Re: Change default PATH for Jessie / wheezy+1

On 2012-08-08 13:38:36 +0200, Alberto Fuentes wrote: > [extra non usuful comments] > Those commands without root permissions are not dangerous. ifconfig seems > the most obvious that a non expert would want to run. ipconfig/ifconfig eth0 > are easy to run/remember. > > ip addr show eth0 is not. ip

Re: Change default PATH for Jessie / wheezy+1

On 2012-08-08 14:38:44 +0100, Roger Leigh wrote: > "Normal" users do not need to know or care about these tools. For some of them, they do. "Normal" users don't need most programs installed in /usr/bin, so let's split this directory? :) > Only admins use them, or tools that set things up on behal

Re: Change default PATH for Jessie / wheezy+1

On 2012-08-08 22:01:37 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 08/08/2012 09:11 PM, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > And ip is not standard (not present on every Linux systems), whereas > > I don't know any system without ifconfig. > > Then, what do you use to list multiple

Re: Change default PATH for Jessie / wheezy+1

On 2012-08-08 22:09:27 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote: > What would be the point, for example, to have these > accessible to the user: > - depmod/insmod/etc. > - swapon/swapoff > - agetty > - init > - etc. One (perhaps minor) point would be to get basic documentation, e.g. depmod --help There is

Re: can we (fully) fix/integrate NetworkManager (preferred) or release-goal its decommissioning

On 2012-08-20 13:08:53 +0200, Bjørn Mork wrote: > Why do you install gnome-core if you don't want the resulting > package mess? If it isn't that important, I think the word "essential" shouldn't be used. -- Vincent Lefèvre - Web: 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog

Re: can we (fully) fix/integrate NetworkManager (preferred) or release-goal its decommissioning

On 2012-08-24 15:03:49 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Fri, 2012-08-24 at 10:44 +0200, Andrew Shadura wrote: > > Hello, > > > > On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 14:51:27 +0100 > > Ben Hutchings wrote: > > > > > What I mean is that this still happens: > > > > > # ifup eth0 > > > ... > > > # ifconfig eth0 do

Re: About the media types text/x-php and text/x-php-source

On 2012-08-26 19:55:49 +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > Now obviously there's a small border; I guess IETF's idea is: > "Can it be exectued/interpreted directly or by some interpreter? Then > application/*" Or compiled & executed, I suppose. But what if the intent is to display the source

Re: About the media types text/x-php and text/x-php-source

On 2012-08-28 04:32:18 +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > On Mon, 2012-08-27 at 11:03 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > On 2012-08-26 19:55:49 +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > > > Now obviously there's a small border; I guess IETF's idea is: > >

Re: [proposal] use xz compression for Debian package by default

On 2012-08-28 12:05:26 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 12:10:18PM +0900, Hideki Yamane wrote: > > We know some packages are better to use gzip, but it's an > > exception. Using xz is best choice for rest 99.99% of packages. > > We can deal with such exception by specifying

Re: About the media types text/x-php and text/x-php-source

On 2012-08-28 11:43:32 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > Christoph Anton Mitterer writes ("Re: About the media types text/x-php and > text/x-php-source"): > > On Mon, 2012-08-27 at 09:02 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > > There are a fair number > > > of email clients out there that, rightly or wrongly, w

Re: About the media types text/x-php and text/x-php-source

On 2012-08-28 12:36:22 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > Vincent Lefevre writes ("Re: About the media types text/x-php and > text/x-php-source"): > > Now, the sender could also provide a charset with > > application/*, in which case the recipient client should know >

Re: About the media types text/x-php and text/x-php-source

On 2012-08-28 14:49:53 +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > Ian,... > > Again, AFAIU, IETF nor the RFCs do consider the MIME types as way to > determine what the sender/creator intends the recipient to do with it. Perhaps it would be more clear like that: one may want to consider a script as

Re: About the media types text/x-php and text/x-php-source

On 2012-08-28 15:53:51 +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > On Tue, 2012-08-28 at 15:20 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > Perhaps it would be more clear like that: one may want to consider > > a script as a program/application that can be executed, in which > > case ap

Re: About the media types text/x-php and text/x-php-source

On 2012-08-28 16:19:29 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > *.php files should be recognised as text/x-php or text/x-php-source by > our mime types file. > > If Apache (or some other webserver) wants to automatically execute > *.php files (whether the url referring to foo.php is is > http://example.com/foo

Re: can we (fully) fix/integrate NetworkManager (preferred) or release-goal its decommissioning

On 2012-08-28 22:41:38 +0300, Serge wrote: > All connections I can think of belong to one of two categories: > 1. Permanent connections. Those are "setup-and-forget" connections. > Typical for servers and wired desktops. Can be managed with ifupdown. > 2. Temporary connections. Those are "use-once-

Re: can we (fully) fix/integrate NetworkManager (preferred) or release-goal its decommissioning

On 2012-08-29 19:17:36 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 5:46 PM, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > There's also usbnet, which is used when I connect my Nokia N900 to > > my laptop. There must also be a fixed setup, but I haven't found a > > solution to

Re: About the media types text/x-php and text/x-php-source

On 2012-08-28 18:03:02 +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > On Tue, 2012-08-28 at 15:37 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > > > Then if there is a charset parameter, with a value that refers to > > > some known text character set, I think that one can assume that > > > the contents are encoded with thi

Re: jessie release goals

On 2013-05-13 16:26:58 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > One could imagine the same thing but with testing directories... > Something like in the /etc/default/ file: > > test -f some_dir || ENABLED=0 > > But this method needs an "ENABLED" variable! Actually, that w

Re: jessie release goals

On 2013-05-13 21:42:20 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 7:33 PM, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > Yes, but similarly, there's no way to do this automatically. > > apt-get autoremove is automatic, or if you want that earlier you could > remove sensord us

Re: jessie release goals

On 2013-05-15 01:00:37 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 05/13/2013 07:08 PM, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > On 2013-05-07 23:54:36 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote: > >> On 05/07/2013 04:00 AM, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > >>> This can be fine for some daemons/servers. For in

Re: /bin/sh (was Re: jessie release goals)

On 2013-05-07 14:23:47 +, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > Shells suitable for /bin/sh are currently bash, dash, mksh. [...] > I have no idea whether yash or zsh can be made suitable, but I think > both could, if the maintainers and possibly upstream are interested. Though zsh has an option to emulate

Re: jessie release goals

On 2013-05-15 20:27:09 +0200, Jean-Christophe Dubacq wrote: > No. Your server comes unconfigured, you do configure it while the other > is still working, and then you stop the service on the first, finish > syncing the mailboxes, switch the MX record, and then you can go to > rest. This is not pos

Re: /bin/sh (was Re: jessie release goals)

On 2013-05-07 14:23:47 +, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > Shells suitable for /bin/sh are currently bash, dash, mksh. I forgot about that (partly because of workarounds), but due to the SIGINT problem, I think that *currently*, among these 3 shells, bash is the most suitable one, and mksh is a bit be

Re: jessie release goals

On 2013-05-18 14:55:46 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > http://wiki.debian.org/umask It says: An umask of 022 gives write permission to the other group members. Is it true? -- Vincent Lefèvre - Web: 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog:

Re: jessie release goals

On 2013-05-19 09:17:31 +0200, Jean-Christophe Dubacq wrote: > Le 16/05/2013 08:43, Vincent Lefevre a écrit : > > On 2013-05-15 20:27:09 +0200, Jean-Christophe Dubacq wrote: > >> No. Your server comes unconfigured, you do configure it while the other > >> is still wor

Re: Debian systemd survey

On 2013-05-22 15:39:00 +0200, Bernd Schubert wrote: > On 05/22/2013 04:50 AM, Uoti Urpala wrote: > >Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > >>I went through the various init systems threads again during the last > >>few days. My understanding of the consensus so far is the following: > >> > >>- Both systemd and up

Re: "Blacklists" in BTS (stopping the trolls and bug machines)

On 2013-05-27 09:04:53 +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote: > I think I have never said the word "abuse", just "tiresome". The "I see a > warning from ucf, let's fill a bug on php5-common" finally overflew my cup > of patience (what is the correct english idiom for this?). If you think you are distracted by

Re: Switching to mozilla ESR in stable-security

On 2013-05-31 08:52:37 +, Raphael Geissert wrote: > Russ Allbery debian.org> writes: > [...] > > This would *enable* users to install software from backports if it either > > didn't exist in stable at all or if they explicitly requested it from > > backports, but would not install such softwar

Re: default MTA

On 2013-05-28 13:05:25 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Le mardi 28 mai 2013 à 12:13 +0200, Adam Borowski a écrit : > > Being able to send outgoing mail, and to handle local (such as > > SMTP rejects or notifications from system daemons) seems plenty > > useful to me. > > Most clients (apart mayb

Re: Debian systemd survey

On 2013-05-30 13:59:09 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Also, determining which flags to pass to the daemon from some other > configuration file, which is a common use of /etc/default files, is a hack > to work around the fact that an init script is not really user-editable. > We therefore move the par

Re: Debian systemd survey

On 2013-06-02 11:10:34 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Michael Biebl writes: > > Am 02.06.2013 18:59, schrieb Russ Allbery: > > >> There's really no reason to have something like an /etc/default setting > >> for that, the way there is for the rsyncd init script. You can just > >> edit that directly

Bug severity and private data disclosure

I reported a bug involving private data disclosure, more precisely, on some network, when printing a file with CUPS 1.6, the file is printed on a wrong printer[*]. The bug severity was downgraded to important (i.e. non-RC), despite the obvious security problem. The given reason was that this kind o

Re: Bug severity and private data disclosure

On 2013-06-10 15:05:05 +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote: > It's amazing how much simpler Debian life becomes if one simply ignores > bug severities entirely. Of course harder to do nearer to release, but > we live in a time of relative luxury right now… This is important for apt-listbugs, which takes

Re: Bug severity and private data disclosure

On 2013-06-10 15:11:26 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > I agree with you that that bug is a potential security vulnerability. > I think the maintainer adopted an overly-close and legalistic reading > of the bug severity guidelines. On the other hand I think the > maintainer makes good points about the

Re: Bug severity and private data disclosure

On 2013-06-10 17:16:12 +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > Since you seem concerned about apt-listbugs, make it support listing > security bugs (optionally with a given severity threshold, so as to > ignore minor or normal bug reports tagged security), and there you go. > > [ From a quick look at the

Re: Bug severity and private data disclosure

On 2013-06-10 23:28:28 +0600, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 04:15:27PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > This is important for apt-listbugs, which takes into account RC bugs by > > default > Which too is not ideal: for example, I don't think users shou

Re: Berkeley DB 6.0 license change to AGPLv3

On 2013-07-04 09:23:49 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > I'm curious, can you elaborate on why as upstream you'd refuse to add > something like a protocol command that return a URL pointing to a > tarball containing the source code of the INN version the users are > running? At times, I'm really s

Re: Berkeley DB 6.0 license change to AGPLv3

On 2013-07-04 15:00:05 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 02:08:33PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > What about users who patch and rebuild software locally? > > That was the second paragraph of my post (that you snipped :)), i.e.: > > > I

Re: Berkeley DB 6.0 license change to AGPLv3

On 2013-07-10 13:06:47 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > If you modify the software you might get in trouble but, according to my > personal ethics, that's the trouble you should have. However, please > note that as long as you run the software only for yourself, you don't > have any problem. You

Re: AGPLv3 Compliance and Debian Users

On 2013-07-11 13:41:47 +, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote: > My understanding though that if Debian is the one making the modification > then Debian is the one responsible for making the source available. If the > end user is then modifying the source then they would subsequently need to > make those mod

Re: /etc/hosts and resolving of the local host/domainname - 127.0.0.1 vs. 127.0.1.1

On 2013-07-31 15:46:29 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 07/31/2013 08:30 AM, Steve Langasek wrote: > > What I'm missing your email is a problem statement explaining what it is > > you're trying to solve. The current implementation has been working > > reliably for years. > > He did wrote it. 127

Re: /etc/hosts and resolving of the local host/domainname - 127.0.0.1 vs. 127.0.1.1

On 2013-07-31 11:00:24 +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote: > ❦ 31 juillet 2013 09:46 CEST, Thomas Goirand  : > > He did wrote it. 127.0.1.1 breaks because some daemon (many, according > > to him) bind only on 127.0.0.1, and not 127.0.0.0/8 as they should. > > How a daemon could bind to 127.0.0.0/8? bind

Re: /etc/hosts and resolving of the local host/domainname - 127.0.0.1 vs. 127.0.1.1

On 2013-07-31 21:01:21 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 07/31/2013 06:47 PM, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > But this wouldn't necessarily solve the mentioned "problem" > > anyway. > > I'm not sure there's a problem anyway. I'm on the side of Stev

Re: UTF-8 in jessie

On 2013-08-12 02:51:52 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > Detecting non-UTF files is easy: > * false positives are impossible > * false negatives are extremely unlikely: combinations of letters that would > happen to match a valid utf character don't happen naturally, and even if > they did, every s

Re: UTF-8 in jessie

On 2013-08-12 15:16:59 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 12:50:35PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > On 2013-08-12 02:51:52 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > > > Detecting non-UTF files is easy: > > > * false positives are impossible > > > * fa

Re: UTF-8 in jessie

On 2013-08-12 17:58:20 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 03:50:19PM +0200, Florian Lohoff wrote: > > 5. All programs consuning UTF8 Text must understand a BOM. > > I'm afraid I don't agree here: BOMs are nasty stuff that serve no purpose > once you standardize on UTF8. They mi

Re: UTF-8 in jessie

On 2013-08-12 20:14:30 +0100, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote: > What about locales though? > > * C.utf8 locale should be always available > * C.utf8 locale should be the default/fallback locale > * utf8 locale variants should be default / available / preferred > (where appropriate) If scripts intend to u

Re: UTF-8 in jessie

On 2013-08-13 10:25:31 +, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > Vincent Lefevre vinc17.net> writes: > > > If scripts intend to use LC_ALL=C.UTF-8 to force everything to > > the standard locale with UTF-8 support, then the glibc should > > be modified to regard C.UTF-8 like

Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?

On 2013-10-02 16:51:09 +0200, Dominik George wrote: > Dominique Dumont schrieb: > >well, you proposed a version like 'hg'. if upstream switches to > >git, you can't use a version like 'git' because it sorts before > >hg. I grant you that is easy to work around. > > If you deem it unlikely

Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?

On 2013-10-02 17:50:40 +0200, Dominik George wrote: > I established an advantage for the user using my proposal - go get > me a disadvantage for the packager. As a user, I dislike long version strings. > That said, what's the point in NOT being verbose? Version strings need to be displayed, and

Re: how do deal with versionless mercurial software ?

On 2013-10-04 13:40:29 +0200, Dominik George wrote: > My argument for keeping the VCS hash is to ease identifying the code > in the package. Does it need to be in the version string? Why not somewhere else? The goal of the Version field in Debian packages is to identify and sort several versions

Re: Linux kernel hardening - link restrictions

Hi, On 2012-03-02 05:11:58 +, Ben Hutchings wrote: > I'm therefore intending to warn about this with the following NEWS > entry in the linux-image metapackages: > > Index: debian/linux-image.NEWS > === > --- debian/linux-image.NE

Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains

On 2012-03-05 16:42:50 +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > Friendly discussion with the maintainer of debian-multimedia.org to > not replace libraries such as libavcodec and friends have failed > ultimatively (BTW, that is part of the reason why we've ended up with > an epoch of '4', dmo uses epoch '5

Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains

On 2012-03-08 12:35:53 +, Philipp Kern wrote: > On 2012-03-08, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > It's worse than that. Security support is non-existent, and users > > don't know that. An example: [… non-free package …] > > Well, non-free in Debian proper doesn't

Re: Linux kernel hardening - link restrictions

On 2012-03-08 15:42:49 +, Ben Hutchings wrote: > Since 'at' is going to be updated in stable, I added a versioned > 'Breaks' instead. But since there may be other problems than with "at", announcing the change in the NEWS file would have probably be a good idea. Things that an admin was usuall

Re: On init in Debian

On 2012-03-18 00:53:37 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote: > I know almost nothing about systemd > > I'd like people to think twice before opt-in for systemd. I just > taked with a friend working for redhat, and he told me how much > he hates it. He told me that if *anything* goes wrong in the boot > pro

Re: On init in Debian

On 2012-03-29 02:43:33 +0200, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote: > $ sudo apt-get remove network-manager* > $ sudo apt-get install wicd wicd-curses wicd-gtk > ^ wicd-kde ? > $ wicd-curses > > And enjoy your network without the NM mess :) Well, wicd has its o

Re: [OT] NM vs. wicd (was: Re: On init in Debian)

On 2012-03-29 11:15:30 +0100, Philip Hands wrote: > I'd only use either to make flipping between wireless networks something > where I don't need to keep the comandline incantations in my head > anyway, so the last thing I need is NM noticing that I've plugged or > unplugged an ethernet cable, and

Re: On init in Debian

On 2012-03-29 13:07:56 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Well, it seems like you should file bugs if you can, because a lot of > these are not universal problems and therefore probably aren't known > issues. I did several months ago: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=637267 http://b

Re: [OT] NM vs. wicd (was: Re: On init in Debian)

On 2012-03-29 23:23:52 -0400, Chris Knadle wrote: > On Thursday, March 29, 2012 04:09:57, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > Well, wicd has its own bugs, such as preventing a laptop from > > suspending. > > Hmm. That sucks. I'd like to debug why you're running into thi

Re: On init in Debian

On 2012-03-30 08:39:38 +0200, Salvo Tomaselli wrote: > > Well, wicd has its own bugs, such as preventing a laptop from > > suspending. > are you talking about a bug from 2008 that has been fixed for ages? > https://bugs.launchpad.net/wicd/+bug/306210 No, this is not the same bug (in my case, wicd

Re: [OT] NM vs. wicd

On 2012-03-30 19:43:48 +0200, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote: > On 30/03/12 12:29, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > I don't know what's going on exactly, but from the logs, it seems > > that when suspending, the connection is ended (as expected), but > > then, wicd t

Re: On init in Debian

On 2012-03-30 10:44:07 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Vincent Lefevre writes: > > On 2012-03-29 13:07:56 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > >> Well, it seems like you should file bugs if you can, because a lot of > >> these are not universal problems and therefore pro

Re: On init in Debian

On 2012-03-31 01:16:42 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > On 2012-03-30 10:44:07 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > I don't think your diagnosis of this is correct, in that I don't think > > wicd is what's doing this. I was getting things like that with Network > > Ma

Re: [OT] NM vs. wicd

On 2012-03-31 05:42:41 +0200, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote: > On 31/03/12 01:03, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > On 2012-03-30 19:43:48 +0200, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote: > >> Check that you don't have GLAN/WLAN or something like that enabled on > >> /proc/

Re: major linux problems summary 2012

On 2012-11-09 14:36:24 +0200, Riku Voipio wrote: > On Sun, Nov 04, 2012 at 12:03:37PM +0100, Karol Szkudlarek wrote: [...] > > and about touchpad: > > > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/606238 [...] > Perhaps we should stop pretending Linux runs on any random hardware, and >

Re: Re: major linux problems summary 2012

On 2012-11-11 21:27:19 +0100, Karol Szkudlarek wrote: > Do you tried nvidia close drivers or nouveau (in the aspect > suspend/resume)?! Only nouveau (to avoid tainted kernels in particular). But I had problems with the Nvidia proprietary drivers in the past. At least the following bug has been fi

Re: Re: major linux problems summary 2012

On 2012-11-12 21:52:41 +0100, Karol Szkudlarek wrote: > >(BTW, I plan to purchase a Lemote YeeLoong 8101B, which has only > >GNU/Linux support, but haven't had news from the vendor yet.) > > I've heard some time ago about Lemote laptops (aka Stallman > recommendations!) its worth attention but the

Re: Re: Re: major linux problems summary 2012

On 2012-11-13 13:23:48 +0100, Karol Szkudlarek wrote: > >It would be interesting to know which Debian developers have > >which laptops. Bugs appearing on these laptops might be fixed > >more easily. At least it would allow bugs to be checked and > >possibly reproduced more easily. > > > >I'm wonder

Re: Dell Latitude Nvidia problems Re: Re: Re: Re: major linux problems summary 2012

On 2012-11-14 08:44:58 +0100, Karol Szkudlarek wrote: > >I have the same card and I can tell you that the nouveau driver is > >broken with it. See the bug mentioned above: > > > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=640464 > > According to point 6 of http://nouveau.freedesktop.org/w

Re: A common configuration format, anyone?

On 2012-11-15 00:15:06 +, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote: > Also XML is not "diff-able" easily, which is usual for tree-like structures. If you mean diff-able for the human, then it depends on the complexity of the data. I have no problems with mine. wdiff can help. But what I really like with XML is

Re: Canonical pushes upstart into user session - systemd developer complains

On 2012-11-26 07:27:08 +0900, Norbert Preining wrote: > Ever heard of > grep, sed, awk, > all these nice things that make your life happy. These tools are broken when dealing with multibyte characters. For instance, with: foo = aéb a "grep 'a.b' file" will find nothing in the C local

Re: [OT] XML

On 2012-11-26 20:32:17 +0100, olivier sallou wrote: > XML is nice for internal config, message/config exchanges, etc... help with > its structure and its DTD to force/help understanding the schema. > > BUT definitely not useable by an end user for end-user config. It is very > hard to read (openin

Re: the right bug severity in case of data corruption

On 2012-11-28 11:47:38 +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: > Let's give it a test, this mail should be signed: > > From blahhityblah Fri Jul 8 12:08:34 2011 > >From foobarbaz Fri Jul 8 12:08:34 2011 > >>From quux Fri Jul 8 12:08:34 2011 > > If the signature is invalid, your setup is broken. Even user

Re: the right bug severity in case of data corruption

On 2012-11-29 01:50:55 +0100, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > It's like a serious flaw would have been found in gzip and people would > say... oh don't complain... there's already the much better/newer bzip2 > or xz. There's a major difference. mbox is buggy by design. Even though mboxrd attempt

Re: Maildir vs. mbox in Debian

On 2012-11-29 01:28:37 +0100, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > But it also has disadvantages to the mbox formats which may be crucial > for some people: > - wasting a lot of storage, which can be significant even if you use > small file systems block sizes... This is a problem with the file syste

Re: the right bug severity in case of data corruption

On 2012-11-29 01:39:57 +0100, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > On Wed, 2012-11-28 at 16:01 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > Even users of mboxo shouldn't even have a problem because in your > > message the F of the "From " line is encoded in quoted-printable: >

Re: the right bug severity in case of mbox formats

On 2012-11-29 01:49:55 +0100, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > On Wed, 2012-11-28 at 22:06 +, Darren Salt wrote: > > It would make sense to have that enabled by default, and to ensure > > that all software in Debian which produces MIME quoted-printable > > does this, or at least can do this. >

Re: Maildir vs. mbox in Debian

On 2012-11-29 15:30:47 +0100, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > On Thu, 2012-11-29 at 15:20 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > Now, I would say that in general, the wasted space is small compared > > to large attachments. And if you have only text and care about disk > > space

Re: Canonical pushes upstart into user session - systemd developer complains

On 2012-11-29 15:46:35 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 05:00:14PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > On 2012-11-26 07:27:08 +0900, Norbert Preining wrote: > > > Ever heard of > > > grep, sed, awk, > > > all these nice things that

Re: the right bug severity in case of data corruption

On 2012-11-29 06:43:06 +, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Wed, 2012-11-28 at 16:06 -0500, Nikolaus Rath wrote: > > Darren Salt writes: > > > (Oops. Failed first time.) > > > > > > Having just viewed the raw text of my message (as sent), there's one other > > > little wrinkle which I already knew but

Re: Maildir vs. mbox in Debian

On 2012-11-29 16:16:25 +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: > *cough* btrfs -ocompress=lzo. Small files are packed inline in metadata > blocks, and you get compression you wanted. Using lzo is faster than no > compression for most loads, adding negligible cost for incompressible data > (especially if not

Re: Canonical pushes upstart into user session - systemd developer complains

On 2012-11-29 21:33:37 +0600, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 04:23:03PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > > The default .subversion/config file is a piece of documentation, not a > > > configuration file. I agree that there's far too much noise in th

Re: Canonical pushes upstart into user session - systemd developer complains

On 2012-11-29 18:08:05 +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: > On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 04:23:03PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > On 2012-11-29 15:46:35 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > > But it will in a UTF8 locale, > > > > Unfortunately the C locale is the only real

Re: Canonical pushes upstart into user session - systemd developer complains

On 2012-11-29 21:25:50 +0100, Stig Sandbeck Mathisen wrote: > So to keep everyone equally happy, we need: > > > > > > Structure _and_ readability. No, you don't have the structure from the XML point of view. -- Vincent Lefèvre - Web: 100% accessible validated (X)HT

Re: Canonical pushes upstart into user session - systemd developer complains

On 2012-11-29 08:37:19 -0800, Kelly Clowers wrote: > On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 7:23 AM, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > And interfaces in various programming languages? > > http://search.cpan.org/~shlomif/Config-IniFiles-2.78/lib/Config/IniFiles.pm At least for Perl, I can't see

Re: Canonical pushes upstart into user session - systemd developer complains

On 2012-12-01 10:16:54 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 02:18:04AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > At least for Perl, I can't see anything related to validation. > > That's because validating an ini file is trivially easy: > > the line is a

Re: Canonical pushes upstart into user session - systemd developer complains

On 2012-12-02 22:04:52 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Sun, Dec 02, 2012 at 12:31:00PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > On 2012-12-01 10:16:54 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 02:18:04AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > > > At least

Re: [OT] config file formats

On 2012-12-03 14:05:49 +0700, Ivan Shmakov wrote: > On the second sight, the difference between, e. g.: > > > > d > f > > > i > > > > and, e. g.: > > [a.b] > c = d > e = f > [a.g] > h = i > > is mostly superficial. There may be a difference at the AP

Re: Differing behaviour of shells regarding simple commands with parameter assignments

Sorry for replying so late, but I disagree... On 2012-12-26 03:03:57 +0100, Timo Weingärtner wrote: > 2012-12-26, 02:22:45 Cyril Brulebois wrote: > > Timo Weingärtner (26/12/2012): > > > bash, zsh, posh output 121 > > > > > > busybox sh, dash, (m)ksh output 122 > > > > > > checkbashisms doesn't

Re: Linux Future

On 2013-01-23 20:45:49 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > Adam Borowski writes: > > > There are two ways to design a system: > > * a monolithic well-integrated system, granting features and efficiency at > > the cost of portability and hackability > > * the traditional Unix way, with a stress on repl

Re: R 3.0.0 and required rebuilds of all reverse Depends: of R

On 2013-03-31 23:20:23 +0100, Neil Williams wrote: > The length of the freeze is not the fault of the release team. > > The length of the freeze is down to all of the contributors to Debian > not fixing enough RC bugs - I count myself in that, I've managed to get > massively less done for this rel

Re: R 3.0.0 and required rebuilds of all reverse Depends: of R

On 2013-04-02 11:09:35 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: > This is indeed Debian’s problem and needs discussion, but the roots lie > in upstreams. It mostly comes down to the fact that upstreams of a > growing number of projects are not able to synchronize their releases so > that a single set of vers

Re: R 3.0.0 and required rebuilds of all reverse Depends: of R

On 2013-04-02 15:09:43 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Vincent Lefevre, le Tue 02 Apr 2013 14:52:35 +0200, a écrit : > > I disagree. If the freeze occurred only once (almost) all RC bugs > > were fixed, > > Problem is: until you freeze, new RC bugs keep getting introduced.

Re: R 3.0.0 and required rebuilds of all reverse Depends: of R

On 2013-04-01 02:34:41 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Uoti Urpala, le Mon 01 Apr 2013 03:07:25 +0300, a écrit : > > Having latest upstream versions easily available to users is important > > for the development of many projects, > > That's what experimental is for. There are various problems wit

Re: R 3.0.0 and required rebuilds of all reverse Depends: of R

On 2013-04-02 14:17:17 +0100, Neil Williams wrote: > The release happens when (almost) all RC bugs are fixed, the freeze is > to allow the existing bugs to be fixed whilst *protecting* the other > packages from breakage caused by new software being uploaded. You can still fix bugs while new softwa

Re: R 3.0.0 and required rebuilds of all reverse Depends: of R

On 2013-04-02 15:23:18 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Vincent Lefevre, le Tue 02 Apr 2013 15:15:38 +0200, a écrit : > > On 2013-04-02 15:09:43 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > > Vincent Lefevre, le Tue 02 Apr 2013 14:52:35 +0200, a écrit : > > > > I disagree. If

Re: R 3.0.0 and required rebuilds of all reverse Depends: of R

On 2013-04-02 14:29:46 +0100, Neil Williams wrote: > That is not how it actually works out. Policy changes are made which > require old packages to build with new flags, compilers and toolchain > packages get upgraded and introduce new failure modes, QA tools improve > and catch more corner cases.

Re: R 3.0.0 and required rebuilds of all reverse Depends: of R

On 2013-04-02 13:37:59 -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote: > [Vincent Lefevre] > > I disagree. If the freeze occurred only once (almost) all RC bugs > > were fixed, there would be (almost) no delay. I suspect that the > > length of the freeze is due to the fact that the freeze o

Re: R 3.0.0 and required rebuilds of all reverse Depends: of R

On 2013-04-02 09:50:23 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Vincent Lefevre writes: > > > There are various problems with experimental, in particular dependencies > > are not necessarily listed, > > Huh? I have no clue what you could possibly be talking about, unless > y

<    1   2   3   4   >