On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 12:54:25PM -0400, John Moser wrote:
> - libav is garbage, full of hacks, loaded with massive security concerns,
> breaks things for existing users, and is only used by Ubuntu because it's
> in Debian and/or because some key Ubuntu/Debian developers are also libav
> develope
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Dale Amon wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 01:56:08PM +0200, Benjamin Drung wrote:
>> Commenting/Uncommenting deb-src lines in /etc/apt/sources.list seems
>> much simpler/easier.
>
> I can deal with that... I always have changes to make to sources.list
> anyway, so
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 01:56:08PM +0200, Benjamin Drung wrote:
> Commenting/Uncommenting deb-src lines in /etc/apt/sources.list seems
> much simpler/easier.
I can deal with that... I always have changes to make to sources.list
anyway, so uncommenting a few more items is not an issue.
--
Ubuntu-
I've stumbled across this:
http://blog.pkh.me/p/13-the-ffmpeg-libav-situation.html
I did some more digging and got the same from the other side. The short
version is they all hate each other and they each claim that they're
merging perfect, well-reviewed, properly-designed code and the other sid
Am Mittwoch, den 22.05.2013, 10:11 +0100 schrieb Robie Basak:
> Another idea about mechanism:
>
> It seems to me that "apt-get update" does two logical tasks which serve
> two different use cases for many users, one of which is rare and
> often unnecessary.
>
> How about an apt configuration opti
Another idea about mechanism:
It seems to me that "apt-get update" does two logical tasks which serve
two different use cases for many users, one of which is rare and
often unnecessary.
How about an apt configuration option that, when enabled (default: off),
disables source index downloads when "
On 22.05.2013 11:02, Ballock Tokarski wrote:
> > I strongly vote for this to be SSSD. RedHat is actively developing it
> > and it seems to be running quite decently on Precise already. For
> this,
> > the following obstacles need to be handled:
> > - SSSD needs to be included in
On Wed, 22 May 2013, Dale Amon wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 02:20:51AM +0200, Florian Diesch wrote:
> > Am Mon, 20 May 2013 10:02:41 -0700
> > 4MB every few days could quite hurt you with that.
> My flat outside Belfast has 20 meg of bandwidth.
It is good that a decade[1] of broadband investme
Hello, Timo,
> SSSD handles those in libpam-sss/libnss-sss, it doesn't need
> libpam-krb5/ldap etc.
>
Yup, my bad. I must have encountered some bug in the early days that made
me think so and I distributed the nss/pam ldap and krb5 stuff along with
sssd.
I have just verified that this is actual
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 02:20:51AM +0200, Florian Diesch wrote:
> Am Mon, 20 May 2013 10:02:41 -0700
> schrieb Benjamin Kerensa :
>
> > I think in most parts of the world 4MB is trivial overhead for a user.
>
> Over here in German cheap mobile data tarrifs often get you something
> like a few hun
10 matches
Mail list logo
