[arch-general] [URGENT] Assistance Requested in Looking for Dr Francis T. Seow, Harvard Law School Research Fellow
Hi, First, I would like to apologize for the out-of-topic post. I will keep this as short as I possibly could. Does anybody know Dr. Francis T. Seow, the former Solicitor-General from the Republic of Singapore? I want to contact him but can't seem to find his email address or telephone number on the internet. Could you help me? Do you also know how I can contact all the justices of the Judicial Committee of the UK Privy Council and all the Lords of the UK House of Lords? According to the UK Parliament website, it says that many Peers do not have public email addresses. I would like to apologize again for using this platform to get my message across as my email accounts may have been compromised. Thank you very much. Yours sincerely, Mr. Teo En Ming Hanyu Pinyin Name: Zhang Enming Facebook: Teo En Ming (Zhang Enming) Photo (1): http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/7534/enmingteodscf2511.jpg Photo (2): http://i.imgur.com/CLifZ.jpg Mobile Phone (Starhub Pre-paid): +65-8369-2618 Singapore Citizen
Re: [arch-general] Burning From Command Line
Mauro Santos registo.maill...@gmail.com wrote: Later, some religuous crowd came up and claimed that Earth is flat. I encourage you to just ignore those people who claim that Earth is flat and that there is a supposed legal problem with cdrtools. Sure I can ignore people who say that Earth is flat. The other people did backup their claims of Earth being round by publishing their reasoning and methods of determining Earth's radius, it has been peer reviewed and agreed upon that those claims are without fault given the knowledge available at the time of publication. You hit the point: There is _zero_ prove from Debian for their claims. Even Eben Moglen (in his mail that has been verified to be otherwise based on lies as he e.g. claims that there was a phone call that did never happen) did not give _any_ legal theory for his claims. Guess why... ... And there is a detailed explanation from me, Lawrence Rosen and other people who confirm each statement with valid legal theories. As long as there people that even believe things claimed by Debian to be in the GPL that are not, we seem to have a serious social problem with FUD and trolling. Jörg -- EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin j...@cs.tu-berlin.de(uni) joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
Re: [arch-general] Burning From Command Line
C Anthony Risinger anth...@extof.me wrote: in the spirit of open licenses, mildly incompatible or not, include the best tool for the job = cdrtools. on a final note, Jeorg, it would be extremely beneficial if you could cite a hard resource regarding the legalities involved here, as you seem to have a resource. or maybe just dual license cdrtools (why not?). why was the license changed to CDDL exclusive anyways? i've As mentioned many times before and as you can read on the website The GPL is full of claims that cannot be enforced in court, see: http://www.rosenlaw.com/Rosen_Ch06.pdf This was written by Lawrence Rosen, the legal advisor of the OpenSource initiative (Opensource.org) in 2004, but I did know this already in 2001 when I tried to be the first person on earth to fight _for_ the GPL and against GPL violations in court. It tourned out that this is impossible. Note that Harald Welte definitely does not base his court cases on the GPL but on the German legal vehicle preliminary injunction where he forbids to sell produced hardware that needs to be payed to the producer (e.g. in China) but cannot create revenues from selling, based on the preliminary injunction. Any similar case that would solely be based on software would get lost unless the objector has an incapable lawyer. As mentioned before, in 2001 Moglen first spread wrong claims in the public while I was underway suing two GPL violating companies. So Moglen is already known as an unreliable legal sources since a long time before Debian started to attack cdrtools. From the lesson I learned in 2001 from suing GPL violaters, I learned that it is useless to use a license that tries to enforce many non-helpful restrictions on the software. As a result, the main contributors of the cdrtools project did discuss this and decided to switch to a more liberal license in the near future. We just could not fully agree on the BSD license. Then in December 2004, Sun and I created the CDDL which turned out to be a license that just tries to enforce as many restrictions as can enforced in court and thus seems to be the right compromise between BSD and GPL. As Debian stedted to attack cdrtools in May 2004 and as Debian massively boosted these attacks in late 2005 (including wrong claims about legal problems), I decided to switch towads the CDDL on May 15th 2006. As you see, the license change was a _result_ of the attacks from Debian but definitely not the cause. been in lengthy license discussion over on Phoronix, and i must admit, the more i get into software as a living [6+ yrs now], the less i like the GPLv* (notice nobody moves TO the GPL, they only move AWAY... this, CouchDB [apache], etc... GPL is too purist IMO) I personally know some projects that did go back from GPLv3 because the GPLv3 claims more restrictions than the GPLv2 and you are correct, I personally don't know about a project that moved from another license towards the GPL. Jörg -- EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin j...@cs.tu-berlin.de(uni) joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
Re: [arch-general] [URGENT] Assistance Requested in Looking for Dr Francis T. Seow, Harvard Law School Research Fellow
Dear Christopher, I have sent countless emails to many governmental, non-governmental and international organizations in the world with the subject Plea for Medical Help/Assistance. But surprisingly I get very few replies. Maybe the replies have been deleted or the emails I sent have been deleted. EDIT: I overheard my neighbours claiming to have passwords/access to my email accounts. --- Mr. Teo En Ming Hanyu Pinyin Name: Zhang Enming Facebook: Teo En Ming (Zhang Enming) Photo (1): http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/7534/enmingteodscf2511.jpg Photo (2): http://i.imgur.com/CLifZ.jpg Mobile Phone (Starhub Pre-paid): +65-8369-2618 Singapore Citizen On 05/27/2010 01:59 PM, Christopher Chan wrote: Do you also know how I can contact all the justices of the Judicial Committee of the UK Privy Council and all the Lords of the UK House of Lords? According to the UK Parliament website, it says that many Peers do not have public email addresses. In Lucid you will find them in /etc/email/PrivyCouncil.txt and /etc/email/HouseOfLords.txt Or he could just ask the Lord of Privies. In fact, I reckon he'd even be invited for tea too.
Re: [arch-general] Burning From Command Line
Attila vodoo0...@sonnenkinder.org wrote: Sorry to say but until there is no decision from a law court i see this only as a interpersonal problem and therefore i prefer to discuss about technical things. Perhaps this is because i'm a former OS/2 user but what i really don't understand is the support for software which is a fork of old software and which In case there was no decision from a court, there is only one halfway reliable method to deal with the problem: Check the claims of both parties and try to understand whether they are able to prove their claims with legal theories. Debian spreads claims that are in obvious conflict with the GPL license text and Debian uses a GPl interpretation that would make the GPL a definitely non-free license acording to the OpenSource definition: http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php Moglen sent me trustworthy legal theories in private at the time when he confirmed that there is no legal problem with the original software. Moglen did never send a legal theory since he has a change of views with Stallman and started to claim that there is a problem. Moglen has been asked several time to send a legal theory for his reversed view but besides from general unfriendlyness, he did never send _any_ legal explanation that could confirm that there is a problem. We for this reason need to stay with his first statements that have been proved with trustworthy legal theories and that confirm that there is no problem. Other lawyers are also confirming that there is no legal problem with the original software and these lawyers also confirm their claims with useful legal theories. So this seems to be a simple decision between pointless attacks and useful legal theories. BTW: Debian started to claim that there is a problem, so it is the duty of Debian to confirm that there is a problem. They did however never confirm any of their claims. don't support the same count of platforms as the original. Aside of this juristic discussions from laypersons i can't recognize for what the world need cdrkit. The world does not need any dead and buggy software regardless of it's name and regardless of it's initiator. Jörg -- EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin j...@cs.tu-berlin.de(uni) joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
[arch-general] This is the arch-general list - Was Burning From Command Line
[it is rude not to change subject lines when going off-topic...] On 27/05/10 20:13, Joerg Schilling wrote: Blah, blah, blah paraphrased Seriously, stop it. 50+ messages that are entirely off-topic for the original question. This is list is for discussion about Arch Linux, not for discussing the licensing of a package not even provided by Arch Linux. As I already stated, the license of cdrtools is not the primary reason this package is not distributed by Arch Linux. The reason any package is not made available officially is that none of the developers appear to want to package and support it. Only in very clear cut cases has the distribution of a piece of software in Arch been prevented by license issues. Massive off-topic thread are more of a demotivation towards cdrtools being supported by a developer. We develop this distribution in our spare time and no-one wants to deal with shit like this. Allan
Re: [arch-general] Burning From Command Line
Jörg, why don't you just change the license of your cdrtools to a licensing scheme - either change every part of it to the GPL, set it under a dual license or whatever - which is indisputable and doubtless instead of arguing with the distributors all the time over years? It's really annoying to always read your nonsense regarding the licensing. The problem seems to be only that people believe the liensing nonsense FUD spread by Debian. Distributors who did ask their lawyers did either never change to the broken and illegal cod from Debian (Sun) or do again ship cdrtools (Suse). I still don't understand why you ask mee to introduce a solution for a non-existent problem. You didn't create CD Recording drives either but still you introduced a solution to the problem of writing to them. So, why should that stop you now? People ask you to simply dual-license it because: - it's almost NO effort to you - it will put to an END to any possible misinterpretations and uncertainties - now and in the future - it will show your good will to engage in discussions - people might prefer GPL in some jurisdictions even if you think it's bullshit -- damjan
Re: [arch-general] Burning From Command Line
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 11:25 AM, Damjan Georgievski gdam...@gmail.com wrote: - it will put to an END to any possible misinterpretations and uncertainties - now and in the future he certainly is not interested in ending these pointless battles :)
Re: [arch-general] Running Mozilla Prism?
Wed, May 26, 2010 at 11:44:03AM +0100, Peter Lewis dijo: On Wednesday 26 May 2010 at 11:31 Peter Lewis wrote: The stand-alone app is only built for 32bit by upstream (that seems to be a common situation for Mozilla stuff, rather sad if you ask me ;-). The code is available in an SVN repo so it ought to be possible to do a build from source. I just checked out Prism from SVN, but there isn't a readme on how to build it and I don't have any experience with building mozilla's code. Also the Prism wiki doesn't provide any information either. Will post back if I get anywhere... Okay, the build instructions are here: https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Prism/Build And it seems that it needs to be built inside of xulrunner and then separated out :-( I don't have time to do this right now, but if anyone fancies turning these instructions into a prism-svn package, then I'd be happy to help test. Cheers, Pete. there you go :) http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=37539 -- Salud! Nicolás Reynolds, xmpp:fa...@kiwwwi.com.ar omb:http://identi.ca/fauno blog:http://selfdandi.com.ar/ gnu/linux user #455044 http://librecultivo.org.ar http://parabolagnulinux.org
Re: [arch-general] cdrtools again... yay! - Was: Burning From Command Line
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Xavier Chantry chantry.xav...@gmail.com wrote: Then, if you want to do something about it, just go ahead and talk with these people Joerg kindly mentioned. Ask them whether they agree or disagree with Eben's interpretation that GPL compliance on mkisofs is broken : http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2010-February/010989.html Dozens of people have contributed to the discussion, but no one actually cares about getting some clarifications ? I just don't get it. I feel like I did my part of the work already by getting a report from Eben, just to see Joerg accusing him of lying in return. Now it would be very nice and useful if someone could continue that work by getting in touch with other competent people.
Re: [arch-general] Burning From Command Line
Adam Lantos h...@playma.org wrote: On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 11:25 AM, Damjan Georgievski gdam...@gmail.com wrote: - it will put to an END to any possible misinterpretations and uncertainties - now and in the future he certainly is not interested in ending these pointless battles :) Let me correct yoour typo: It should read: They certainly are not interested in ending these pointless battles :) note that these pointless battles have been initated by Debian and as long as people spread FUD about my software, I need to correct. Jörg -- EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin j...@cs.tu-berlin.de(uni) joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
Re: [arch-general] This is the arch-general list - Was Burning From Command Line
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 06:56, Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org wrote: [it is rude not to change subject lines when going off-topic...] On 27/05/10 20:13, Joerg Schilling wrote: Blah, blah, blah paraphrased Seriously, stop it. 50+ messages that are entirely off-topic for the original question. I agree. Joerg, you waste the time of every reader of this list. I've never muted as many threads as I have when you start acting like a spoiled child on these lists. It's been discussed to death, please go elsewhere.
Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] [signoff] pkg-config-0.24-1
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 9:42 AM, Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org wrote:
Upstream update. Renamved from pkgconfig to pkg-config as has been done
upstream for some time now.
This looks funny to me:
$ pacman -Qi pkg-config | grep '^Provides'
Provides : pkgconfig=${pkgver}
Isn't it supposed to be expanded?
Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] [signoff] pkg-config-0.24-1
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 8:49 AM, Ray Kohler ataraxia...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 9:42 AM, Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org wrote:
Upstream update. Renamved from pkgconfig to pkg-config as has been done
upstream for some time now.
This looks funny to me:
$ pacman -Qi pkg-config | grep '^Provides'
Provides : pkgconfig=${pkgver}
Isn't it supposed to be expanded?
Allan broke it! :)
-Dan
Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] [signoff] pkg-config-0.24-1
On 27/05/10 23:50, Dan McGee wrote:
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 8:49 AM, Ray Kohlerataraxia...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 9:42 AM, Allan McRaeal...@archlinux.org wrote:
Upstream update. Renamved from pkgconfig to pkg-config as has been done
upstream for some time now.
This looks funny to me:
$ pacman -Qi pkg-config | grep '^Provides'
Provides : pkgconfig=${pkgver}
Isn't it supposed to be expanded?
Allan broke it! :)
Crap... I had noticed that and then neglected to actually fix it
before uploading.
Expect -2 soon.
Allan
Re: [arch-general] This is the arch-general list - Was Burning From Command Line
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 8:18 AM, Daenyth Blank daenyth+a...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 06:56, Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org wrote: [it is rude not to change subject lines when going off-topic...] On 27/05/10 20:13, Joerg Schilling wrote: Blah, blah, blah paraphrased Seriously, stop it. 50+ messages that are entirely off-topic for the original question. I agree. Joerg, you waste the time of every reader of this list. I've never muted as many threads as I have when you start acting like a spoiled child on these lists. It's been discussed to death, please go elsewhere. I'm going to give this the rest of the day to simmer down, then I'm going to start moderating/banning accounts
Re: [arch-general] This is the arch-general list - Was Burning From Command Line
Hi, Joerg does has few odd things maybe because he is wrong or we are wrong but either way; we shouldn't be rude to him.he is the reason we have working cd/dvd burning support on Linux. AFAIK, he is working on cdrtools since 1995, much before I was knew what OSS was. he gave us his full source code efforts for benefit for community much like other free software devs. lets give him credit for that. Also the truth is one person cannot be responsible for 50+threads. other people are replying to as well, so should be Joerg be blamed alone? if you want to ban, he should not be only one. Regarding licensing, I don't understand much( I am no lawyer) but from users perspective things are pretty good in Arch. default package is cdrkit which should be good enough for most users. if anyone faces any problem, he can always get original cdrtools from AUR. the real problem is with other big distros but that discussion is outside the scope of this mailing list. @Joerg schily I would suggest you spend your time more productively. if you feel/believe cdrkit fork is in conflict with the Copyright law cannot be distributed legally. Please feel free to take legal action. your current strategy is clearing not working. if you can't take legal action due to some reason, its best to accept the current situation and move on with doing better things which are good use of your sharp mind. Wishing you success with whatever you choose to do. Regards, Gaurish Sharma www.gaurishsharma.com
Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] [signoff] glibc-2.12 toolchain build
On 28/05/10 00:55, Jan de Groot wrote: On Sat, 2010-05-22 at 20:45 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: Hi, Glibc-2.12 toolchain rebuild. Fedora has been running something like the glibc-2.12 release for the last few weeks so as always it should be nice and safe. linux-api-headers-2.6.34-1 - update - fix license glibc-2.12-1 - update - clean up old stuff from install file binutils-2.20.1-3 - new cvs snapshot gcc-4.5.0-3 - just a rebuild valgrind - rebuild for glibc-2.12 - patched for glibc-2.12 and future 2.12.x versions - build fix patch Signoff both, Allan Signoff both. Didn't test valgrind, but building a full xorg-server stack on top of testing with this new toolchain should give proof that this toolchain works fine. Does gdb still work with this version of glibc btw, or does it need a rebuild just like valgrind? I think gdb is fine... but I have not used it extensively. I'd appreciate reports from anyone who has extensively used gdb and valgrind with the new glibc. Allan
Re: [arch-general] Running Mozilla Prism?
On Thursday 27 May 2010 at 13:35 Nicolás Reynolds wrote:
I don't have time to do this right now, but if anyone fancies turning
these instructions into a prism-svn package, then I'd be happy to help
test.
there you go :)
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=37539
Excellent, thanks Nicolás!
I'm just installing it now... I did notice a small typo though, line 39 should
read:
cd ${srcdir}/mozilla-1.9.2/mozilla-obj/prism/dist
not
cd ${srcdir}/mozilla-1.9.2/mozilla-obj/prism/dist/prism
Will report back...
Pete.
Re: [arch-general] Running Mozilla Prism?
On Thursday 27 May 2010 at 16:34 Peter Lewis wrote: there you go :) http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=37539 Ah, also that /usr/bin/prism links to the pkgdir when it should link to /usr/lib/prism-1.0b4/bin/prism But, fixing that, it launches but just gives a window with the following error in it: XML Parsing Error: undefined entity Location: chrome://webrunner/content/webrunner.xul Line Number 58, Column 5:command id=cmd_saveImage label=saveImage.label; oncommand=WebRunner.doCommand(this.id);/ Any idea? Thanks, Pete.
Re: [arch-general] This is the arch-general list - Was Burning From Command Line
At Donnerstag, 27. Mai 2010 16:25 Gaurish Sharma wrote: Joerg does has few odd things maybe because he is wrong or we are wrong but either way; we shouldn't be rude to him.he is the reason we have working cd/dvd burning support on Linux. AFAIK, he is working on cdrtools since 1995, much before I was knew what OSS was. he gave us his full source code efforts for benefit for community much like other free software devs. lets give him credit for that. +1 Also the truth is one person cannot be responsible for 50+threads. other people are replying to as well, so should be Joerg be blamed alone? if you want to ban, he should not be only one. +100 and if you ban someone than you have to ban me because i'm the startpoint of this underthread ... a little cue in this case would be helpfull.-) See you, Attila
Re: [arch-general] cdrtools again... yay! - Was: Burning From Command Line
On Thu 27 May 2010 14:43 +0200, Xavier Chantry wrote: Dozens of people have contributed to the discussion, but no one actually cares about getting some clarifications ? I just don't get it. I feel like I did my part of the work already by getting a report from Eben, just to see Joerg accusing him of lying in return. Now it would be very nice and useful if someone could continue that work by getting in touch with other competent people. That would be nice and useful if people actually believed that there would be an end to this discussion. Anyways, it's been stated that licensing isn't really the issue any more. The fact is no Dev or TU is interested in maintaining cdrtools. Jörg has something to learn about how to deal with people, but he's too stubborn to take any advice.
Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] [signoff] glibc-2.12 toolchain build
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org wrote: I think gdb is fine... but I have not used it extensively. I'd appreciate reports from anyone who has extensively used gdb and valgrind with the new glibc. Allan I've been using valgrind on the new glibc. It reports a whole new slew of warnings for previously quiet code, but otherwise performs as expected. Curl example: http://codepad.org/htorjWF9 dave
Re: [arch-general] This is the arch-general list - Was Burning From Command Line
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 10:37 AM, Attila vodoo0...@sonnenkinder.org wrote: At Donnerstag, 27. Mai 2010 16:25 Gaurish Sharma wrote: Also the truth is one person cannot be responsible for 50+threads. other people are replying to as well, so should be Joerg be blamed alone? if you want to ban, he should not be only one. +100 and if you ban someone than you have to ban me because i'm the startpoint of this underthread ... a little cue in this case would be helpfull.-) To be clear: On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 9:11 AM, Aaron Griffin aaronmgrif...@gmail.com wrote: I'm going to give this the rest of the day to simmer down, then I'm going to start moderating/banning accounts Notice that accounts is the plural, not the singular.
Re: [arch-general] cdrtools again... yay! - Was: Burning From Command Line
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 5:52 PM, Loui Chang louipc@gmail.com wrote: On Thu 27 May 2010 14:43 +0200, Xavier Chantry wrote: Dozens of people have contributed to the discussion, but no one actually cares about getting some clarifications ? I just don't get it. I feel like I did my part of the work already by getting a report from Eben, just to see Joerg accusing him of lying in return. Now it would be very nice and useful if someone could continue that work by getting in touch with other competent people. That would be nice and useful if people actually believed that there would be an end to this discussion. Anyways, it's been stated that licensing isn't really the issue any more. The fact is no Dev or TU is interested in maintaining cdrtools. Jörg has something to learn a how to deal with people, but he's too stubborn to take any advice. The licensing doubt might not be a show-stopper for Arch, but clearing it would still increase the chances of a dev/tu packaging it. And I was not just thinking about Arch, I was thinking about every potential packagers/distributors of cdrtools, this would be useful for all of them. So if anyone wants to become the first useful person in that discussion, (s)he knows what to do. And as a sidenote, one TU showed interest the first time : http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2010-January/010358.html I suppose he got scared away by the endless discussion.
[arch-general] dualboot?
I'm new to Arch Linux Linux in general, so please excuse any newbie questions... Can the Arch Linux install do a dualboot installation? I've read some documentation and it seems to be iffy on this point. Also, why are most Linux users and programmers so obsessed with Python? I'd much rather download Euphoria. http://www.rapideuphoria.com If it's a requirement that a Python runtime be on the system, then I'd rather not install at all.
Re: [arch-general] This is the arch-general list - Was Burning From Command Line
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 10:08 PM, Aaron Griffin aaronmgrif...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 10:37 AM, Attila vodoo0...@sonnenkinder.org wrote: At Donnerstag, 27. Mai 2010 16:25 Gaurish Sharma wrote: Also the truth is one person cannot be responsible for 50+threads. other people are replying to as well, so should be Joerg be blamed alone? if you want to ban, he should not be only one. +100 and if you ban someone than you have to ban me because i'm the startpoint of this underthread ... a little cue in this case would be helpfull.-) To be clear: On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 9:11 AM, Aaron Griffin aaronmgrif...@gmail.com wrote: I'm going to give this the rest of the day to simmer down, then I'm going to start moderating/banning accounts Notice that accounts is the plural, not the singular. Err. I don't think you should do that unless they become a pure nuisance. I am facing a similar situation with Squidoo. Because of someone else on my subnet (I have static ip), spamming on their site (or may be due to a virus, its a common scene here), they have banned the whole subnet. And now even after several request they won't whitelist me. You may end up banning some for none of their mistake. -- Nilesh Govindarajan Facebook: nilesh.gr Twitter: nileshgr Website: www.itech7.com
Re: [arch-general] This is the arch-general list - Was Burning From Command Line
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Nilesh Govindarajan li...@itech7.com wrote: On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 10:08 PM, Aaron Griffin aaronmgrif...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 10:37 AM, Attila vodoo0...@sonnenkinder.org wrote: At Donnerstag, 27. Mai 2010 16:25 Gaurish Sharma wrote: Also the truth is one person cannot be responsible for 50+threads. other people are replying to as well, so should be Joerg be blamed alone? if you want to ban, he should not be only one. +100 and if you ban someone than you have to ban me because i'm the startpoint of this underthread ... a little cue in this case would be helpfull.-) To be clear: On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 9:11 AM, Aaron Griffin aaronmgrif...@gmail.com wrote: I'm going to give this the rest of the day to simmer down, then I'm going to start moderating/banning accounts Notice that accounts is the plural, not the singular. Err. I don't think you should do that unless they become a pure nuisance. I am facing a similar situation with Squidoo. Because of someone else on my subnet (I have static ip), spamming on their site (or may be due to a virus, its a common scene here), they have banned the whole subnet. And now even after several request they won't whitelist me. You may end up banning some for none of their mistake. Moderating an account merely puts emails from that account on hold until approved by a moderator.
Re: [arch-general] dualboot?
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 10:12 PM, David Lowe da_legit_du...@yahoo.com wrote: I'm new to Arch Linux Linux in general, so please excuse any newbie questions... Can the Arch Linux install do a dualboot installation? I've read some documentation and it seems to be iffy on this point. Also, why are most Linux users and programmers so obsessed with Python? I'd much rather download Euphoria. http://www.rapideuphoria.com If it's a requirement that a Python runtime be on the system, then I'd rather not install at all. Python is an opensource language used by many applications. You may have to install it while installing some desktop environment. As for dual boot, any Linux can be dual booted. If you already have some other Linux, you just need to add the entry for the partiton which contains the Arch kernel into Grub. -- Nilesh Govindarajan Facebook: nilesh.gr Twitter: nileshgr Website: www.itech7.com
[arch-general] perl-list-moreutils 0.22-2
saw this updated this morning and got curious as to why. I looked at it and it seems little more than a PKGBUILD improvement... nothing that would affect current users. why bump the pkgrel? also this version isn't on abs I don't know what affects that though. -- Caleb Cushing http://xenoterracide.blogspot.com
Re: [arch-general] perl-list-moreutils 0.22-2
On 05/27/2010 08:02 PM, Caleb Cushing wrote: saw this updated this morning and got curious as to why. I looked at it and it seems little more than a PKGBUILD improvement... nothing that would affect current users. why bump the pkgrel? also this version isn't on abs I don't know what affects that though. because it wasn't built for a long time and it didn't had $arch in the file name. abs take time to update. is done once a day so be patience -- Ionut
Re: [arch-general] cdrtools again... yay! - Was: Burning From Command Line
Am 27.05.2010 17:52, schrieb Loui Chang: Anyways, it's been stated that licensing isn't really the issue any more. The fact is no Dev or TU is interested in maintaining cdrtools. Jörg has something to learn about how to deal with people, but he's too stubborn to take any advice. When has that happened? I would gladly package cdrtools. I know from many users that it is superior to cdrkit (although I never had any trouble with either of them). However, I fear that some of my fellow developers would stop me from doing that due to the questionable license situation. What has happened to Open Source Software anyway? People keep claiming their software is free, but then they argue about so-called free licenses being incompatible. This used to be about free sharing of code, but now we need lawyers involved just to do that? Whenever a lawyer is involved, there is certainly no freedom, just random blabla that nobody understands. For me, this is about quality of software and the ease of distributing it (and of course open-ness of source code wherever possible). And as long as nobody sues us for it, I am glad to distribute any piece of software. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [arch-general] This is the arch-general list - Was Burning From Command Line
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 07:55:24PM +0530, Gaurish Sharma wrote: Joerg does has few odd things maybe because he is wrong or we are wrong but either way; we shouldn't be rude to him.he is the reason we have working cd/dvd burning support on Linux. AFAIK, he is working on cdrtools since 1995, much before I was knew what OSS was. he gave us his full source code efforts for benefit for community much like other free software devs. lets give him credit for that. +1 as well. Joerg may or not be a difficult person to deal with, if he is there may or not be good reasons for that, and if there are they are probably not my business. Anyway, someone who has created the cdr toolset and maintained it for 15 years will get more of my respect than whoever forks it for whatever reason and then leaves the result to rot. Ciao, -- FA O tu, che porte, correndo si ? E guerra e morte !
Re: [arch-general] cdrtools again... yay! - Was: Burning From Command Line
On Thu 27 May 2010 18:32 +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote: Loui Chang louipc@gmail.com wrote: That would be nice and useful if people actually believed that there would be an end to this discussion. Anyways, it's been stated that licensing isn't really the issue any more. The fact is no Dev or TU is interested in maintaining cdrtools. Jörg has something to learn about I am not sure whether you realized that cdrtools is well maintained and without known bugs. Sorry I wasn't completely clear, by maintaining I meant maintaining the binary Arch Linux package. No one is interested in it, and you really can't force interest.
Re: [arch-general] dualboot?
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 12:42 PM, David Lowe da_legit_du...@yahoo.com wrote: I'm new to Arch Linux Linux in general, so please excuse any newbie questions... Can the Arch Linux install do a dualboot installation? I've read some documentation and it seems to be iffy on this point. Also, why are most Linux users and programmers so obsessed with Python? I'd much rather download Euphoria. http://www.rapideuphoria.com If it's a requirement that a Python runtime be on the system, then I'd rather not install at all. Dual boot between Linux and which OS? Since you say you are new to Linux in general maybe you want to dual boot with Windows. In that case check the wiki [1]. Also, since Arch Linux puts a lot of responsibility in the hand of the user and assumes he/she knows what he/she is doing, it might be a good idea to try another distribution first (OpenSUSE, Ubuntu, etc). If you find you like Linux then you should give Arch a try. You'll love it and you will *learn a lot*. [1] http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Windows_and_Arch_Dual_Boot -- Louis Brazeau Informaticien
[arch-general] [signoff] device-mapper/lvm2 2.02.66 and cryptsetup 1.1.1
I put updated device-mapper/lvm2 2.02.66 and cryptsetup 1.1.1
packages to testing.
These packages enable udev synchronization to finally get rid of all
race conditions related to udev rules. I also cleaned up the PKGBUILDs
massively and removed all static binaries and libraries from the packages.
Dynamic lvm and cryptsetup now run entirely from /{bin,lib}, without the
need for /usr.
Please sign off.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [arch-general] cdrtools again... yay! - Was: Burning From Command Line
On Thu 27 May 2010 19:11 +0200, Thomas Bächler wrote: Am 27.05.2010 17:52, schrieb Loui Chang: Anyways, it's been stated that licensing isn't really the issue any more. The fact is no Dev or TU is interested in maintaining cdrtools. Jörg has something to learn about how to deal with people, but he's too stubborn to take any advice. When has that happened? I would gladly package cdrtools. I know from many users that it is superior to cdrkit (although I never had any trouble with either of them). However, I fear that some of my fellow developers would stop me from doing that due to the questionable license situation. http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2010-January/010357.html http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2010-May/013557.html
Re: [arch-general] cdrtools again... yay! - Was: Burning From Command Line
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 2:29 PM, Loui Chang louipc@gmail.com wrote: http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2010-January/010357.html http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2010-May/013557.html eh? more circles? On Thu 27 May 2010 19:11 +0200, Thomas Bächler wrote: When has that happened? I would gladly package cdrtools. I know from many users that it is superior to cdrkit (although I never had any trouble with either of them). However, I fear that some of my fellow developers would stop me from doing that due to the questionable license situation. What has happened to Open Source Software anyway? People keep claiming their software is free, but then they argue about so-called free licenses being incompatible. This used to be about free sharing of code, but now we need lawyers involved just to do that? Whenever a lawyer is involved, there is certainly no freedom, just random blabla that nobody understands. For me, this is about quality of software and the ease of distributing it (and of course open-ness of source code wherever possible). And as long as nobody sues us for it, I am glad to distribute any piece of software. bang. this look like a winner here, eh? Jeorg says there is no problem with inclusion. Thomas says there is no problem with packaging. it would appear that there is no problem. C Anthony
Re: [arch-general] cdrtools again... yay! - Was: Burning From Command Line
On Thu 27 May 2010 14:41 -0500, C Anthony Risinger wrote: On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 2:29 PM, Loui Chang louipc@gmail.com wrote: http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2010-January/010357.html http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2010-May/013557.html eh? more circles? What the hell do circles have to do with anything? The first link seems to show there's no problem with the license. The second link states: And the license of cdrtools is not even the reason that cdrtools is not packaged in Arch.
Re: [arch-general] dualboot?
Am 27.05.2010 18:42, schrieb David Lowe: I'm new to Arch Linux Linux in general, so please excuse any newbie questions... Can the Arch Linux install do a dualboot installation? I've read some documentation and it seems to be iffy on this point. Also, why are most Linux users and programmers so obsessed with Python? I'd much rather download Euphoria. http://www.rapideuphoria.com If it's a requirement that a Python runtime be on the system, then I'd rather not install at all. Hello, python is no requirement for Arch Linux itself. If you do not like it, just do not install it. But I know many programs written in python and not a single one written in euphoria. The last stable release of the latter was in 2007. Regards Stefan
[arch-general] Configuring Arch to only use a single interface and not probe for another netowrking interface?
Hi all, The subject should spell it out, but what I'm wondering is if there is any way to force Arch to not probe for say eth0 when eth1 is prefered over eth0 and such? Thanks for any help on that question! Basically eth0 is my laptop's ethernet card, while eth1 is the wireless card. While the wireless card is used specifically for Internet connection, the wired is never used at all. I have my laptop configured through the use of netCFG to handle the wireless to make it a bit faster to configure. While that is the case, I would prefer that only that eth1 is used, and would like to see eht0 disappear totally from the list of detected network interfaces if Arches kernel is flexible enough to do this. If anyone could get back to me I would appreciate it very much. Regards, --Keith Skype: skypedude1234 MSN Messenger: keithin...@hotmail.com Yahoo messenger /AIM: keithint1234
Re: [arch-general] Configuring Arch to only use a single interface and not probe for another netowrking interface?
On 05/27/2010 11:22 PM, Keith Hinton wrote: Hi all, The subject should spell it out, but what I'm wondering is if there is any way to force Arch to not probe for say eth0 when eth1 is prefered over eth0 and such? Thanks for any help on that question! Basically eth0 is my laptop's ethernet card, while eth1 is the wireless card. While the wireless card is used specifically for Internet connection, the wired is never used at all. I have my laptop configured through the use of netCFG to handle the wireless to make it a bit faster to configure. While that is the case, I would prefer that only that eth1 is used, and would like to see eht0 disappear totally from the list of detected network interfaces if Arches kernel is flexible enough to do this. If anyone could get back to me I would appreciate it very much. you can disable it from rc.conf by adding a ! in front of eth0 like this: INTERFACES=(!eth0 eth1) -- Ionut
Re: [arch-general] dualboot?
On 05/27/2010 04:21 PM, Stefan Husmann wrote: python is no requirement for Arch Linux itself. If you do not like it, just do not install it. Isn't pacman written in python? That would make python a requirement for Arch then, right? DR
Re: [arch-general] dualboot?
On Thu 27 May 2010 16:42 -0400, David Rosenstrauch wrote: On 05/27/2010 04:21 PM, Stefan Husmann wrote: python is no requirement for Arch Linux itself. If you do not like it, just do not install it. Isn't pacman written in python? That would make python a requirement for Arch then, right? No, it's written in C.
Re: [arch-general] dualboot?
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 4:42 PM, David Rosenstrauch dar...@darose.net wrote: On 05/27/2010 04:21 PM, Stefan Husmann wrote: python is no requirement for Arch Linux itself. If you do not like it, just do not install it. Isn't pacman written in python? That would make python a requirement for Arch then, right? The rankmirrors script is in python, but pacman itself is in C, and makepkg is in bash.
Re: [arch-general] dualboot?
On Thu, 27 May 2010 18:48:38 +0200, Nilesh Govindarajan li...@itech7.com wrote: On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 10:12 PM, David Lowe da_legit_du...@yahoo.com wrote: I'm new to Arch Linux Linux in general, so please excuse any newbie questions... Can the Arch Linux install do a dualboot installation? I've read some documentation and it seems to be iffy on this point. Also, why are most Linux users and programmers so obsessed with Python? I'd much rather download Euphoria. http://www.rapideuphoria.com If it's a requirement that a Python runtime be on the system, then I'd rather not install at all. Python is an opensource language used by many applications. You may have to install it while installing some desktop environment. As for dual boot, any Linux can be dual booted. If you already have some other Linux, you just need to add the entry for the partiton which contains the Arch kernel into Grub. Maybe just compare the websites... obviously Python wins! :) -- Jeroen Op 't Eynde - jer...@xprsyrslf.be - http://xprsyrslf.be To read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Bottom-posting Steun Jeugdhuis de PUT via Donamail: http://www.donamail.be/default.asp?btnID=iYOviYvW
Re: [arch-general] [signoff] device-mapper/lvm2 2.02.66 and cryptsetup 1.1.1
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 1:38 PM, Thomas Bächler tho...@archlinux.org wrote:
I put updated device-mapper/lvm2 2.02.66 and cryptsetup 1.1.1
packages to testing.
These packages enable udev synchronization to finally get rid of all
race conditions related to udev rules. I also cleaned up the PKGBUILDs
massively and removed all static binaries and libraries from the packages.
Dynamic lvm and cryptsetup now run entirely from /{bin,lib}, without the
need for /usr.
Please sign off.
You need force option for cryptsetup because 1.1.1_rc2-1 sorts as
newer than 1.1.1-1:
warning: cryptsetup: local (1.1.1_rc2-1) is newer than testing (1.1.1-1)
Re: [arch-general] dualboot?
On Thu, 27 May 2010, Jeroen Op 't Eynde wrote: On Thu, 27 May 2010 18:48:38 +0200, Nilesh Govindarajan li...@itech7.com wrote: On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 10:12 PM, David Lowe da_legit_du...@yahoo.com wrote: I'm new to Arch Linux Linux in general, so please excuse any newbie questions... Can the Arch Linux install do a dualboot installation? I've read some documentation and it seems to be iffy on this point. Also, why are most Linux users and programmers so obsessed with Python? I'd much rather download Euphoria. http://www.rapideuphoria.com If it's a requirement that a Python runtime be on the system, then I'd rather not install at all. Python is an opensource language used by many applications. You may have to install it while installing some desktop environment. As for dual boot, any Linux can be dual booted. If you already have some other Linux, you just need to add the entry for the partiton which contains the Arch kernel into Grub. Maybe just compare the websites... obviously Python wins! :) -- Jeroen Op 't Eynde - jer...@xprsyrslf.be - http://xprsyrslf.be To read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Bottom-posting Steun Jeugdhuis de PUT via Donamail: http://www.donamail.be/default.asp?btnID=iYOviYvW At any rate, there's no reason not to install both euphoria and python. If you're planning on sticking with a distribution like Arch that requires you to `look under the hood', you should get used to working with a variety of programming languages. There's no single language which is perfect for every job. == John K Pate http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/s0930006/ -- The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
Re: [arch-general] dualboot?
On Thu, 27 May 2010 23:17:42 +0200, John K Pate j.k.p...@sms.ed.ac.uk wrote: Maybe just compare the websites... obviously Python wins! :) At any rate, there's no reason not to install both euphoria and python. If you're planning on sticking with a distribution like Arch that requires you to `look under the hood', you should get used to working with a variety of programming languages. There's no single language which is perfect for every job. yes -- Jeroen Op 't Eynde - jer...@xprsyrslf.be - http://xprsyrslf.be To read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Bottom-posting Steun Jeugdhuis de PUT via Donamail: http://www.donamail.be/default.asp?btnID=iYOviYvW
Re: [arch-general] dualboot?
Why wouldn't you install both? On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 5:25 PM, Jeroen Op 't Eynde jer...@xprsyrslf.bewrote: On Thu, 27 May 2010 23:17:42 +0200, John K Pate j.k.p...@sms.ed.ac.uk wrote: Maybe just compare the websites... obviously Python wins! :) At any rate, there's no reason not to install both euphoria and python. If you're planning on sticking with a distribution like Arch that requires you to `look under the hood', you should get used to working with a variety of programming languages. There's no single language which is perfect for every job. yes -- Jeroen Op 't Eynde - jer...@xprsyrslf.be - http://xprsyrslf.be To read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Bottom-posting Steun Jeugdhuis de PUT via Donamail: http://www.donamail.be/default.asp?btnID=iYOviYvW -- Just another system hacker
Re: [arch-general] Strange suspend behaviour
I've set up my system so that when I close the laptop lid the computer goes into suspend mode. However, when I wake it up by pressing the power button the system starts, and after 3-5 sec it goes into suspend mode again. If I then press the power button again, it starts and stays on. Suggestions? Explain what DE you are running and how and what did you set up. Sounds like he's running KDE. The problem that he described is with powerdevil and has already been fixed upstream (but I don't think the current release contains it yet). -- Sven-Hendrik I'm using OpenBox on i686. /etc/acpi/handler.sh is set to react on laptop lid close like so: button/lid) #echo LID switched!/dev/tty5 /usr/sbin/pm-suspend ;; *) logger ACPI group/action undefined: $1 / $2 ;; esac # End of /etc/acpi/handler.sh I'm also having an issue where the fan sometimes goes all guns blazing and runs at 100% (for no reason at all) after awakening from suspend.
Re: [arch-general] [signoff] device-mapper/lvm2 2.02.66 and cryptsetup 1.1.1
Am 27.05.2010 23:08, schrieb Ray Kohler: You need force option for cryptsetup because 1.1.1_rc2-1 sorts as newer than 1.1.1-1: warning: cryptsetup: local (1.1.1_rc2-1) is newer than testing (1.1.1-1) I think I'm not going to add it. The 'force' option introduces some very weird behaviour from what I remember. As the rc2 package was only in testing, it shouldn't be a big deal, testing users should know what they're doing and upgrade manually. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[arch-general] test
Sorry for this useless message. testing some service.
Re: [arch-general] dualboot?
Python is powerful, easier to learn/read/write(compare to perl), lightful(compare to C++/Java), thats why python is sexy. Dual-boot linuxs is never a problem to grub, i guess that why never any document got such topic detailed, all you need to do is to modify /boot/grub/menu.lst, even not at all, you may press 'C' in grub menu and run into the grub shell, and type commands to boot the the other kernel. On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 5:30 AM, audioslave10152 audioslave10...@gmail.comwrote: Why wouldn't you install both? On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 5:25 PM, Jeroen Op 't Eynde jer...@xprsyrslf.be wrote: On Thu, 27 May 2010 23:17:42 +0200, John K Pate j.k.p...@sms.ed.ac.uk wrote: Maybe just compare the websites... obviously Python wins! :) At any rate, there's no reason not to install both euphoria and python. If you're planning on sticking with a distribution like Arch that requires you to `look under the hood', you should get used to working with a variety of programming languages. There's no single language which is perfect for every job. yes -- Jeroen Op 't Eynde - jer...@xprsyrslf.be - http://xprsyrslf.be To read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Bottom-posting Steun Jeugdhuis de PUT via Donamail: http://www.donamail.be/default.asp?btnID=iYOviYvW -- Just another system hacker -- Arch Linuxer, Pythoner, Geek -- Blog: http://apt-blog.net
[arch-general] how to test kde
Hi, How can i test KDE beta in arch? Do i have to compile everything or is there a beta software repo available for testing? Thanks, Papul
Re: [arch-general] how to test kde
On 28/05/10 13:08, papul wrote: Hi, How can i test KDE beta in arch? Do i have to compile everything or is there a beta software repo available for testing? Thanks, Papul If you are prepared for breakage... enable the [kde-unstable] repo: http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=97899
Re: [arch-general] test
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 7:58 AM, papul mkakati2...@gmail.com wrote: Sorry for this useless message. testing some service. You're send a test message to 500-1000 people on a mailing list. Idiotic. Create a mail account on another provider and test your thing. Don't annoy us. Mr. Aaron may ban you if you do this once more. -- Nilesh Govindarajan Facebook: nilesh.gr Twitter: nileshgr Website: www.itech7.com
Re: [arch-general] Configuring Arch to only use a single interface and not probe for another netowrking interface?
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 2:10 AM, Ionut Biru biru.io...@gmail.com wrote: On 05/27/2010 11:22 PM, Keith Hinton wrote: Hi all, The subject should spell it out, but what I'm wondering is if there is any way to force Arch to not probe for say eth0 when eth1 is prefered over eth0 and such? Thanks for any help on that question! Basically eth0 is my laptop's ethernet card, while eth1 is the wireless card. While the wireless card is used specifically for Internet connection, the wired is never used at all. I have my laptop configured through the use of netCFG to handle the wireless to make it a bit faster to configure. While that is the case, I would prefer that only that eth1 is used, and would like to see eht0 disappear totally from the list of detected network interfaces if Arches kernel is flexible enough to do this. If anyone could get back to me I would appreciate it very much. you can disable it from rc.conf by adding a ! in front of eth0 like this: INTERFACES=(!eth0 eth1) -- Ionut Agreed you don't use the device, but its weird disabling that. I wouldn't do that. Just ignore it. You never know which thing will come to use when. PS: No offence meant. -- Nilesh Govindarajan Facebook: nilesh.gr Twitter: nileshgr Website: www.itech7.com
Re: [arch-general] test
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 09:21:07AM +0530, Nilesh Govindarajan wrote: On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 7:58 AM, papul mkakati2...@gmail.com wrote: Sorry for this useless message. testing some service. You're send a test message to 500-1000 people on a mailing list. Idiotic. Create a mail account on another provider and test your thing. Don't annoy us. Mr. Aaron may ban you if you do this once more. -- Nilesh Govindarajan Facebook: nilesh.gr Twitter: nileshgr Website: www.itech7.com Jesus... calm down man. Mr Aaron... really? -- Andres P
Re: [arch-general] cdrtools again... yay! - Was: Burning From Command Line
This used to be about free sharing of code, but now we need lawyers involved just to do that? Whenever a lawyer is involved, there is certainly no freedom, just random blabla that nobody understands. I think you've hit the nail on the head there, Thomas. We should never lose sight of basic values, whatever stones the world puts in our way.
