projects which Intel still sells 32bit only chips for IoT. This at
least keeps Ubuntu as a prime development environment for these devices.
Please also keep a minimal installer.
--mtx
--
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Free software and Linux embedded engineering
i...@metux.net -- +49-151
On 01.06.2017 08:45, Sebastian Busse wrote:
> We are thinking of upgrading to current nVidia graphics cards. As far as
> I can see, the GeForce 1080 is supported since 367.27 while the GeForce
> 1080 TI is supported since 381.09.
Considering the hostilty of that company against the FOSS community
On 04.05.2017 09:26, Jérémy Lal wrote:
> At the moment, in debian, /usr/lib/nodejs is there to store all node
> modules installed from debian packages.
hmm, would that conflict w/ having certain "nodejs-$version" subdirs
w/ the actual engines (the whole tree - not splitted out the several
FHS par
Hi folks,
I'm currently packaging nodejs-7.9 for various deb Distros.
I'll have to maintain some applications that use the fanciest
new features, and precompiled binaries from untrusted sources
(eg. nvm+friends) of course are not an option.
Before I go all of this alone - is there anybody here
On 14.04.2017 08:31, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> I'm neither an Ubuntu developer, nor do I maintains some backports.
> However, a lot of backports easily could be counter-productive regarding
> the Long Term Support's policy.
Why so ?
> Consider to provide your packages by a PPA.
I'm already trying t
Hi folks,
anybody around here who also maintains some backports for trusty ?
I've collected several packages which I maintain locally (eg. right
now I'm packaging recent cairo w/ drm patches applied) and I'd like
to put that into bigger community.
--mtx
--
mit freundlichen Grüßen
--
Enric
On 02.01.2015 17:08, Martin Pitt wrote:
Hi,
> Yes, man dh_fixperms. Shared libraries don't need to and should not be
> executable.
Oh, wasn't aware of that. Just used to that as gcc sets that flag.
Is it a bug in gcc, or are there platforms where +x is required ?
cu
--
Enrico Weigelt,
metux I
Hi folks,
I'm just packaging some library to various deb distros using
pbuilder + git-buildpackage.
Unfortunately, the .so's loose the +x flag in the package
(while usual 'make install' is okay) - it seems that some of the
dh stuff drops that flag :(
maybe some of you guys might have an idea ?
On 03.12.2014 23:32, Vittorio wrote:
> If really you could succeed in getting rid of polkit and dbus, that
> would be a very good work.
> I completely agree with you. Polkit has given me a lot of headaches.
Well, you're welcomed to join me :)
I'll yet have to sort out certain conceptional issues
On 29.11.2014 22:31, I.E.G. wrote:
Hi,
> I was a "little" surprised to see the "...has been converted to an
> upstart job" message some time ago in response to a ~$ /etc/init.d/
> stop/start/restart/foo .
> I tried the ~$ service stop/start/restart/foo and it either didn't work
> or produced the
On 02.12.2014 11:11, Stephen P. Villano wrote:
> Personally, I prefer SElinux to polkit, but such isn't part of the
Dont they play in entirely different areas ?
I just started to care about polkit, when began doing weird things
and causing network-manager to break (more precise: the gnome
fronte
Some time ago, I observed even major ISPs being blacklisted
in some spamfilter appliance network (just forgot its name ;-o),
where I'm *pretty* sure that they're not spamming (I know these
guys personally, and they're quite professional, compared to
other companies of this size) - and there was n
On 02.12.2014 11:24, Martin Pitt wrote:
Hi folks,
> Indeed that's another example where Debian offers a choice but Ubuntu
> doesn't -- we examine the alternatives, pick one, and support nothing
> else. (cf. combinatorial explosion and efficient maintenance and
> support).
by the way: could anybo
On 02.12.2014 08:27, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult [2014-12-02 7:55 +0100]:
>> By the way: is it then be mandatory ?
>
> Yes, it will be. As Scott and others have already pointed out, Ubuntu
> never offered a choice of init systems, and doesn't
On 01.12.2014 19:15, Tom H wrote:
> Especially after deciding a few months ago to switch to systemd!
By the way: is it then be mandatory ?
Because, for me, that would mean leaving Ubuntu, definitively.
I'm currently exploring ways for getting rid of polkit, and
also trimming down in other place
On 29.11.2014 00:39, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
Hi,
> Similarly, 16.04 LTS is not yet planned, thus i'm not sure whether it
> will or won't ship upstart. If it does, it will be another 5 years
> from then, or 2021.
I really hope, it will continue to ship upstart and doesn't push
towards systemd
On 28.11.2014 13:41, Ben Tinner wrote:
Hi,
> Recently, the developers of Ubuntu have decided to migrate the init
> system from upstart to systemd.
>
> So, I would like to find out what will happen to upstart after Ubuntu
> complete its transition to systemd.
That might also depend on which init
17 matches
Mail list logo
