Re: Bypass events and get the physical keyboard state directly
On 02/21/2017 08:59 PM, Pekka Paalanen wrote: > I am glad you found the culprit and told us what it is. I would have > never guessed it to be an SDL bug caused by such subtle interactions. Its weirder than that. The input bug hasn't any obvious effect on the video animation until after you add timed sections to your game loop. Specifically, sleeping the game process after processing the current frame until the beginning of the next frame. Once I started return CPU cycles back to the system, I got slammed with ghosted events that would continue moving the screen around long after my hands had left the keyboard. I'm also doing Win32 platform code with a similar game loop design in another layer, and that was working fine with identical game code. The entire time, I couldn't believe that was the quality of keyboard input on Linux. Sheesh. https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=610326 -- 0xD64E442F.asc Description: application/pgp-keys signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ xdg mailing list xdg@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
Re: Bypass events and get the physical keyboard state directly
Yup, the encryption was an automagickal client mistake. And I understand all your points, and don't disagree with the security model. I just don't think that the people and the software that are assuming responsibility for system security should be. I'm not afraid to go and look, then tear it up and write my own thing if its a good use of time. I think its going to be a very good use of time these days ;) For posterity, the input problem I had is a bug in SDL2. Pressing and holding down a key was not producing events with the repeat flag set. It produced pairs of keydown & pressed - keyup & released events without the repeat flag set. These events continued to be send long after the key was physically released. It is an untenable expectation for the application to track key state with garbage input. This is a known SDL2 bug affecting at least verisons 2.0.4 https://bugzilla.libsdl.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3472 and 2.0.5. There is a patch I've tested locally on my own system, and it works. https://bugzilla-attachments.libsdl.org/attachment.cgi?id=2594 On 02/20/2017 11:17 PM, Pekka Paalanen wrote: > (I think you just sent an encrypted email to a mailing list. I assume > this was an accident, since nothing indicates otherwise.) > > > On Mon, 20 Feb 2017 21:56:03 +1300 > Bryan Baldwin <br...@katofiad.co.nz> wrote: > >> I don't know why you mentioned Wayland. As a reference point? I'm not >> presently developing with a Wayland target. > Yes, as a reference point. > >> I cannot track the state of the keyboard with the events I received, >> because, as described, they are garbage. Something between evdev and >> my code screws the input data. X11, GNOME, or SDL2. Out of that >> stack, X11 would have been my goto to look for a way to view input >> more directly, which is why I asked about your interfaces here, but >> even that was completely wrong. > There is probably a reason why something somewhere converts repeats > into up/down pairs, if that is the only problem you have. You could try > finding out which component is responsible for it, and ask on the > appropriate mailing list why it is so and how to work around it. > > I would also hazard a guess that these up/down pairs come really close > to each other, so if you actually drained the event queue before > looking at the tracked keyboard state, maybe it would be what you need. > But that is just speculation from me. > > FWIW, Wayland does not have repeat events itself. A toolkit may > manufacture those any way it wants based on keyboard state (the exact > state you seem to be wanting in the first place). > >> Initial code tests I've made directly against evdev prove that the >> input seen is accurate and properly reported. Grabbing all the input >> devices is easy. Releasing and reacquiring all of them based on >> window focus is easy. Identifying what each device is and which to >> use is easy. I have no idea what you are talking about with Re: to >> permissions and security. I'm not sure where in the original software >> stack the input code is being ruined, but to whomever code that >> belongs, if you cannot deliver accurate input from the kernel with >> 100% confidence, you cannot be trusted to decide permissions or >> security, either. > I'm not convinced, but I won't argue about the easyness. > > The security/permissions problem is this: if you are allowed to open > the input devices, you can also trivially implement an invisible > keylogger, just "forget" to close the devices. Obviously people don't > like that idea, hence in a usual system the input device permissions > are restricted, probably as far as to the root user. Hence your game > needs to run as root, or ask the user to bypass the set permissions > e.g. by adding himself to the 'input' group (which now opens the door > for keyloggers). Display servers often use logind DBus API to open input > devices to avoid running as root, but I believe logind would refuse > your game if a display server was also active at the same time. > > > Thanks, > pq > > >> On 02/20/2017 09:20 PM, Pekka Paalanen wrote: >>> On Mon, 20 Feb 2017 12:37:36 +1300 >>> Bryan Baldwin <br...@katofiad.co.nz> wrote: >>> >>>> Okay, so further investigation has lead me to test code against >>>> evdev directly. Nevermind ;) >>> But if you run under any kind of display server (windowing system), >>> that won't usually work at all, or works wrong. >>> >>> That is also why any kind of "bypass the display server" will not >>> generally work. There is a myriad of reasons for that, including >>> permission and security issues, even starting from
Re: Bypass events and get the physical keyboard state directly
bincbyqRIBgJE.bin Description: PGP/MIME version identification encrypted.asc Description: OpenPGP encrypted message ___ xdg mailing list xdg@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
Re: Bypass events and get the physical keyboard state directly
Okay, so further investigation has lead me to test code against evdev directly. Nevermind ;) On 02/20/2017 11:19 AM, Bryan Baldwin wrote: > Hello all, > > I've been writing game code, and have gone adrift with a big problem > with keyboard input. > > The properties I'm getting through SDL2 contain key up/down, > pressed/released, and repeat. I've read either that the pressed/released > properties are only set with the key actually physically down, or that a > keyboard event will at least have the repeat property set if the key is > a repeat. I can't confirm that any of this is true in code. > > No matter what I do, if I hold down a key I get the first key down + > pressed event, a subsequent event flagged as a repeat at the delay > threshold (500ms), and then a deluge of *unflagged* key down+pressed / > key up+released event pairs for the rate interval that continue > repeating well after the key is actually released. I tried using SDL2's > GetKeyboardState instead, but this produces identical results. Its the > same data as events with a different interface. > > The documentation I've read for keyboard input with X11 also follows a > very similar event-based model, but what I want is a way to check the > keyboard and literally only see exactly what the state of the keys at > the instant that that call is made, and by-pass any and all other > processing entirely, including auto-repeat. > > Can anyone point me in the right direction? > > > > ___ > xdg mailing list > xdg@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ xdg mailing list xdg@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
Bypass events and get the physical keyboard state directly
Hello all, I've been writing game code, and have gone adrift with a big problem with keyboard input. The properties I'm getting through SDL2 contain key up/down, pressed/released, and repeat. I've read either that the pressed/released properties are only set with the key actually physically down, or that a keyboard event will at least have the repeat property set if the key is a repeat. I can't confirm that any of this is true in code. No matter what I do, if I hold down a key I get the first key down + pressed event, a subsequent event flagged as a repeat at the delay threshold (500ms), and then a deluge of *unflagged* key down+pressed / key up+released event pairs for the rate interval that continue repeating well after the key is actually released. I tried using SDL2's GetKeyboardState instead, but this produces identical results. Its the same data as events with a different interface. The documentation I've read for keyboard input with X11 also follows a very similar event-based model, but what I want is a way to check the keyboard and literally only see exactly what the state of the keys at the instant that that call is made, and by-pass any and all other processing entirely, including auto-repeat. Can anyone point me in the right direction? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ xdg mailing list xdg@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
Re: [DNG] GNOME3 and Co.
On 01/04/2016 08:39 AM, Mitt Green wrote: > Dr. Nikolaus Klepp wrote: > > >I want to point out, that TDE is very configurable (which cannot be said > >from GNOME 2/3), > >and kmail is the best mail client with maildir support available. > > My personal problems with TDE: > - it's a Qt DE; > - it's ugly; > - it's waaay too configurable, with own settings dialogue for pretty much > everything. Gentoo lovers have already been using this patchset to keep GNOME 3 systemd-less. It would be great to get an even larger part of the systemd-free community behind this project. I'd love to see Devuan GNOME 3 packages :) https://github.com/dantrell/gentoo-project-gnome-without-systemd -- 0xE1A91299.asc Description: application/pgp-keys ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Fwd: The FSF Allows No Derivatives,
You don't *asterisk* need to make a *asterisk* derivative work from nd sources. Just write an *asterisk* original work about it. This is *asterisk* actually what the FSF and GNU ppl want you to do. They do *asterisk* not want to be the central source for all things free, either. Just say it in your own *asterisk* words! On 05/25/2015 05:18 PM, Aaron Wolf wrote: And the ND clause helps this HOW? I think ND is *hurting* our cause and *increasing* the misrepresentation by discouraging some amount of positive derivative works that are *aligned* with FSF values. On 05/24/2015 10:15 PM, Will Hill wrote: I suppose the easiest way to demonstrate the misrepresentation is to ask an IT person about the FSF. If you can't remember your own surprise on first reading actual GNU and FSF material, you will probably be surprised by the average IT person's skewed perceptions. They are likely to tell you some confused things about Open Source, freeware, hobbiest, etc. The general public is even less well informed. The last thing you might hear is a clear understanding of the power non free software has over users and what it takes to undo that. This problem of misrepresentation is not unique to free software. Rich and powerful people devote significant resources to confusing the public about all sorts of things. On Friday 22 May 2015, streo...@gmail.com wrote: will hill easy to observe pattern of publishers missrepresenting GNU and the FSF by all means at their disposal -- 0xE1A91299.asc Description: application/pgp-keys signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [libreplanet-discuss] The FSF Allows No Derivatives,
On 04/26/15 20:24, rysiek wrote: Problem is -- and this very discussion shows it *very* well -- that even with such restrictive license put on works of opinion (I do not subscribe to the view that this distinction is relevant, but let's work with that), views *are* misunderstood. So, the license does not fix this problem, at all. The impetus of the license isn't to increase understanding or decrease misunderstanding amongst readers of a work of opinion, but to stop the distribution of misrepresenting derivative works. I can't follow you when you start from a false predicate. -- 0xE1A91299.asc Description: application/pgp-keys signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Hello, and setting up a server
On 04/26/15 02:36, Jim Garrett wrote: Am I correct in thinking that running a server for this purpose requires a static IP address? No. You can enlist the aid of a dynamic dns service. I use DNSexit. The catch of this solution is that you must run a script on your server that periodically checks its IP address and updates the dns server when it changes. Sound simple but the biggest gotcha is when the update script stop working. For myself, I use a bash script wrapper around the perl updater to detect when it has lost the plot, then restart it. Lots of inexperienced people running servers sounds like a large-scale security disaster waiting to happen. Is there any way this could be managed? I just started a high security project at work this year. How far you need to go depends on the sensitivity of the data and services you want to protect. Here is some low hanging fruit: * Do not use SSH, or enable SSH on a non-standard port. * Use SSHGuard to detect and stop brute forcing attempts (works for more than just SSH btw). * Use IPTables, or similar firewall, to block ports other than those being used. * Install Snort to detect network intrusion attempts. * Install AIDE to detect intrusion (and rootkits) at the filesystem level. -- 0xE1A91299.asc Description: application/pgp-keys signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [libreplanet-discuss] The FSF Allows No Derivatives,
On 04/27/15 02:51, rysiek wrote:
Maybe we could at least try to keep it civil on this list, please?
#$%^*(){ is %^$)(@^$%ing ^*()
Several years ago volunteers of an organisation I worked for translated the
following article:
http://ur1.ca/g5iwh
We reached out to FSF for permission to publish it; it has been ignored
completely.
I stipulate that the fact that this text has not been available to 40 million
Polish speakers worldwide may have been a larger net loss than potential for
misrepresentation/mistranslation.
What? Why do you need to translate that article? It would have been great if
you could, but FSF are not the sole distributors of such news. If you are
worried that forty million Polish reader were deprived of this information,
that's your fault. You were informed. You weren't handcuffed by this. You could
have written your own article! It isn't like you have to reverse engineer a
complex program to duplicate it, it's just a few paragraphs!
There is no clear distinction between works of opinion and the rest; as I
have argued before, a work of opinion can be used as a base for work of
art,
or an educational endaevour, or otherwise. This distinction is as artificial,
as it is harmful.
With the license, the distinction is as simple as placing the text into the
section licensed as immutable for the reason I say this is my opinion. So
what if it is educational? So what if it is art. What difference does it make?
I would be worried that this could be used as a loophole to lock away useful
information, except it can't. Even if you tried, I could simply copy or
paraphrase your text, put it in my mutably or immutably licensed text and say
its my opinion distinct from yours even it if says the same thing. What I can't
do is make a copy, change what it says, and say it's yours.
The ridiculousness of this thread is that there is no useful example of
exploitation of this clause. Its rhetorical nonsense.
The original purpose of immutable clauses in the GFDL is to prevent third
parties from removing the political and social commentary that the authors
added to explain why they started the project. And they were right, because
there were people who were just gagging to get rid of it. When they discovered
they couldn't, they were butthurt and ran off and invented open source. And
that's fine, too.
--
0xE1A91299.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [GNU-linux-libre] [Dev] [Riley Baird] LibertyBSD - OpenBSD minus the blobs
On 12/30/2014 09:45 AM, Riley Baird wrote: Is there any significant reason, other than the license, that gcc is better than clang? I really don't want to deviate too much from upstream, and as long as the license is free, I don't see a problem. If it's about the license, I can see that OpenBSD's, or Debian's decision of which compiler to use would be influential, and thus they should use gcc. But LibertyBSD is not likely to be influential, so I don't see the point in changing the default compiler. If you were going to pick apart something because of the license, you probably wouldn't be doing BSD in the first place. BSD licensing is horrible, and does nothing to prevent antagonists from appropriating your code and not sharing their changes with you. Whilst I think that LibertyBSD is an interesting project, and possibly edifying to its developers, it is like fishing ice cubes out of an ocean filled with iceburgs, freedomwise. --
Re: why people give up on open source software
On 10/26/2013 02:08 AM, Wolfgang Keller wrote: And that may be the origin of the problem, SINCE IN ALL CAPS IT IS PLAIN UNREADABLE AND THUS NO ONE WILL ACTUALLY READ IT. That's backwards. Its part of the solution. It doesn't matter if you read it or not, because it applies whether you read it or not. -- 0xCCE82347.asc Description: application/pgp-keys signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: why people give up on open source software
On 10/26/2013 02:08 AM, Wolfgang Keller wrote: And that may be the origin of the problem, SINCE IN ALL CAPS IT IS PLAIN UNREADABLE AND THUS NO ONE WILL ACTUALLY READ IT. That's backwards. Its part of the solution. It doesn't matter if you read it or not, because it applies whether you read it or not. -- 0xCCE82347.asc Description: application/pgp-keys signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: why people give up on open source software
On 10/26/2013 02:08 AM, Wolfgang Keller wrote: And that may be the origin of the problem, SINCE IN ALL CAPS IT IS PLAIN UNREADABLE AND THUS NO ONE WILL ACTUALLY READ IT. That's backwards. Its part of the solution. It doesn't matter if you read it or not, because it applies whether you read it or not. -- 0xCCE82347.asc Description: application/pgp-keys signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: why people give up on open source software
On 10/25/2013 05:32 AM, Ken Springer wrote: snip We know your argument. Seriously, We've heard it everywhere all the time...end-less-ly. Everybody wishes that their software was robust with magic documentation and free specialists that will fix your problem or tell you what to do on demand. It doesn't always work out that way, though. Tough. You think you are owed an explanation of how everything you download and run works. That could be a mistake. These licenses generally state, "AS IS WITH NO WARRANTY OR MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE". Its usually printed all or in part in all captial letters. If there is something that you want to see happen in free software, and the developers who are working for free (or paid by someone else to work on it contrary to your interests) aren't doing it, or aren't doing it fast enough to suit you, and you cannot or will not do it yourself, you still have recourse. It works similarly to, but not quite the same as, the proprietary model. Pay someone to do it for you. Then you'll have someone obligated to put up with your whinging. That is not us. -- 0xCCE82347.asc Description: application/pgp-keys signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: why people give up on open source software
On 10/25/2013 01:29 PM, Ken Springer wrote: On 10/24/13 5:13 PM, Bryan Baldwin wrote: On 10/25/2013 05:32 AM, Ken Springer wrote: snip We know your argument. Seriously, We've heard it everywhere all the time...end-less-ly. Everybody wishes that their software was robust with magic documentation and free specialists that will fix your problem or tell you what to do on demand. It doesn't always work out that way, though. Tough. You think you are owed an explanation of how everything you download and run works. That could be a mistake. These licenses generally state, "AS IS WITH NO WARRANTY OR MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE". Its usually printed all or in part in all captial letters. If there is something that you want to see happen in free software, and the developers who are working for free (or paid by someone else to work on it contrary to your interests) aren't doing it, or aren't doing it fast enough to suit you, and you cannot or will not do it yourself, you still have recourse. It works similarly to, but not quite the same as, the proprietary model. Pay someone to do it for you. Then you'll have someone obligated to put up with your whinging. That is not us. This is all the time I have for this reply. Which is the same amount of time you have to do anything other than to tell others what to do, as if they needed your advice. -- 0xCCE82347.asc Description: application/pgp-keys signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Why People Give Up on Groups.
On 10/25/2013 04:55 PM, gordon_cooper wrote: I quit I thought the very same thing, except 99% of the time the LYX list has interesting news, is genuinely helpful, and quitting only would only be a punishment to myself because the 1% hurt my delicate sensibilities. I'd rather have the cherry and spit out the pit, than not have any cherries at all because they have pits. All of the most interesting lists have flame wars. It isn't a sign that its time to quit. Its the sign that the project is mature enough to attract positive and negative attention. The Linux Kernel mailing list covers one of the most advanced free software projects of all time and is full of flames and all sorts. I love living in New Zealand, which is full of otherwise sensible people. You probably should have quit *silently* instead of making a show of it for sympathy posts. You make the rest of us look bad. -- 0xCCE82347.asc Description: application/pgp-keys signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: why people give up on open source software
On 10/25/2013 05:32 AM, Ken Springer wrote: snip We know your argument. Seriously, We've heard it everywhere all the time...end-less-ly. Everybody wishes that their software was robust with magic documentation and free specialists that will fix your problem or tell you what to do on demand. It doesn't always work out that way, though. Tough. You think you are owed an explanation of how everything you download and run works. That could be a mistake. These licenses generally state, "AS IS WITH NO WARRANTY OR MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE". Its usually printed all or in part in all captial letters. If there is something that you want to see happen in free software, and the developers who are working for free (or paid by someone else to work on it contrary to your interests) aren't doing it, or aren't doing it fast enough to suit you, and you cannot or will not do it yourself, you still have recourse. It works similarly to, but not quite the same as, the proprietary model. Pay someone to do it for you. Then you'll have someone obligated to put up with your whinging. That is not us. -- 0xCCE82347.asc Description: application/pgp-keys signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: why people give up on open source software
On 10/25/2013 01:29 PM, Ken Springer wrote: On 10/24/13 5:13 PM, Bryan Baldwin wrote: On 10/25/2013 05:32 AM, Ken Springer wrote: snip We know your argument. Seriously, We've heard it everywhere all the time...end-less-ly. Everybody wishes that their software was robust with magic documentation and free specialists that will fix your problem or tell you what to do on demand. It doesn't always work out that way, though. Tough. You think you are owed an explanation of how everything you download and run works. That could be a mistake. These licenses generally state, "AS IS WITH NO WARRANTY OR MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE". Its usually printed all or in part in all captial letters. If there is something that you want to see happen in free software, and the developers who are working for free (or paid by someone else to work on it contrary to your interests) aren't doing it, or aren't doing it fast enough to suit you, and you cannot or will not do it yourself, you still have recourse. It works similarly to, but not quite the same as, the proprietary model. Pay someone to do it for you. Then you'll have someone obligated to put up with your whinging. That is not us. This is all the time I have for this reply. Which is the same amount of time you have to do anything other than to tell others what to do, as if they needed your advice. -- 0xCCE82347.asc Description: application/pgp-keys signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Why People Give Up on Groups.
On 10/25/2013 04:55 PM, gordon_cooper wrote: I quit I thought the very same thing, except 99% of the time the LYX list has interesting news, is genuinely helpful, and quitting only would only be a punishment to myself because the 1% hurt my delicate sensibilities. I'd rather have the cherry and spit out the pit, than not have any cherries at all because they have pits. All of the most interesting lists have flame wars. It isn't a sign that its time to quit. Its the sign that the project is mature enough to attract positive and negative attention. The Linux Kernel mailing list covers one of the most advanced free software projects of all time and is full of flames and all sorts. I love living in New Zealand, which is full of otherwise sensible people. You probably should have quit *silently* instead of making a show of it for sympathy posts. You make the rest of us look bad. -- 0xCCE82347.asc Description: application/pgp-keys signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: why people give up on open source software
On 10/25/2013 05:32 AM, Ken Springer wrote: We know your argument. Seriously, We've heard it everywhere all the time...end-less-ly. Everybody wishes that their software was robust with magic documentation and free specialists that will fix your problem or tell you what to do on demand. It doesn't always work out that way, though. Tough. You think you are owed an explanation of how everything you download and run works. That could be a mistake. These licenses generally state, "AS IS WITH NO WARRANTY OR MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE". Its usually printed all or in part in all captial letters. If there is something that you want to see happen in free software, and the developers who are working for free (or paid by someone else to work on it contrary to your interests) aren't doing it, or aren't doing it fast enough to suit you, and you cannot or will not do it yourself, you still have recourse. It works similarly to, but not quite the same as, the proprietary model. Pay someone to do it for you. Then you'll have someone obligated to put up with your whinging. That is not us. -- 0xCCE82347.asc Description: application/pgp-keys signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: why people give up on open source software
On 10/25/2013 01:29 PM, Ken Springer wrote: On 10/24/13 5:13 PM, Bryan Baldwin wrote: On 10/25/2013 05:32 AM, Ken Springer wrote: We know your argument. Seriously, We've heard it everywhere all the time...end-less-ly. Everybody wishes that their software was robust with magic documentation and free specialists that will fix your problem or tell you what to do on demand. It doesn't always work out that way, though. Tough. You think you are owed an explanation of how everything you download and run works. That could be a mistake. These licenses generally state, "AS IS WITH NO WARRANTY OR MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE". Its usually printed all or in part in all captial letters. If there is something that you want to see happen in free software, and the developers who are working for free (or paid by someone else to work on it contrary to your interests) aren't doing it, or aren't doing it fast enough to suit you, and you cannot or will not do it yourself, you still have recourse. It works similarly to, but not quite the same as, the proprietary model. Pay someone to do it for you. Then you'll have someone obligated to put up with your whinging. That is not us. This is all the time I have for this reply. Which is the same amount of time you have to do anything other than to tell others what to do, as if they needed your advice. -- 0xCCE82347.asc Description: application/pgp-keys signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Why People Give Up on Groups.
On 10/25/2013 04:55 PM, gordon_cooper wrote: I quit I thought the very same thing, except 99% of the time the LYX list has interesting news, is genuinely helpful, and quitting only would only be a punishment to myself because the <1% hurt my delicate sensibilities. I'd rather have the cherry and spit out the pit, than not have any cherries at all because they have pits. All of the most interesting lists have flame wars. It isn't a sign that its time to quit. Its the sign that the project is mature enough to attract positive and negative attention. The Linux Kernel mailing list covers one of the most advanced free software projects of all time and is full of flames and all sorts. I love living in New Zealand, which is full of otherwise sensible people. You probably should have quit *silently* instead of making a show of it for sympathy posts. You make the rest of us look bad. -- 0xCCE82347.asc Description: application/pgp-keys signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [Sugar-devel] FYI: Simon Phipps on GitHub
On 07/16/2013 02:06 PM, Walter Bender wrote: http://www.infoworld.com/d/open-source-software/github-finally-takes-open-source-licenses-seriously-222708 Only the microsite, http://choosealicense.com, afaict GitHub itself is still completely non-free. -- ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
[Fsf-Debian] Stephano's talk at LibrePlanet
Was the video for this ever published? If so I apologize, but I haven't seen the link posted here? ___ Fsf-collab-discuss mailing list Fsf-collab-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/fsf-collab-discuss
Re: [Full-disclosure] Fw: Fw: Justice for Molly (cops killingcivillians)
On 03/30/13 01:00, Jerry dePriest wrote: 3. Let's discuss what a douchebag you are for downplaying something by putting it into the scope of a chain letter? That's confirmation you are in fact a true douchebag... Its worse than a chain letter. Its like psychotic religious cults shoving drivel in the form of dirty pamphlets at people on the street corner. ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Re: [Full-disclosure] Fw: Fw: Justice for Molly (cops killingcivillians)
On 03/30/13 01:00, Jerry dePriest wrote: I forogt New Zeland is just another offshoot of the penal colony Austrailia used to be. You can't help it, it's in your genes... I'm not expatriate. New Zealand is not now nor has ever been a penal colony, except in the pilot episode of Star Trek - Voyager. I don't know what it is in J.J. Abrams-verse. You've made many many kiwi friends with that post, btw. :D ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Re: [Full-disclosure] Justice for Molly (cops killing civillians)
On 03/27/13 16:21, Jerry dePriest wrote: https://www.facebook.com/groups/180686205383827/ It is possbile to avoid spamming the list with Facebook tracts? ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Re: [Full-disclosure] Fw: Justice for Molly (cops killing civillians)
On 03/28/13 04:31, Jerry dePriest wrote: I said sorry... what if it was your relative? what if it was the cops fucking with your family? There are places for these kinds of conversations, which are not here. There are and will be seemingly urgent problems that some person somewhere is going to think so important that they run out of their houses screaming and try to spread the word as far and wide as possible. In previous decades we have had chain letters, then chain email, and now we can finally relagate most of that craze torubbish tips like Facebook. Please keep it there. ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Re: [Clfs-dev] Final CLFS Git book issues
On 01/17/13 11:33, William Harrington wrote: Other archs I hope others can help with the builds. I'm building MIPS64EL on loongson2f. ___ Clfs-dev mailing list Clfs-dev@lists.cross-lfs.org http://lists.cross-lfs.org/listinfo.cgi/clfs-dev-cross-lfs.org
Re: [libreplanet-discuss] GFDL with Invariant Sections or other unmodifiable parts. Was: Ubuntu malware: what to do?
On 01/06/13 09:21, Michael Dorrington wrote: Part of the problem is that the FSF puts 'nice' content^1 in unmodifiable sections of their manuals. What if someone wrote a manual for their software which had content in an unmodifiable section that you found particularly 'un-nice' but you found the program useful and wanted to distribute the manuals to people at a stall. How would you feel about not even being able to remove the 'un-nice' section? The text that FSF puts into its unmodifiable sections is not 'nice' for everyone. The reason those messages are in an invariant section is exactly because they are 'un-nice' to those that would like to usurp free software and use it to take away the users freedoms. Invariant sections could serve to impede the propagation of the work that includes them. In the case of the FSF's invariant section we need not worry, because the people to whom those messages are 'un-nice' would probably not to help propagate free software with the freedoms intact in the first place. Where something distasteful to the degree that it is offensive to a larger subset of the population, the propagation of such a work would be even more greatly impeded. It is contrary to the interests of an author to do such a thing. In the unlikely example that it happens, it is more likely that a competing work will replace the offensive one. In the case of non-FSF definitions of free, it is more important to look at the reasons that people promote criticism of FSF invariant clauses. At best they are poorly thought out claims that any authored work == software. At worst it is a weak facade to cover up the critic's desire to divorce the idea of freedom from the software, and replace it openness or something equally meaningless and contemptible. ^1 http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Content
Re: [Fsf-Debian] gap assessment
On 11/30/12 02:29, Osamu Aoki wrote: I think that analysis is quite sound. But I would add something to: 1) Exclusion of GFDL documentation of some essential software packages. This may be weak objection point from FSF based on Complete Distros. If not being a complete enough distribution isn't a bar, having to enable non-free to get access to FSF free documentation isn't acceptable, nor is it likely that Debian will change to accommodate different license terms for different types of works in main. I think the obvious solution is a `merge` repo, within which any package acceptable to FSF and unacceptable for Debian `main` can be put. That way FSF free users have what they need without enabling access to non-free, and licensing terms in Debian main remain consistent. GFDL works are probably the only packages that would be there, if so maybe call it gnu-docs or gnu-gfdl. ___ Fsf-collab-discuss mailing list Fsf-collab-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/fsf-collab-discuss
Re: [Fsf-Debian] user freedom also matters for cultural and opinion works [was: Re: Silent here]
I think that you are reading too much into what copyright licenses can do for you, or possibly mixing up the inspiration one gains from such works with the direct modification of them. For instance, I can draft art images in the style of Frank Frazetta, and make the figures, animals, and monsters very much like his work. But those images are my expressions and not litigious under copyright. If it was otherwise, Frank Cho might have gotten himself into some trouble already. I think remixes of art are fine, but I don't like making them myself. And they are not a necessary freedom. There is no dystopic control that could be forced on anyone by not being allowed to mix such works, and mixing occurs in spite of the fact that the materials they are derived from are not usually licensed with permission to modify. If you really had to make a collage style piece, but were prevented from sourcing other artist's works, it isn't too much work for you to make your own samples and piece them together. This is simply not something you can do with anything but the most trivial program unless you had Stallman and his a cadre of programmers writing a UNIX replacement. And that was only done once with some help from Mr. Torvalds. Artistic remixing isn't even the case in question. Debian isn't being stampeded with mixed media artists clamouring to get access to all the free samples of work only to find...oh darn, they are all in invariant clauses of GFDL docs. Works of opinion and personal views in the author's own words shouldn't be modified by third parties because they should remain in the author's own words. Users are already fully free without permission to modify those. ___ Fsf-collab-discuss mailing list Fsf-collab-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/fsf-collab-discuss
Re: [Fsf-Debian] Silent here
On 11/24/12 12:55, Michael Gilbert wrote: That link has no guidance from the FSF yet. That bug log includes only senior debian developers engaged in a debate about the issue. If FSF doesn't produce guidance there, then the decision that happens there will only a barometer of a certain subset of debian developers. Debian works by addressing bug reports, so specific collaboration could help by FSF representatives filing bug reports about the problems they see in various areas: bugs.debian.org/www.debian.org bugs.debian.org/bugs.debian.org bugs.debian.org/qa.debian.org [etc.] Please give us specific items to consider and fix. It's okay if specific bugs haven't been raised yet. This list seems to be the place to discuss the issues from which the bug reports will ultimately be derived. Collaboration isn't filing bugs, or at least it isn't _only_ filing bugs. Its both sides talking about things and working out what should be done. When the discussion list has done its job, there shouldn't be anyone one either side who is unsure of at least something that could be reported as a bug. Your response shows that the list hasn't done its job just yet. I'm not sure, but I think there are probably some people who work with both Debian and FSF. Even if there aren't, there surely are people in Debian that understand internal processes as initmately as FSF's philosophy. There won't be any lack of hands for noticing problems and writing bug reports. I expect bugs will be filed from people in both organizations. But simply waiting for the FSF to tell you where the problems are isn't a commitment to attain and maintain compliance with the free distribution guidelines. Such a commitment itself a requirement to attain compliance. ___ Fsf-collab-discuss mailing list Fsf-collab-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/fsf-collab-discuss
Re: [Fsf-Debian] Silent here
On 11/24/12 05:03, Mason Loring Bliss wrote: An amusing comparison may be drawn between the FSF's rejection of four-clause BSD licenses and the FSF's support of invariant sections in the GFDL. Documentation is not software. I wouldn't be surprised to find differences when comparing licenses drawn for software to licenses drawn for documentation. Software freedom guidelines have nothing to do with documentation freedom. Applying one to the other shows profound lack of thought and is going to waste a lot of time. ___ Fsf-collab-discuss mailing list Fsf-collab-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/fsf-collab-discuss
Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)
On 10/05/2012 05:51 AM, Patrick wrote: I'd better not answer this. I should wind things down now. The FSF foundation and it's members care about free software but the scope of concerns stops there. FSF compatible licences do not protect charitable software from becoming for-profit, period. The charitable quality cannot be applied to software meaningfully. A person can be charitable, not a program. You may wish to be charitable and give copies of your program away only as gratis, but it is not then unethical for another person to be entrepreneurial and sell copies of it for profit, *if* they are conveying the four freedoms when they do. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [libreplanet-discuss] help with FSF incompatible but community oriented licence(s)
On 10/04/2012 10:52 AM, Patrick wrote: All you are doing is looking down on people, it's useless I would be interested to know how it is that FSF is preventing you from writing a license that serves your absurd desires? Refusing to do your work for you is not the same as locking you down. It is not anyone else's responsibility to ensure that a license exists for every possible configuration of terms that you might imagine you want to have. If you don't have the resources to make one, or you don't feel confident enough to do it yourself, that's too bad. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [Clfs-dev] Download utility for final system
On 09/03/2012 03:04 PM, William Harrington wrote: On Sep 2, 2012, at 05:00 AM, Martin Ward wrote: On 02/09/12 03:47, William Harrington wrote: Greetings All, An issue we need to discuss. In the final system we do not have an ftp client (which can be used to ftp to a server to get curl or wget or whatever other utility to download packages for cblfs). I've had some issues with wget in downloading packages from sites like SourceForge, who do not link directly to the file. Curl works on these, however. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Clfs-dev mailing list Clfs-dev@lists.cross-lfs.org http://lists.cross-lfs.org/listinfo.cgi/clfs-dev-cross-lfs.org
Re: [Fsf-Debian] No response?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 08/06/2012 07:49 PM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 03:50:23AM +, Clint Adams wrote: Do you understand how a sane and honest person might disagree with you given the preponderance of evidence? I agree and this is one of the criticism we need to address. But saying, in reply to this, see, we/you're lying is not enough to actually solve the issue. You're right, it doesn't solve the issue, it supplies visibility of the issues. A compliant has been made that the discussion can't go forward until all parties ascribe to Mr. Finney's Orwellian newspeak. I disagree. Its because we've fleshed out that disagreement that the anatomy of the problem is now this clear. At that point, I argue that those people should be free to do what they want with their time and Debian resources, no matter if the non-free bits merely happen to be *colocated* with the official free bits that form the Debian distribution. I trust the maintainers of nonfree would not in fact pack their bags, shut off the lights, and lock the doors if it were decided at the end of the day to move contrib and nonfree off site. I'm not sure the open use of Debian resources is the best way to go, but I don't think that is a show stopper in and of itself. I'm deeply ambivalent about colocation. I think it could be done in a way that works. But right now, if you http/ftp to the storage and drill down, its all there in gory detail. In Mr. Adams examples, the bug reports and sundry forms are already marked nonfree in an obvious way. I don't think plastering _more_ nonfree nomenclature on top of that is good enough either. Cutting and pasting FSF philosophy with every article of nonfree is inelegant. Why not take a copy of the Debian services framework (whichever services that might mean), reupholster it, and serve it up from a separate URL under a different name, exclusively for contrib and nonfree? That would take some effort up front, but then who really wants to troll through all the html or whatever and figure out how to put surgeon general warnings on everything? (And please, refrain from lightly smash this down with no, you should delete non-free/contrib from your servers. That is indeed the *alternative* solution, but for the sake of searching from common ground, we need to be creative and explore all the various possibilities.) Colocation could be done in such a way that the free and nonfree packages aren't part of the same structure. Which is to say I think one should have to navigate to a different URL, whether served by the same hardware or not, in order to browse the nonfree packages, bug reports, et al. Behind the scenes needs to mean completely behind the scenes, where the Debian nomenclature and anything nonfree never appear together on screen, whether the maintainers continue working transparently with each other or not. Maybe that didn't land as close as you might hope to your idea of ideal, but I trust it was neither light nor bashing. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQH6EIAAoJEM5s7GXJ0FEIHzEH/Rxs+AHI0ojBAlP+9CBNy6Tf vxdtBZAWTXOTG/dRt+Y0cbpwDw/3j38/0BipGFkHC2AzpXwcktn0iIsz0uNDJ7Yq 2smVXmo+zHa68qoV5NNZ92mSF3SvU9c/8A/FDp9roq7M0zq08LNQkVb7f1pLy6J6 aloqhW+WrV4djAclNJXCwzxAeX3qty87wvq99MGXAIFl24qBqyUeTsikidBJxwuv RiXHIStDJw7gZGvHiTomcG6qIcCI2DLS/DZVgeoV6N53NMKzhIx+94bHNLcwf/z4 juRse9b5okFNDA/dNzzcxpRriA4FpESsFevfNd3LFC6/SOxJ+hmKUFTVHQ/tyJU= =AU3w -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Fsf-collab-discuss mailing list Fsf-collab-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/fsf-collab-discuss
Re: [Fsf-Debian] No response?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 08/04/2012 08:12 AM, Paul Wise wrote: On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Paul van der Vlis wrote: I agree with the FSF when they say: Debian also provides a repository of nonfree software. I don't believe that putting the non-free software on a different set of infrastructure still maintained by Debian is meaningfully different to what we have now. Is there an opportunity to make the separation between what is and is not Debian even clearer, and to do it in a way that remains consistent with Debian's social contract? I think my idea would make it clearer. But not 100% sure it's worth the work. Maybe there are other things more important. Fundamentally, the issue seems to be about the clarity of the distinction between Debian (the 'main' section) and non-free/contrib. Do we have any opinion from RMS or other FSF folks about what amount of clarity is required before they would consider Debian a free distro? Until we have that there isn't much point discussing potential levels of separation. I agree. And it dances around the real issue. The point of separation of main from contrib/nonfree is moot. It doesn't matter whether Debian developers or maintainers work in both sectors or not. The only thing that really matters is what is in your literature, your documentation, and your repositories. Of course, people who really really cared about their freedom probably wouldn't want to work in both camps. It would be interesting to get a response directly from FSF _specifically for Debian_ to meet the free distribution requirements, but its terribly terribly redundant. FSF have *already* published their requirements in sufficient detail with which to begin work. Does anyone working on Debian really need a third party to give step-by-step plan to figure it out? Asking FSF to examine Debian to give you such a response is tantamount to saying, If you want us to be a free distribution, do our work for us. Being a free distribution is not mysterious, nor a moving target. Its all laid out rather unambiguously. Nonetheless, here is my take (not necessarily representative of FSF). * Remove all references to contrib/nonfree from *everything*. It should not appear in the comments of sources.list, or anywhere in the packages and documentation, or in Debian's websites and mailing lists. * No packages should require anything from contrib or nonfree to be installed (isn't this already true?). * No packages should reference, offer, or refer to any other nonfree software before, during, or after it is installed (even if it can be installed without the nonfree). * Replace all references like understanding that some users need nonfree with we are dedicated to identifying and removing all nonfree packages whenever discovered and as soon as they are discovered. It would also be helpful if Debian developers were frequently caught in the act of doing so, as well. Not just labelling nonfree as bugs and ignoring it for years. Thus, if I browse the Debian website, or download a Debian installer and install it, or join a Debian mailing list, I expect never to see, hear, or discover anything about any nonfree software or repository anywhere, unless it is in a blacklist explaining why it was removed/not included. Requests for support for nonfree should be denied without comments or references that point to where such support is available. As far as where contrib/nonfree should go, if there were no direct links from Debian's websites, mailing lists, documentation, packages, or software to them, that would be good enough for me. Wherever they end up going, Debian probably shouldn't be part of the title, either. Needless to say, I'm completely skeptical and incredulous. Here's why. Unless the majority of Debian's movers and shakers are happy with and excited about the prospect of doing all of the above, I don't think Debian will *ever* get to the point where its a fully free distribution. Plastering the website with 100% free notices doesn't mean anything and doesn't count. You have to *want* to be free to get free. If Debian really really wanted to be free, this discussion list wouldn't even exist. The devs would have simply gone out, done it, and filled out the application email for consideration by FSF like everyone else who's on that list already did. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQHPZWAAoJEM5s7GXJ0FEIIuAH+gIelA4gXrv9uCmv4zNFUb0X qzpLMbtmBhJ0Zf07kN21wl/++Lz3GH67H9b5Vbc6vnBoaanOgN/eIYTmZ8/Q2WyC xyxqZU3KDYeSh8Cr1viigFhazmgvLUfT1M6Uotkjqub1MDekly8BzYt8H2jMuJ6h ydAvY9VXVuV834lo3WF05cOOcOm3iP8cJDZpZT0Ns4NNhV+B1Vr9/fSYVcSX38zE 4mEupTyWVaZ6Hzj386HcLwSHUNxFdwHqvHFJxdXiXmDxvR6xRpXChiQQLrjKbvdC qkWDcn7iLjGikmc+KiKLXA/XR7h+5Yho8pMdHRHh0sFu18skd9W5gGcc6HrgAKw= =1NBk -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___
Re: [Fsf-Debian] The question behind the questions [was No response?]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 08/05/2012 11:01 AM, Mason Loring Bliss wrote: I tried in my small way to pursue Debian's inclusion in the FSF free distributions list. [...] I've heard just enough of Bryan's sort of views to solidy my opinion. [...] Support for non-free software is going to get more people to use free software. What was your small way of trying to get Debian on the FSF list? How many nonfree packages did you actually remove from the distribution? Am I right, at least in your case? For you, this about getting Debian into the FSF free distribution list without actually removing or stopping support for anything nonfree. I'm still struck by the image of overwrought zealots in an ivory tower throwing stones at the people building and maintaining the foundation of their tower. Is denying the Debian distribution a listing on FSF actually throwing stones? Being on that list is about actually being free, not pretending to be free by doing a lot of work for free software and distributing nonfree on the side. You said it yourself. You think distributing nonfree software helps free software. Why then do you need to try to label something free, when it obviously isn't? If there isn't a willingness to consider being flexible on both sides, then we might as well go back to Debian being hugely popular and the FSF promoting rebranding efforts like Trisquel and gNewSense. Yes, that is my feeling exactly. We *shouldn't* be flexable on freedom. If Debian wants to get on the free distribution list, Debian developers need to get to work on actually making the distribution free instead of trying to persuade the FSF to drop the first word in its name, or change that word to open. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQHbpdAAoJEM5s7GXJ0FEIh4YH/Aot9TkHDMYhiZa5t6TiRfjJ ORwF0VyHj4Qu4LcvuQ7Gbe0AOx4IBc3h4vDWpjRvk4q/HIuV0mTpdVfjh+rK/ri+ ZFt9NDnkaS+DmyxHWmqiK9qAYTULktLmIJxO4/+xCs3MryJEFa4FFFNXrtYnn8H0 5dJo5MX5UP/sTihXv/KmPHmQiSCcv3QbVLTHeLpu7h0WnEGSa3DmjAKgV2I8sldu yj4clsG/YRa3Fpzc5axquk00GToYmPokvUyexbLELyX33uc7H9+hJhb3BZ3v/aO0 kFTodgzh016F7DbKQueTL3US2l872HJlvBgN63m3P9T3xL1VGEDJJFfsYe01bcg= =HwRY -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Fsf-collab-discuss mailing list Fsf-collab-discuss@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/fsf-collab-discuss
Re: [otrs] What is FreeText and such
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 04/09/2011 11:09 PM, Muhammad El-Sergani wrote: Guys, no replies? Hi all, Can anyone help shed some light as to what exaclty FreeText, and such, are? Freetext are containers into which you may store ancillary information about a ticket or an article. The additional information appears at the appropriate level in the ticket view, ie. TicketFreeText appears throughout the ticket view, and ArticleFreeText only appears for a particular article. Some FreeText fields are used to enable ITSM functionality. If you are planning to use the ITSM modules, please investigate which freetexts are used by that system and avoid using them for your own custom purposes. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJNoEDzAAoJEHblvm1J+WqMYuQH/jjEzo4Lujk3frGvE/G9jXW9 a0BHu7GFotTjR86SxU44y08jS6D1OcY7m8Uhvqyd3b7AQPh4JN4hTCj2Pv23lyR3 doG8LrFc0fKG2cX9uIMn2WS8KsYlLpJHb5iyq7RKlUsPw4b5LiQkEQbNCECdBcQl ZRBrv86uySVXvBb0RXA9HQgvnKuk+AotbBWy6tVczUerFAzoMT0tDPPMVjXatGoc k58HwyORjeGH+ywLUpWcoFX4xfKe0aGFCP9jxHKIcCDKT76yXuNSL+RH7AZQtHs/ +PjFkzyMZp/ykS16U22QU46OfU+l19NISuZJOFpaLoJz++rIxMzTwCKcIrSST5s= =RAtQ -END PGP SIGNATURE- - OTRS mailing list: otrs - Webpage: http://otrs.org/ Archive: http://lists.otrs.org/pipermail/otrs To unsubscribe: http://lists.otrs.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/otrs
New LaTeX TeX Lyx user
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Lyx lovers, I've had a long time interest in LaTeX TeX and Lyx, and finally made some time to dig into the software and learn how to write all my documents using this incredible program. Thank you for your efforts. Bryan -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJM03TTAAoJEHblvm1J+WqMp6IH/1KKCvXIybPKQzVCtV5rZ0JW 6szlgUDBJaEEssFn1HK4gTEtnxkbQluNtRJWgW72pISEWpQ+afG1tRoE85NDlKi8 ouw9foSQcyPbzka1vbX0XoD6wq7+GlgsZjggl3RjxnSTfnM1lvrj4+gg/ZzdQ7HV fxVA3wlwPeWWKccPU2kClslLEDG+07fNC0D6/8/6bAfAf6CVIs+DUzwDsbDy1EKj MlHv/GbhlMHdCW/209CtS6Cr37JinuRJJMW/KYVh8XIaev8IvAR2P5FgMrptrNJq KobbD0mBnymfZR4X8R7u33kaqU1ogmuXV21pAUmJVDt6yroGBh9i20bDSFbdggk= =7+/q -END PGP SIGNATURE-
New LaTeX TeX Lyx user
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Lyx lovers, I've had a long time interest in LaTeX TeX and Lyx, and finally made some time to dig into the software and learn how to write all my documents using this incredible program. Thank you for your efforts. Bryan -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJM03TTAAoJEHblvm1J+WqMp6IH/1KKCvXIybPKQzVCtV5rZ0JW 6szlgUDBJaEEssFn1HK4gTEtnxkbQluNtRJWgW72pISEWpQ+afG1tRoE85NDlKi8 ouw9foSQcyPbzka1vbX0XoD6wq7+GlgsZjggl3RjxnSTfnM1lvrj4+gg/ZzdQ7HV fxVA3wlwPeWWKccPU2kClslLEDG+07fNC0D6/8/6bAfAf6CVIs+DUzwDsbDy1EKj MlHv/GbhlMHdCW/209CtS6Cr37JinuRJJMW/KYVh8XIaev8IvAR2P5FgMrptrNJq KobbD0mBnymfZR4X8R7u33kaqU1ogmuXV21pAUmJVDt6yroGBh9i20bDSFbdggk= =7+/q -END PGP SIGNATURE-
New LaTeX TeX Lyx user
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Lyx lovers, I've had a long time interest in LaTeX TeX and Lyx, and finally made some time to dig into the software and learn how to write all my documents using this incredible program. Thank you for your efforts. Bryan -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJM03TTAAoJEHblvm1J+WqMp6IH/1KKCvXIybPKQzVCtV5rZ0JW 6szlgUDBJaEEssFn1HK4gTEtnxkbQluNtRJWgW72pISEWpQ+afG1tRoE85NDlKi8 ouw9foSQcyPbzka1vbX0XoD6wq7+GlgsZjggl3RjxnSTfnM1lvrj4+gg/ZzdQ7HV fxVA3wlwPeWWKccPU2kClslLEDG+07fNC0D6/8/6bAfAf6CVIs+DUzwDsbDy1EKj MlHv/GbhlMHdCW/209CtS6Cr37JinuRJJMW/KYVh8XIaev8IvAR2P5FgMrptrNJq KobbD0mBnymfZR4X8R7u33kaqU1ogmuXV21pAUmJVDt6yroGBh9i20bDSFbdggk= =7+/q -END PGP SIGNATURE-
[Savannah-register-public] [task #10523] Submission of GNU+Linux from Source Code
Follow-up Comment #5, task #10523 (project administration): Opps, I had been replying directly from email. No one ever saw my response. Here is my response from August 2nd: I can understand not wanting to host entire distributions of software, because I don't want this either. GNU+Linux from Source Code is meta in the fact that it's actual deliverable is not a distribution, only the tools to make one. Even more precisely, it is the tools to make software-implemented factories that produce GNU+Linux distributions to spec. As such, GLFSC will never have any accompanying packages of software, neither binary nor source. It is only a set of tools that I plan to host as git repository for development. The planned function of the tools is to collect configuration data from files or user input, instantiate a build target, generate a basesystem of GNU+Linux, and pass the configuration details on to that system. The source code packages can be sourced from the users local storage, or synced from public locations on the Internet. After the basesystem is built and booted, there will be more automation that will allow the user to generate a software repository of packages with the package management system of their choice. You can read more about the development and goals at my wiki: http://katofiad.co.nz/wiki Enjoy! (-: ___ Reply to this item at: http://savannah.gnu.org/task/?10523 ___ Message sent via/by Savannah http://savannah.gnu.org/
[Savannah-register-public] [task #10523] Submission of GNU+Linux from Source Code
Additional Item Attachment, task #10523 (project administration): File name: glfsc.tar.xz Size:0 KB ___ Reply to this item at: http://savannah.gnu.org/task/?10523 ___ Message sent via/by Savannah http://savannah.gnu.org/
[Savannah-register-public] [task #10523] Submission of GNU+Linux from Source Code
Additional Item Attachment, task #10523 (project administration): File name: glfsc.tar Size:170 KB ___ Reply to this item at: http://savannah.gnu.org/task/?10523 ___ Message sent via/by Savannah http://savannah.gnu.org/
[Savannah-register-public] [task #10523] Submission of GNU+Linux from Source Code
Follow-up Comment #3, task #10523 (project administration): Yes, I have a git repo ready to go up when you are ready :) ___ Reply to this item at: http://savannah.gnu.org/task/?10523 ___ Message sent via/by Savannah http://savannah.gnu.org/
Re: [GNU-linux-libre] Linux freedom for Live in italian
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 09/23/2010 05:58 AM, Quiliro Ordóñez wrote: Does anyone have any idea what this is? I found it here http://sourceforge.net/projects/linuxfreedomfor/ It is in italian so I do not understand what it proposes. Sky24 seems to be a way to view the all news italian television station via your web browser. Bryan -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJMmmd0AAoJEHblvm1J+WqMPU8IAJXAL8CTImJrU6VWO/5EpA4l aWXJMln3QA7EGAOyRWBHzvqmrfJYAlbB3xx/4jmjI+lKpOek73EkiDKHamN8ZGnQ nU/SUueLLLNOsJ9pr4YyaUw5++RdUJkDx2iJp87brx6ujy4fR25jI3n4PyU52L9M P8zsmLVOxg4z73YNHtfnTK4kbT9QjNrfODbiC02eg9QBOLipziGVq1i8FFPmZIvO w/TSXW67iSsMxmhNsy0OO7JbL/Ndd0wptyfMcJWxFnIC5XLUhQ1myURpFlK0Uho4 Cf1pPFZ50bUSOiz6mxuOO+3Bz1Pg5reO0iIvUeMI8D37QKOdVyo1opqNeHi2KNA= =x2Kf -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [itsm] Deleting a Config Item
On 08/19/2010 05:08 PM, Yasir Mughal wrote: Is there any way to remove unwanted Config Items? The simplest thing you can do is set the item to invalid. Bryan - OTRS mailing list: itsm - Webpage: http://otrs.org/ Archive: http://lists.otrs.org/pipermail/itsm To unsubscribe: http://lists.otrs.org/mailman/listinfo/itsm
Re: [itsm] Deleting a Config Item
On 08/19/2010 06:40 PM, Yasir Mughal wrote: The invalid option is for the metadata, I am looking for delete option for the actual data. For example I was adding information for computers, and out of 8 entries, one is incorrect and I want to delete that. I don't see why you can't simply make corrections to the data as it stands. You don't really have to remove the database rows, but you probably can. This is not recommended to do so if your config items have been in use and linked in tickets etc etc. Even so, there are six tables that may contain data about the config item you wish to remove. mysql show tables like %config%; +---+ | Tables_in_otrs (%config%) | +---+ | configitem| | configitem_counter| | configitem_definition | | configitem_history| | configitem_history_type | | configitem_version| +---+ 6 rows in set (0.00 sec) Deleting the main row in configitem should be enough, although this may leave some dangling bits in the other five tables. As such, its recommended to edit the item or simply set it to invalid. Cheers! Bryan - OTRS mailing list: itsm - Webpage: http://otrs.org/ Archive: http://lists.otrs.org/pipermail/itsm To unsubscribe: http://lists.otrs.org/mailman/listinfo/itsm
Re: [otrs] OTRS upgrade from 2.2.5 to 2.4.7
On 08/14/2010 12:56 AM, Мажар Денис wrote: Hi All. I've upgrade otrs from 2.2.5 to 2.4.7 through 2.3 version. But now when I log in to web interface I can see only No Permission to use this frontend module! message. What can I do with this? Assuming that you follow through with each and every step in UPGRADE appropriately, please run bin/SetPermissions.pl from the toplevel of your OTRS install directory. Then, reset your webserver and try logging in again. Cheers! Bryan - OTRS mailing list: otrs - Webpage: http://otrs.org/ Archive: http://lists.otrs.org/pipermail/otrs To unsubscribe: http://lists.otrs.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/otrs
Re: [otrs] How to change text in customer ticket update notification?
On 07/24/2010 11:07 PM, paul gore wrote:
Yes, I meant notifications section. My problem is I do not see any
customer related notifications available there, only agents.
I have seen similar problem reported here with no reply. So is it a
bug? Can it be fixed?
Its not a bug of which I am aware. The notifications are store in your
database backend under the table notifications. If you specified an
OTRS specific table name prefix, it will be ${prefix}notifications.
For example:
If you made otrs_ your prefix, the notifications table will be called
otrs_notifications.
Make an SQL query to ensure the notifications are in that table. The
field notification_type will show you the name of each notification.
For example:
The record with notification_type Agent::NewTicket will contain all
the data for notifying Agents about new tickets.
When you first installed OTRS, if you used the web installer, it will
have run several sql statements stored as files to set up the database.
If you installed manually, you would have run the sql statements
yourself. The statement files should be in your otrs directory in
scripts/database. The statement file that inserts the notifications data
(and possibly lots of other stuff, too) should be called
otrs_initial-insert.sql.
Don't just blindly re-insert all that data, either. Don't assume I know
what I'm talking about. Have a good look into the contents of the file.
You may only need to pick out a couple sql inserts to put back the
default notification in the language(s) you want. Good luck! (-:
-
OTRS mailing list: otrs - Webpage: http://otrs.org/
Archive: http://lists.otrs.org/pipermail/otrs
To unsubscribe: http://lists.otrs.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/otrs
NEW! ENTERPRISE SUBSCRIPTION - Get more information NOW!
http://www.otrs.com/en/support/enterprise-subscription/
[Savannah-register-public] [task #10523] Submission of GNU+Linux from Source Code
URL: http://savannah.gnu.org/task/?10523 Summary: Submission of GNU+Linux from Source Code Project: Savannah Administration Submitted by: bryan Submitted on: Sun 25 Jul 2010 09:31:55 PM GMT Should Start On: Sun 25 Jul 2010 12:00:00 AM GMT Should be Finished on: Wed 04 Aug 2010 12:00:00 AM GMT Category: Project Approval Priority: 5 - Normal Status: None Privacy: Public Percent Complete: 0% Assigned to: None Open/Closed: Open Discussion Lock: Any Effort: 0.00 ___ Details: A new project has been registered at Savannah This project account will remain inactive until a site admin approves or discards the registration. = Registration Administration = While this item will be useful to track the registration process, *approving or discarding the registration must be done using the specific Group Administration https://savannah.gnu.org/siteadmin/groupedit.php?group_id=10597 page*, accessible only to site administrators, effectively *logged as site administrators* (superuser): * Group Administration https://savannah.gnu.org/siteadmin/groupedit.php?group_id=10597 = Registration Details = * Name: *GNU+Linux from Source Code* * System Name: *glfsc* * Type: non-GNU software documentation * License: GNU General Public License v2 or later (GNU General Public Licence v3 or later) Description: GNU+Linux from Source Code is a collection of tools with which designers can make complete distributions of the GNU+Linux operating system. Because of this capability, GLFSC could be considered a source-based distribution of GNU+Linux on its own. GLFSC will follow the free system guidelines as described at http://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html Other Software Required: none + n/a + n/a Other Comments: I wish to use GIT as the SCM for GLFSC. Tarball URL: http://savannah.gnu.org/submissions_uploads/glfsc.tar.xz ___ Reply to this item at: http://savannah.gnu.org/task/?10523 ___ Message sent via/by Savannah http://savannah.gnu.org/
Re: [otrs] How to change text in customer ticket update notification?
On 07/24/2010 09:52 AM, paul gore wrote: I did try to look at notification events, but I do not see any related to a customer, only agents. Is it a bug? Notification Events is not the correct place. Look for the notification text in the Notifications section of the Admin control panel. Scroll through the items listed under Change. Notification text has one entry for each language, so ensure you edit the text for every language you've assigned to your customers. Bryan - OTRS mailing list: otrs - Webpage: http://otrs.org/ Archive: http://lists.otrs.org/pipermail/otrs To unsubscribe: http://lists.otrs.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/otrs NEW! ENTERPRISE SUBSCRIPTION - Get more information NOW! http://www.otrs.com/en/support/enterprise-subscription/
Re: [otrs] Closed tickets and tickets related to the service
On 07/23/2010 03:09 AM, Marek Hall wrote: I've been searching for some time, but could not find the option to see all registered and closed tickets. Is this available in OTRS? Also, would be nice to get an overview of all tickets related to the custom service. Hi Marek, You can get a list of tickets with status closed by using the Search function in OTRS. * Select the icon labelled Ticket in the OTRS Navbar * Select the icon labelled Search in the OTRS Navbar * Scroll down the form the the list titled State * Click the name of the status you wish to see (you may select additional fields by holding the CTRL key while you click) * Scroll to the bottom of the Search form and click the button labelled Search * See a list of tickets matching your criteria You will find many other criteria you may use to narrow, widen, or otherwise change the list of tickets you can see. This includes any combination of custom Services you have configured for your system. Bryan -- - OTRS mailing list: otrs - Webpage: http://otrs.org/ Archive: http://lists.otrs.org/pipermail/otrs To unsubscribe: http://lists.otrs.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/otrs NEW! ENTERPRISE SUBSCRIPTION - Get more information NOW! http://www.otrs.com/en/support/enterprise-subscription/
Re: [otrs] CC field in Phone Ticket
Hi Amit, Phone tickets are sent directly to a queue and do not have a CC field. If you need to CC someone in your message...use the Email Ticket function. On Mon, 2010-07-05 at 05:58 -0700, Amit Sharma wrote: Hi, How do I enable/add CC field in phone ticket? -- Bryan Baldwin OTRS AG Norsk-Data-Straße 1 D-61352 Bad Homburg T: +49 (0) 6172 681988 0 F: +49 (0) 9421 56818 18 I: http://www.otrs.com/ Geschäftssitz: Bad Homburg, Amtsgericht: Bad Homburg, HRB 10751, USt-Nr.: DE256610065 Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Burchard Steinbild, Vorstand: André Mindermann NEU: OTRS::ITSM 2.0 - jetzt mit dem brandneuen Change Management Modul - Die erste ITIL® V3 kompatible und nach PinkVERIFY zertifizierte Open Source IT Service Management (ITSM) Lösung weltweit! - OTRS mailing list: otrs - Webpage: http://otrs.org/ Archive: http://lists.otrs.org/pipermail/otrs To unsubscribe: http://lists.otrs.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/otrs NEW! ENTERPRISE SUBSCRIPTION - Get more information NOW! http://www.otrs.com/en/support/enterprise-subscription/
Re: [otrs] Cant create more than 2 sub-queues
Hi Alan, You might also want to try creating test tickets and moving at least one active ticket into each of your new queues. Then they should show when their parent has been selected. I know from experience that our system doesn't show a the queue if the queue has no tickets. Bryan On Tue, 2010-06-29 at 16:28 -0300, Alan Creed wrote: Hi, I need help! I need to create a queue like: queue1 queue2 queue3 queue4 or queue1:queue2:queue3:queue4 But the problem is that when I try to create queue4 as a sub-queue of queue3, I cant It shows me only the first 2 queue to choose from. It doesnt show me queue3, altough it is created. Thanx in advance __ Ahora Hotmail es un 70% más veloz. Acceder a tu casilla nunca fue tan rápido. Ver más - OTRS mailing list: otrs - Webpage: http://otrs.org/ Archive: http://lists.otrs.org/pipermail/otrs To unsubscribe: http://lists.otrs.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/otrs NEW! ENTERPRISE SUBSCRIPTION - Get more information NOW! http://www.otrs.com/en/support/enterprise-subscription/ - OTRS mailing list: otrs - Webpage: http://otrs.org/ Archive: http://lists.otrs.org/pipermail/otrs To unsubscribe: http://lists.otrs.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/otrs NEW! ENTERPRISE SUBSCRIPTION - Get more information NOW! http://www.otrs.com/en/support/enterprise-subscription/
[GNU-linux-libre] GNU+Linux from Source Code
Hello all, I'm developing a prototype build system for GNU+Linux that can be used stand-alone or as the base for other more refined distributions with specialized goals. My impetus is to have a flexible design for a system I would love administering. The vision for my project is to be to Archlinux what gNewSense is to Ubuntu. I will not be creating any public repositories for binary redistributable packages (although others may wish to do so). I only intend to maintain a collection of scripted build instructions, an init system, admin tools, and compiled programs that can be used to compile and manage a GNU+Linux system from source with fine controls and minimal fuss. I don't have any set goals for size, speed, or user application. I'm not worried about being the most minimal, fastest, or convenient distribution. Because my design is focused on versatility and flexibility, I expect its greatest utility will be as a distribution maker's distribution and basesystem. I've named my project _GNU+Linux from Source Code_, a fully free meta-distribution of the GNU+Linux operating system. Bryan
