil wrote: > Actually, I'd be grateful if you, golinux and a few others can share > the burden of keeping trolls away from the list, as now I'm quite > convinced that if we go the moderation way we better do it full on > and try to keep around only the post

Re: [Dng] Puppy Linux-related thoughts

Puppy Linux is interesting. I used it for awhile and liked that it was fast, and fun. A bit lacking in software, but with the Slacko packages you can make it better. My main concern about it was that it logs you in as root (without even a password). A lot of people have expressed concern about this

Re: [Dng] Devuan commitments - will trade-off be applied?

On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 12:04:17PM +0100, Didier Kryn wrote: > > True. This description of the project contains already a lot of > the ideas we are shaking on the list. > > There are still concerns about the fact that some of the > software we use are big hairballs and enforce technical l

Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet

> https://lwn.net/Articles/629259/ covers the most recent flare-up when > somebody wanted to make the AST of GCC accessible. > > > This is not the first post in which this spamgourmet account is > > spreading FUD. We may need to react to this beyond argumenting. > > I don't see anything I said on t

Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet

On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 12:17:07PM +0100, devuan...@spamgourmet.net wrote: > > GCC was deliberately making things interdepend on each other, even > without technical reasons, simply to prevent commercial entities to > replace the e.g. front-end of the compiler with some proprietary code > and then

Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet

On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 01:04:43PM -0400, Hendrik Boom wrote: [cut] > > >... > > > > https://lwn.net/Articles/629259/ covers the most recent flare-up when > > somebody wanted to make the AST of GCC accessible. > > There's a good quote in the comments to this article: > > "We reject kings, pr

[Dng] FW: Devuan commitments - will trade-off be applied?

> > > > > True. This description of the project contains already a lot of > > the ideas we are shaking on the list. > > > > There are still concerns about the fact that some of the software > > we use are big hairballs and enforce technical lock-ins. Eg. the Linux > > kernel and the X-

Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet

* On 2015 22 Mar 22:09 -0500, Peter Olson wrote: > > On March 22, 2015 at 6:29 AM Jaromil wrote: > > > > On Sat, 21 Mar 2015, Peter Olson wrote: > > > > > RMS didn't call me a troll, he answered the question. Somebody else > > > took it upon himself to refer to the question as trolling. I have

Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet

On Mon, 23 Mar 2015, Nate Bargmann wrote: > * On 2015 22 Mar 22:09 -0500, Peter Olson wrote: > > > On March 22, 2015 at 6:29 AM Jaromil wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, 21 Mar 2015, Peter Olson wrote: > > > > > > > RMS didn't call me a troll, he answered the question. Somebody else > > > > took it u

Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet

>On these regards Stefano wrote "troll as action != troll as a person" >https://twitter.com/jaromil/status/579594919767064576 so he still >considers the action of asking a systemd question to RMS to be trolling >I think this is unacceptable u

Re: [Dng] FW: Devuan commitments - will trade-off be applied?

> What X really needs is to be gutted: a complete rewrite, while providing a > compatibility layer for X11. Rather than do that, the Linux crowd chose to go > with Wayland, which could be described as much the same thing. Fair > enough, and even reasonable. At least it would be, except for the fa

Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet

On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Mark R. White wrote: > > Just to be clear: I've seen a lot of cross talk about the possibility of > systemd being put into Devuan via a sandbox or even having the systemd API > written in. Is it safe to assume that going forward that there will be no > systemd in

Re: [Dng] FW: Devuan commitments - will trade-off be applied?

[T.J. ] Hi Jude! Wayland is basically just that--a complete rewrite of X, built around design requirements that were not present when X11 was designed. Think of Wayland as X12, and think of Xwayland as the X11 compatibility layer. [T.J. ] Yes, I know. =) Also, userspace mode se

Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet

On Mon, 23 Mar 2015, Nuno Magalhães wrote: > On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Mark R. White > wrote: > > > > Just to be clear: I've seen a lot of cross talk about the > > possibility of systemd being put into Devuan via a sandbox or even > > having the systemd API written in. Is it safe to assum

Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet

On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 07:44:30PM +0100, Jaromil wrote: [cut] > > I think this is unacceptable under so many ways... some of which I've > tried to explain. I'm also !flabbergasted! to see the discussion averted > into the AST for GCC debacle with a touch of RMS bashing. Either someone > is real

Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet

On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 5:48 AM, wrote: > On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 2:40 AM, Jude Nelson - jud...@gmail.com > wrote: >>> The only way not to be forcing anybody is to stick with the least >>> common denominator for everything. That flat out stops progress. >> >> This is simply not true. A key hall

Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet

> GCC was deliberately making things interdepend on each other, even > without technical reasons, simply to prevent commercial entities to > replace the e.g. front-end of the compiler with some proprietary code > and then have that use the GPL backend. This would enable a new, > proprietary languag

[Dng] Which DE will initially be fully supported in Devuan?

Hello Everybody, I hope I am not too early to ask this. I have been switching desktops that are available in Debian so many times. But I always go back to XFCE. I have been on XFCE (again) for almost a year now. From the recent discussions, it seems KDE, Gnome (and its forks), and (perhaps)

Re: [Dng] FW: Devuan commitments - will trade-off be applied?

*> [T.J. ] That is like saying that everyone uses the same mouse. They might work the same to the average person, but a developer knows the difference. Wayland at present only works on* *> Linux and it is not being designed with portability in mind. The actual Wayland devs are working only wit

Re: [Dng] Which DE will initially be fully supported in Devuan?

I guess I missed reading http://lists.devuan.org/dwn/54F5606A.20909.dyne.org.html. XFCE it is then. On 23/03/15 21:44, Anto wrote: Hello Everybody, I hope I am not too early to ask this. I have been switching desktops that are available in Debian so many times. But I always go back to XFCE.

Re: [Dng] Which DE will initially be fully supported in Devuan?

On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 8:44 PM, Anto wrote: > From the recent discussions, it seems KDE, Gnome (and its forks), and > (perhaps) Unity are out of the options. I think there are a lot of good > options like XFCE, LXDE, Enlightenment, etc. But which one is going to be > *initially* fully supported i

Re: [Dng] FW: Devuan commitments - will trade-off be applied?

From: Jude Nelson [mailto:jud...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 23, 2015 3:50 PM To: T.J. Duchene Cc: dng@lists.dyne.org Subject: Re: [Dng] FW: Devuan commitments - will trade-off be applied? Technically, Wayland is the protocol definition, not the implementation (i.e. think X11 vs X.org

Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet

On Mon, 3/23/15, KatolaZ wrote: Subject: Re: [Dng] rumors on RMS about systemd at libreplanet To: "Jaromil" Cc: dng@lists.dyne.org Date: Monday, March 23, 2015, 2:22 PM On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 07:44:30PM +0100, Jaromil wrote: [cut] > > I think this is unacceptable under so many ways... s

Re: [Dng] FW: Devuan commitments - will trade-off be applied?

Hi T.J., > *While I am not commenting as to their ultimate aims, which OVERALL are actually quite admirable and agnostic, it is still less than desirable that a key technology: KMS IS part of the* *> initial implementation, which in turn becomes the "reference implementation" for all practical pu