Re: [arch-general] How to take screenshot of ring switcher ?
What if we're elitist and don't want newbies like you switching to Linux The ml is not the place for you to be a jackass. Take it elsewhere *gasp* How long till this whole community just figures it hates itself and vaporizes to dust? I'll be there and fuel the vaporizer.
Re: [arch-general] HAL dependencies
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 16:22:28 -0700, Rob Bean papab...@gmail.com wrote: Has anyone else stripped HAL completely out of their Arch install? Thats exactly why heresy was started. ( http://hereticlinux.org/ ) Its archlinux minus hal/dbus/rapekit. Search the list for Whats wrong with dbus anyway under the thread xf86-input-evdev conflicts with xorg-server. Remove xorg-server Also gnomies please read that thread before responding to this messages again. It has all been said, and settled.
Re: [arch-general] Problems with ifplugd and net-auto-wired
On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 05:57:36 +0100, Sebastian Köhler sebkoeh...@whoami.org.uk wrote: I've two problems with ifplugd and net-auto-wired. When ifplugd is started during boot my speakers make a weird and very loud moep sound. When started from a console after boot no such sound occurs. Intel and via sound chips have a tendency to make noise in some conditions like acpi wakeup, or sudden power drop in weak laptops. Try to blacklist your sound driver and load it after whatever causes the noise. Never read about anything but a plop noise, so not sure if that's related.
[arch-general] tcp ack Traffic shaping
Apparantly i chose the wrong IPS. My upload is extremly tiny. When i upload something with only 5kb, my dowload rate dies. I assume that's because Acks don't get through in time. Anyone got an idea how to give those priority?
Re: [arch-general] mail client
On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 01:24:30 -0500, andrew james and...@systemssingular.com wrote: has anyone else a funky thunderbird vers 3? yes, see some older thread on the ML. any switch values to cause it to work quicker? enabling offline reading seems to fix some of my issues alternatively, what is your favoured mail news client for POP3, IMAP, Syndicates, news groups NNTP, all in one? I want a better program. after i had to abandon thundersuck, i tried quite a lot of alternatives. Here is an incomplete wiki entry on usable muas from a heresy perspective: http://hereticlinux.org/wiki/email
Re: [arch-general] A suggestion for the devs regarding rebuilds
On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 13:08:10 -0500, Jeff Horelick jdho...@gmail.com wrote: if someone actually posts patches or other constructive stuff, please CC me. We're rewriting pacman anyway and looking for a solution to handle this mess in particular. Right now the only idea i got is versioned deps which is sort of flawed since that would assert a certain awareness upstream. And if we had that, we didnt have the problem in the first place... maybe there is a smarter way to force update of packages that would break when their dependencies are updated. -- Arvid
[arch-general] anyone maintaining a fixed QGtkStyle?
Hi, i was wondering if anyone maintained a QGtkStyle for use outside gnome. Would be duplicated work and i guess i'm not the only one who uses gtk styles but not gnome. -- Arvid
Re: [arch-general] anyone maintaining a fixed QGtkStyle?
On Sat, 6 Feb 2010 17:32:32 -0500, Jim Pryor lists+arch-gene...@jimpryor.net wrote: There's a qgtkstyle-svn in AUR. Is it broken? its outdated. QGtkStyle is now part of qt, so its harder to maintain the non-gnome patch. But thanks for posting. Reading from the comments, it seems a suprisingly high amount of people ran into the problem. Upstream claims its a minor glitch affecting very very few people. (from an ubuntu perspective maybe... *sigh*) Going to maintain the patch downstream in heresy. -- Arvid
Re: [arch-general] Mounting tmpfs on /dev. Why?
AlannY, Recently, I've found that Arch mounts tmpfs on /dev. And, as you may see, this makes big problem to some applications. i'd call it annoyance, but i cant see big problems for the typical arch user who are loving udev/hal/etc.. Is there anything particular you are experiencing issues with? This mount is not placed in /etc/fstab. So, I think this is done by some of init scripts. Welcome to archlinux, Violating unix standards while claiming the oposite. We're loving it. I've looked at the /etc/rc.d folder and grep mount `find`. But nothing interesting found. Its stuffed with other nuisances into /etc/rc.sysinit I really don't want to mount tmpfs on /dev. How to don't do it? Remove the line from the init. Or use heresy alltogether. Read the script. If you dont know what it does, dont touch it and post some actual bugs to the arch devs. -- Arvid
Re: [arch-general] An old, tiresome discussion: cdrtools vs cdrkit
On 01/28/2010 10:15 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote: I cannot use a license that is missinterpreted by too many people and that for this reason is used to attack the project. like, the CDDL? Seriously, you should have seen that comming. Debian has a Master degree in Gnu zealotery and disinformation. Glad you're on the move to cluebat some people finally. -- Arvid
Re: [arch-general] Mounting tmpfs on /dev. Why?
On 02/04/2010 02:33 PM, Thomas Bächler wrote: I'd like you to find any modern Linux distribution that doesn't do it this way. Good luck with that. HereticLinux :P
Re: [arch-general] dark themes (was 2 Killer kde4 dark themes - DR you listening??)
On 01/19/2010 08:09 PM, Dimitrios Apostolou wrote: sorry for hijacking your thread but speaking of dark themes, I have been looking for ages for a nice reverse theme for gtk+ but every single one I remember wasn't perfect... Anyone 100% happy with a reverse theme? i like NOX from murrine-themes-collection, couldnt say if its perfect, since i only have like 2 gui apps, but it looks very polished to me. Works fine on qt apps too. And most importantly, how the /heck/ do you handle the *bright* *white* pages of the web... I'd tried creating a custom CSS for me, but it broke too many pages... with proper environment light. i find that only unbearable at night when i turned the lights off already. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] Quoting of E-mails
On Mon, 11 Jan 2010 21:33:20 -0700, Steve Holmes steve.holme...@gmail.com wrote: If bottom-posting is so passionately desirable, then may I suggest people trim down the history of a thread. One is supposed to add their answer to the bottom of the _quote_ not the mail. People who do otherwise are indeed worse then top-posters. Of course interlacing replies with quoted text makes a lot of sense when you have multiple issues or questions being asked. It makes sense for multiple _statements_. That's why you put statements in paragraphs. Anyway, just my thoughts, not trying to war or any of that, just trying to see the proes and cons of e-mail styles. With improper quoting style, you have to extract the history of a discussion from the thread view and content combined. With proper quoting, only the current mail view is enough. It doesn't matter if you top or bottom post in that regard, but bottom posting seems to make sense in a western culture where we read logs from top to bottom. Not sure why some people are so nazi on top posting when improper quoting and me too posts are the actual problem.
Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] Cron
On 01/06/2010 12:03 AM, Jim Pryor wrote: Hi this is the author of yacron again. I've just heard from Matt Dillon, he says he's happy for me to take over development and maintainership of dcron. Congratulation. That's good news. I liked Yacron for maintaining minimalism while still meeting modern requirements (i.e. laptops). Keep it that way, will you ;) -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] KDE 4.4 + pnm2ppa + CUPS
On 01/02/2010 05:35 PM, Lars Tennstedt wrote: I can print with Firefox, GIMP, OpenOffice and GNOME applications but I cannot still with KDE 4 or Qt 4 applications. please check if pure qt applications work, such as opera. If not, how does the failure ocure? -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] KDE 4.4 + pnm2ppa + CUPS
On 01/02/2010 09:20 PM, Lars Tennstedt wrote: Qt4 applications behave like KDE4 applications. The printer recognizes the job and all it prints is a blank paper, sometimes with headline but always without the body. Does the same failure appear when printing to pdf? Also please try the following test: cd /tmp/ mkdir bla cd bla wget http://codepad.org/UggpuBz4/raw.cpp qmake -project qmake make ./bla and tell if it prints Hello world as expected. If not, please try a clean not downstream patched version of qt ( heresy has unfortunately only 4.6.0 as arch package, which according to arch devs breaks kde right now. http://hereticlinux.org/repo/i686/qt-4.6.0-3-i686.pkg.tar.gz ) finally, if that fails, please report a bug upstream, including your detailed cups setup and the above testcase. http://bugreports.qt.nokia.com thanks -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] What ISO will load a kernel in an AMD K62/450?
On 12/28/2009 03:39 AM, David C. Rankin wrote: Guys, After the recent discussion about arch working well on old hardware, I decided to dump a suse 10.3 install on an old AMD K6-2/450 and install arch on it. I downloaded the net install iso i686. I knew if it was truly i686 it wouldn't install -- and it didn't. My question is which Arch download, if any, can install on this old hardware. (currently a great little fax server, backup DNS/dhcp box and 40G of storage.) Any help (or the right link) would be appreciated. Compile it yourself then (abs is trivial) or if you are too lazy: http://vectorlinux.com/ is similar to arch (slightly more slackware biased ) and runs on i386 -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] What ISO will load a kernel in an AMD K62/450?
On 12/28/2009 03:58 PM, nez...@allurelinux.org wrote: Could you fix your date or whatever is wrong with your setup: huh thanks. didn't notice. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] A universal Operating System API - why don't we have it?
On 12/21/2009 01:31 PM, Frédéric Perrin wrote: Le lundi 21 à 18:57, Laurie Clark-Michalek a écrit : And on the anal sex point... actually, I think it'd be better for the convocation as a whole if we dropped that analogy. Is that what they call a Freudian slip? I laughed. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] A universal Operating System API - why don't we have it?
On 12/18/2009 01:26 AM, Damien Churchill wrote: Isn't this what POSIX was, albeit quite old now, but still a standard? imagine that: some people out there still think posix is THE standard and people should read the spec BEFORE reimplementing basics in the name of making things cross platform. even windows gains more posix implementation every version. The only ones actually going slowly AWAY from the standard are the GNUs. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] speaking of Thunderbird 3.X - great new thread summary view
On 12/17/2009 07:20 AM, Dan Martins wrote: I believe that the messages need to be indexed before you will get the new thread summary view, or whatever you want to call it. yeah exactly my suspecion. Looks like i never get a stable index here. probably because 1) i have over 120K messages 2) i disabled their new offline sync thing which both is likely an supported use case. unfortunately i can't reach their bugzilla. times out... -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] Inkscape maintainer MIA?
Allan McRae wrote: The comment two below that starts From what I can tell, that patch is horrendously incorrect. I have never heard horrendously incorrect describe a good patch before... shows why we disagree on patches. The proposed patch may compile, but the abi break had a reason and casting it away won't get you very far. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] speaking of Thunderbird 3.X - great new thread summary view
On 12/15/2009 11:43 PM, Ng Oon-Ee wrote: It doesn't display '3-4' lines, it's the first sentence or so, you see 3-4 lines because of the screen width. I don't even get any sentences, just the ... (literally I see 3 dots per message) as mentioned above. Looks like I'm alone on this... same here. are you on imap? might be related to the imap offline index being broken. Random guess, though. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] Inkscape maintainer MIA?
Hussam Al-Tayeb wrote: On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 12:01 +0200, Marti Raudsepp wrote: Hi arch-general, I'd like to point your attention to the Inkscape package: Inkscape version 0.47 was released on November 25. This is a very significant release that many Inkscape users have been waiting patiently. However, the Arch Linux Inkscape maintainer, Tobias Kieslich, seems to be missing in action. Looking at his FlySpray activity, his last comment seems to be dated November 18. Can anyone please look into resolving this? Regards, Marti 0.47 fails to build with a poppler error :/ and more. i'd be happy if someone can magically fix it. We're waiting for a compiling one too. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] [OT] What is wrong with DBus anyway?
Arvid Picciani wrote: Sounds like either this discussion is worth discussing again. i forgot to add: or you're a rare exception, Jan. thanks for at least trying to see the point here, much aprechiated. i hope others follow. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] [*] Re: conclusion: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
Heiko Baums wrote: If yes hal/dbus wouldn't do any harm, too. Nobody detains you from using the keyboard. Just for the sake of proving the legatimicity of this project for those who still didnt get it: as an example. do you follow the irc channel? Somone just triggered the qgtkstyle bug that makes it assert when you dont run dbus and gconf. But you can't do that, as it conflicts with other software. fixing the bug on the other hand breaks gnome. I can provide the fix in antidesktop, as the users arent expected to run gnome. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] [*] Re: conclusion: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
Heiko Baums wrote: Do you know what a bug report is and what it is for? http://bugreports.qt.nokia.com/browse/QTBUG-5545 this is an upstream bug, and a workaround inaproppriate to apply to archs main repo, as i said. Please read mails entirely and assume good faith and intelligence, as i try to do. ( i know i fail at it from time to time, but i promise to try harder ) -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] [OT] What is wrong with DBus anyway?
Aaron Griffin wrote: Mechanisms have existed for like 20 years before dbus to communicate with other programs. and those don't require a user space daemon. dbus is just another way to do it that has a smell of architecture astronomy - as if they all scoffed at the actual ways to do IPC on various Unicies and said Oh, I can design better. Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly. – Henry Spencer That's why I dislike it. +1 I'll add some additional points: - it's implementation is large broken. - most software depending on it, will crash when dbus crashes, or fail to start uncracefully, or behave unexpected. - some systems are actually not supported by hal while they are by udev and have system-v IPCs. - reinventing the wheel and calling it super-boat-2000 isn't going to help anyone. Instead of fixing problems, people constantly create new ones. - FDO is hierarchic and polical level. Dbus is hierarchic on technical level. FDO wishes to provide a better experience to users by integrating all software nicely into one global truth. The Foss ecosystem is not hierarchic. The Foss ecosystem does not require a single truth to rule them all. The Foss ecosystem does not require to be competitive with OtherOs. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] [OT] What is wrong with DBus anyway?
Nathan Wayde wrote: what does any of that have to do with dbus in a technical sense? There are multiple incorrect answers to this. I'm going to chicken out of this argument, until someone proofreads my essay on this topic. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
[arch-general] peaceful suggestion to clarify the arch way to avoid this to happen AGAIN
Allan McRae wrote: I personally think your mis-reading the Arch Way. So another person who mistakes the use of simplicity for minimalism. I thought we had been through that many, many times. Can we, independently of the technical details of dbus, agree all, that I and some other people have been interpreting the arch way wrong? If yes, can we please change the wiki to reflect that? i suggest removing the words minimalistic and unix like from http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/The_Arch_Way also possibly A freshly installed Arch Linux system contains only basic core components as the definition of basic is unclear. additionaly i propose that a conclusion to this whole thing is noted on the page, that says something like: Archlinux is optimized, to work well with all desktops, not just one, including that it will not sacrifice commonly available desktop software for the sake of simplicity. It's very fuzzy, as i try not to offend anyone again. maybe more concrete: As an example: there have been ongoing discussions to sacrifice feature X,Y for the advantage of commandline or antidesktop users, and to the disadvantage of desktop users. This is not what archlinux is about, as we want to provide a good user experience for the largest possible user base I prefer a clear this distro is not for you, go away over we share your mindset. maybe. or maybe not.. and this would have helped to avoid this situation alltogether. Thank you. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] peaceful suggestion to clarify the arch way to avoid this to happen AGAIN
Ng Oon-Ee wrote: I actually think the you've been over-focusing on a single part of the 'arch way', that its 'all about' minimalism. then i suggest we remove the statement that it is all about minimalism. Throughout this thread the vibe I've been getting for you is that you somehow feel disadvantaged and biased-against because dbus/hal exist and are selected as options in building general-purpose binaries. I feel in fact like wasting my time. I am a very simple person. I understand fuck you very well and can handle it, other things like blurry project goals make me act stupid. Why is Arch not for the minimalist user? Because it was officially stated by two arch devs that it is not. Because dbus/hal are enabled in some packages in binary? Because its philosophy does not match. That goes way deeper then arguing vim vs emacs. Please, can we stop beating it now, and just officialy tell minimalists to fuck off so everyone can stop wasting their time? -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] peaceful suggestion to clarify the arch way to avoid this to happen AGAIN
f...@kokkinizita.net wrote: On Fri, Dec 04, 2009 at 12:08:29AM +0100, Arvid Picciani wrote: Please, can we stop beating it now, and just officialy tell minimalists to fuck off so everyone can stop wasting their time? Bad spelling and foul language. Yeah once again i fail at not offending anyone... suggest better wording please. this honestly not feeling offensive for me, and i'm incapable of doing it your way. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] peaceful suggestion to clarify the arch way to avoid this to happen AGAIN
Sébastien Leblanc wrote: Please, stop filling my inbox with useless junk. Please use the kill thread option of your MUA. Messages like this aren't helping anyone, and are especcialy not helping to minimize the thread length. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] peaceful suggestion to clarify the arch way to avoid this to happen AGAIN
Heiko Baums wrote: Show me a more minimalist distribution than Arch and Gentoo. I guess you won't find one. And if you did I suggest you switching to this distro. This is the entire reason i want arch to officialy state that these users are not welcome. I want to move on, so we can split up the user bases. Ultimately so both sides can continue their life without the constant (and i'm meaning constant. this isnt the first time this discussion exploded) need to reevaluate if arch should do this or that. If Arch doesn't fit your needs then choose another distro or build one by yourself. It's done. All i want is to settle this in a useful way. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] [OT] What is wrong with DBus anyway?
Pierre Chapuis wrote: Take gedit for example. It is a text editor, and: [23:44 TA|catwell] ldd $(which gedit) | grep dbus libdbus-glib-1.so.2 = /usr/lib/libdbus-glib-1.so.2 (0x7f5df48bb000) libdbus-1.so.3 = /usr/lib/libdbus-1.so.3 (0x7f5df467c000) AFAIK it uses dbus only to communicate with itself (between its instances). There is no iteroperability problem, so D-Bus is not that useful to me. But then again, maybe I don't know how gedit works well enough to judge... funny thing: gedit is the first time i noticed the problem. then i went emacs, and now emacs depends on dbus. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] peaceful suggestion to clarify the arch way to avoid this to happen AGAIN
Heiko Baums wrote: So why do you continue ranting about Arch? I tried not to. All i wanted is a clear cut, but i think i'm alone with that wish, so i'll stop beating it. You're the ones who'll have to deal with this procedure over and over again (not with me. no worries) -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] [OT] What is wrong with DBus anyway?
On Thu, Dec 03, 2009 at 10:04:16PM -0200, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto wrote: The *Kit family maybe could be replaced by a good set of ACLs, but even that can be problematic, as not all the concepts that are configured by PolicyKit or ConsoleKit are files. And the Unix security model of Users/Groups/Others is not very flexible, beyond some simple cases. Let me illustrate the problem here by construction an argument with a similar flaw: The mouse is inflexible and should be deprecated, as a stylus has the advantage of being cordless. All modern pointing devices should be cordless and i think these mouse users are just from the 60s. f...@kokkinizita.net wrote: It's a lot more flexible than you'd imagine. It has been used with success to manage systems with thousands of users. If that is possible, do you really think that a managing a simple personal computer requires anything new ? It all adds up. Been on one of their conferences? A man with my patience can easily go into stabbing mode there. The amount of clueless people clearly outnumbered any available resources to cluebat them. Eternal September is a pattern, not an event. Someone is propably going to whine about me being offensive again, so i added cake: not. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] [OT] What is wrong with DBus anyway?
Ng Oon-Ee wrote: What does upstream have to say about this dependency? Does not seem 'necessary' to me http://blogs.igalia.com/itoral/2006/03/30/adding-dbus-support-to-gedit/ priceless finding. let me sum up: - There is feature X which works very well - He discovered it doesn't use dbus. - He starts work on a very complicated patch that makes it use dbus. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] [OT] What is wrong with DBus anyway?
Denis A. Altoé Falqueto wrote: 2009/12/4 Arvid Picciani a...@exys.org: http://blogs.igalia.com/itoral/2006/03/30/adding-dbus-support-to-gedit/ priceless finding. let me sum up: - There is feature X which works very well - He discovered it doesn't use dbus. - He starts work on a very complicated patch that makes it use dbus. As I understand it, the complexity was related to the fact that GEdit didn't had DBus support. Of course the first patch will be complex and replace a working functionality, but for now on, GEdit can expose events and functions to _any_ other application through DBus. Just because nobody is using right now, doesn't mean that it will never be useful. Correct me if i'm wrong, but i read that as: - THe argument is valid - but irrelevant because the positive side is some feature no one needs. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] peaceful suggestion to clarify the arch way to avoid this to happen AGAIN
Arvid Picciani wrote: It's done. All i want is to settle this in a useful way. Nathan Wayde wrote: I originally identified you as a poisonous person and you just keep confirming my theory. a I found a problem b I made aware of the problem c I have provided patches d I have provided packages e I have expressed the wish to find a way that suits both sides f You accuse me of being poisonous. I'm a strong person, but there are things i am not capable of just letting go. Calling someone who drives the very foundation You spit on poisonous is a very sad new addition to the foss world. Usually I'd take such insult with a grain of salt and swallow it, but seeing that You are backed by a very large amount of people, it might be wise to just accept that I'm not welcome anymore, in a world I once helped creating. Maybe I'm like a father who can't let his kids go, and i am indeed poisonous in a way that i deny the kids to make their own mistakes. For the time being, good luck on your journey. Just remember that the cake is a lie. /s/ Arvid
Re: [arch-general] Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
Ng Oon-Ee wrote: All this 'fork this fork that' threatening is really quite sad. A fork is not a threat. It's a suggestion to resolve problems outside the current project politics. I can't see why anyone would be offended by this. I know its common in open source and linux in particular, but I certainly don't see threatening a fork and dilution of resources as in an way beneficial to Arch as a distro Me neither. Where did i say that? and to us individually as users. It would be beneficial to the other us users which doesnt include you, but me. Which is why i have made suggestions to another user part of this other us. Not to your us. I see dbus/hal and the rest of this bloat as part of a good user experience. This is a difference in opinion, not a heresy. That's nice for you. You are welcome to get packages of abs and reconfigure them to add non upstream features, if you like them. Having said all that, contributing the appropriate packages to the AUR is a very good initiative. Expand the choice of the user, I know some, maybe many, agree with you on minimalism w.r.t dbus/hal/the like. Forking is ridiculous and non-practical, I already maintain a 50% fork. The remaining act is merely political. Obviously i will not bother to maintain a website and stuff if no one else cares contributing. and it would be better for everyone involved in Arch if its not used as a proverbial hammer to get one's way. I'm very sure my previous mail does not have any effect on the devs decision to follow their own founder or not. My hope is that it has an effect of users, so we can, in the event of failure, gather together and rebuild arch outside of the current project politics. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
Arvid Picciani wrote: Aaron Griffin wrote: If you have legitimate, actionable fixes for anything you take issue with, please post them to the bug tracker. Until then, this is just hot air. I take that as an invite to post packages to the tracker that adhere to the arch way. If this turns out to be another false promise, i will add that to the next iteration. please comment on: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/17346 summary: 1) I suggested reverting the dbus configure flag to upstream default. 2) Jan de Groot closed the bug with WONTFIX since this revert WILL break some third party gui configure util. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
Jan de Groot wrote: Now you're propably saying numbers of downstream decisions doesn't say anything. Very true, which is why i prefer arguing about intent a...@andariel: ~ grep Maintainer /var/abs/core/dbus-core/PKGBUILD # Maintainer: Jan de Groot j...@archlinux.org and bias So, just because I'm the maintainer of a package that is required for a lot of the packages I maintain makes me biased. Please read from top to down. This grep was to prove intent. It is in fact, not required for alot of packages upstream, and especially there is no valid reason to put it in core. we do specifically enable config-dbus, but dbus is a dependency anyways: indeed, i am wrong on this one. hal is already upstream default. a...@andariel: ~ (for i in $(grep Jan de Groot /var/abs/ -r | cut -d ':' -f 1 | cut -d '/' -f 5); do if (pacman -Si $i | grep gnome /dev/null); then echo $i; fi; done) | wc -l 149 Ooh, so I'm the GNOME maintainer, what next? please don't quote out of context. this statement was to prove your bias towards gnome, which in combination with the above dbus-core point, shows why this is a problem. I never even installed Ubuntu on any system, how can I prefer it? Arch has thousands of packages that need to work together, sometimes you can't stick to your so called unix philosophy. Thank's for confirming once again that you do NOT wish to follow unix philosophy. This was indeed, the entire point of this rant. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
Jan de Groot wrote: Dbus support in wpa-supplicant is not broken. A not working networkmanager is broken. We have to make a choice here, and having broken software isn't the right choice, is it? dbus is indeed broken. so its a different tradeof then you suggest. Additionaly, i don't intent to argue about that. My point is that the idea of archlinux is not centered around the gnome desktop, but rather around upstream defaults. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
Jan de Groot wrote: Ah, so my intent is to put dbus support in every possible package in the repository. This is in fact what i claim. Am I convicted now? What's the sentence? That you read and reflect on the ideas archlinux was built on. One of your removed patches is one that integrates use of ca-certificates in qt instead of the bundled certificates. Ok you got me there. This IS a fix. It didn't work on 4.6 so i didn't bother investigating what it actually does. Sorry, my fault. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
Allan McRae wrote: While I am at it, lets see why your arguements just grepping for enable|disable etc are idiotic. Take the gcc PKGBUILD: i have pointed out myself that those do not form a valid argument. Trying to disprove my other points by doing that _again_ does not work. I personally think your mis-reading the Arch Way. We do not patch to add features that are not supported upstream but I have never seen anything mentioned about using minimal configure flags. Let me quote the arch way 2.0 which has a very nice condensed statement that does in fact support minimalism: without unnecessary additions, modifications, or complications Simplicity is the primary principle. All other principles must be sacrificed in favor of design simplicity. Implementation simplicity is more important than interface simplicity. Please provide an interpretaton of this statement that does support enabling features for the sake of interface simplicity, breaking design simplicity in the process. So you filed bug reports about this? I can, for the sake of disarming that as counter argument. I can't see how this adds anything to the original points though. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
Ng Oon-Ee wrote: Design simplicity? How is --enable-dbus less simple than --disable-dbus or the equivalents? My argument was --enable-dbus vs ie the defaults. Simplicity isn't a hammer with which to attack every package that doesn't conform to minimalism by your definition. Yes you can. Otherwise what is there difference between arch and ubuntu or whatever your prefered desktop os is? Are you suggesting the removal of KDE/Gnome from the repos? Because to disable dbus would require:- a) Parallel packages be maintained with dbus enabled for usage of gnome and the like packages OR b) Gnome and the like will have to be moved to AUR/community since they would need recompiling some core packages for dbus support. I suggest fixing them instead, so they compile with the default options of their dependencies. Preferable fixing them upstream of course. Neither of the options seems much like design simplicity to me. I have provided a way that confirms with the arch way. It would be good if the UNIX way (tm) or the Arch Way (tm) is not treated as some kind of religious doctrine. It is what arch is based on. I can't see why people who follow some projects root ideas have to leave the project because somone else has other ideas. Systems evolve and grow, and the desktop does as well, thankfully. And thankfully they grow beyond your gnome/kde world :) -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
Heiko Baums wrote: There is a second option regarding your dbus/wpa_supplicant example. Why not file a bug report/feature request to upstream of networkmanager to remove dbus from it? Of course you need to file this bug report/feature request to upstream of every package which depends on dbus. As soon as dbus is removed from every package or made optional at runtime then you could reopen this bug report/feature request to Arch again. Otherwise it's better to keep the optional dbus support in wpa_supplicant. This is a VERY good point. I shall do that. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
Piyush P Kurur wrote: I am curious. What desktop do you use Arvid ? None at all. I used one of these desktops (kde3) a few years ago because terminals started to age and lack modern features. But then the antidesktop movement has lifted keyboard centric user experience to a modern level, basicly bringing everything i like about unix together with the good parts of the modern world. Now i'm running xmonad, with a mix of gui (gimp,inkscape,browser) and non gui applications (basicly everything that makes sense to be used with a keyboard) -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] conclusion: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
Piyush P Kurur wrote: I use xmonad and share your dislike for hal/dbus. This however does not justify not having a decent PnP particulary it would ... when you want to install it for non-experts. .. if what i THOUGHT archlinux is about (experts) was true. However you appear to agree that this is not the case (anymore?). To my eyes Arch has been quite snappy and minimalist, as you can read on this thread, that isn't actually a goal. I'm not sure WHAT it's goals are anymore, but i have been educated that it is NOT about: - power users - minimalism switch from Debian stable on my laptop. It is definitely far better than the monstrosity of Ubuntu or Fedora. I dont know how you find it otherwise. err yeah,.. i guess if you have other distros as comparison, arch feels like cake :D -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] conclusion: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
Thomas Bächler wrote: Apologize for being an asshole. I have not intended to insult arch developers, and i apologize if i did,.. You can either apologize to me now or STFU to everyone but you, just to anger you. and get yourself another distro well i guess that settles any ultimatum prematurely. - preferably one whose developers like being insulted like this. like what? maybe you are feeling insecure about it? There is a saying in my native language that goes like: Dogs only bite if you hit their spot. The other devs at least managed to respond in professional and calm way, which ultimately convinced me that they are right. I consider such statements an insult whine more... that's sure going to save your image. but because Arch is very different from either of those and I am quite proud of that and insecure. and I will not tolerate such statements. my address is publicly available. go find me? -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] conclusion: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
Piyush P Kurur wrote: Okey so you agree that Arch != Ubuntu. Now we have a way forward. heh yeah, sorry, that comparison is rather childish. I regret i responded to Thomas mail... Arvid's reply to me made me search for antidesktop (I did not know about such a movement) i have no idea how official that term is. its used by various projects to denote not centered around traditional windows desktop ideas and I find this xorg-server-antidesktop 1.6.1.1 yeah for example that. in AUR. Whatever happended to it I do not know. Arvid can you start maintainning it yes. in fact i just have to publish my local repository. and may be give it the status that if finally makes to the official Arch repository ? I'm uncertain about how to handle this right now. It would require a mediator for me to contribute to arch as i am incapable of finding common ground. You sound like you are able to do that? You dont have to fork Arch for that. yeah, a custom repo would work i think. I'd just grab official packages and remove stuff anyway. I for one would definitely use this instead of the standard xorg-server with hal/dbus as I have always been a xmonad + xterm + screen user. I think there is nothing wrong in having two xorg-server packages besides anitdesktop sounds so cool. well the work certainly is cool :D but it's a serious HCI concern brought up here. I think the original author of that phrase did write a good article about it, if i remember correctly. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] conclusion: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
Thomas Bächler wrote: I consider such statements an insult Sorry Thomas, my response was retarded. can you help me find another term i should use to denote the desktop idea, that is not offensive? I'll propably need it for further discussion, and prefer NOT to piss of people. gnomies mouse users etc is all the same level of offensiveness. I lack ideas here. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
[arch-general] custom repo guide?
Hey, can you link me to a manual on custom repositories? I couldn't find anything on the wiki. Specifically what needs to be done on the server side to maintain the package index. Looks like that is all that's needed for a repo, is it? thanks. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] custom repo guide?
Allan McRae wrote: Arvid Picciani wrote: Hey, can you link me to a manual on custom repositories? I couldn't find anything on the wiki. Specifically what needs to be done on the server side to maintain the package index. Looks like that is all that's needed for a repo, is it? thanks. http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Custom_local_repository_with_ABS_and_gensync#Custom_local_repository cake! thanks. any idea how to build packages for a repo in bulk though? preferable even with more generic make options then my workstation would have. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
[arch-general] ArchLinux AntiDesktop (was: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises)
http://heresy.asgaartech.com/ Let me know if this solution works for everyone and/or if anyone is offended by anything on that site or the fact that it exists and/or if anything should be added to it. Contributors very welcome :) -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] ArchLinux AntiDesktop
Aaron Griffin wrote: On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 12:19 PM, Arvid Picciani a...@exys.org wrote: http://heresy.asgaartech.com/ Let me know if this solution works for everyone and/or if anyone is offended by anything on that site or the fact that it exists and/or if anything should be added to it. Contributors very welcome :) This is exactly in the spirit of the whole arch community thing. glad i finally did understand some parts of it :D As an FYI, I may use your xorg-server package myself (I won't have to recompile it myself). The only change you made is to disable the hal stuff? The sole reason I still have an xorg.conf is so I can turn that option (AutoAddDevices) off. X detects my machine just fine except for that. Would you mind throwing the PKGBUILDs you use up there as well? of course. they are available on the linked bitbucket project. http://bitbucket.org/aep/arch-antidesktop/src/tip/xorg-server/PKGBUILD -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] custom repo guide?
Aaron Griffin wrote: You know, I tried making a script to do this and it ended up going no where. The intent was to use makechrootpkg (from devtools) to build packages in a chroot and consequently install the package to the chroot when completed. The only stipulation was that you needed to manually specify the build order and do the dep stuff manually. I'd suggest making a dumb script to just call makechrootpkg repeatedly. If you're doing deps, then order matters, if not, then a simple loop like so would work: for pkg in pkgbuilds/*; do pushd $pkg makechrootpkg -c /path/to/chroot #or whatever popd done Nice. mkchrootpkg appears to be exactly what i need. I'm going to do that, thanks. I guess i have it a little easier with the dependencies, since i can pull almost all of them from upstream binaries. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] [*] Re: conclusion: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
Piyush P Kurur wrote: On Thu, Dec 03, 2009 at 01:54:10AM +0530, Raghavendra Prabhu wrote: One thing I don't understand here is - why people crib that package B should not have feature X. If you don't want that, ABS is for that. There are plenty of packages which have additional dependencies like that mplayer(like smbclient) or vlc(hal :) or lua). I don't think it is about not having a feature X. For example I think PnP is a worthwhile feature to have. But many do not like hal/dbus. Again the counter argument is that disabling hal/dbus is just an additional line in xorg.conf. Point well taken but if we can compile xorg-server package without hal/dbus enabled and then whomsoever wants to use hal/dbus make a small change in xorg.conf to facilitate it (I dont know whether this is possible) I would prefer such an xorg-server. Again it is purely my preference. Such an xorg-server, I think will be both ``minimalist'' and ``featurefull'' whatever those terms mean. I blame this one on the upstream. Leaving X dead with default config and no dbus started is one of the worst solutions they could have come up with. Similar, my main argument against dbus is based on the fact that software will fail when configured but not run with dbus. i dont want my software crashing because it requires a defect user space dameon for features i dont want anyway is signifcantly different to: i dont like feature X is wasting 2kb ram But this is a free world and people are free to ignore the difference. Finally, true anti-desktop is using lynx or watching mplayer with ascii renderer :) , all in virtual terminal(with directfb if required) Yes many prefer lynx/w3m/elinks/edbrowse over other webbrowsers. But saying that anti-desktop means mplayer with ascii is just streatching it a bit too much. If you use screen + xterm + xmonad then you will, I hope, see the advantage of not using gnome/kde. The general ignorance towards power user setups might explain why people describe us as old timers who can't get along with change or ricers funny thing is that the wimp desktop didnt change in 20 years while antidesktop brings new and fresh ideas all the time. Just think about keyboard-user browsers. THATS a HCI improvement. Guess where 10GUi got its ideas from.. It's a vim vs emacs argument though, ie a waste of time for everyone, and a nuisance if the discussion participants generally know only one side. Some people can't be educated, others are educated and chose a side based on own experience. I prefer the second kind, no matter which side they chose. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
[arch-general] wiki email confirmation won't confirm
Hey, i'm trying to sign up for the wiki, the confirmation link yields a page that says: Your e-mail address has now been confirmed. though in the account preferences remains: Your e-mail address is not yet authenticated. No e-mail will be sent for any of the following features. And i can't edit. Another confirmation code had the same result. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
[arch-general] xf86-input-evdev conflicts with xorg-server. Remove xorg-server?
obviously i do NOT want to remove xorg-server. i don't need evdev, but: :: xorg-server: requires xf86-input-evdev=2.2.5 so no removing it either. the mirror i'm using has been updated today (December 1th), and i'm not using testing. mirrors package versions: xorg-server 1.7.2-2 xf86-input-evdev 2.3.1-1 thanks -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] xf86-input-evdev conflicts with xorg-server. Remove xorg-server?
Ng Oon-Ee wrote: On Tue, 2009-12-01 at 12:43 +0100, Arvid Picciani wrote: obviously i do NOT want to remove xorg-server. i don't need evdev, but: :: xorg-server: requires xf86-input-evdev=2.2.5 so no removing it either. the mirror i'm using has been updated today (December 1th), and i'm not using testing. mirrors package versions: xorg-server 1.7.2-2 xf86-input-evdev 2.3.1-1 thanks What about your own package versions (the ones currently installed)? xorg-server: 1.6.3.901-1 xf86-input-evdev : 2.2.5-something on irc the idea came up that the local versions conflict with the repo versions, hence pacman is confused about the dependencies. i removed evdev, and all the other drivers localy. Which turned out to be a very bad idea. Now i'm left with a half dead system. warning: cannot resolve hal=0.5.13, a dependency of xorg-server THAT is the actual problem. It now depends on HAL, which doesn't work. Anyone got a hack available for this? Patch? Maybe it's just a configure option. I'll have to build my own xorg anyway then i guess. *sigh* archlinux vs lfs 0:1 -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] usable browser?
Dieter Plaetinck wrote: can you give some examples of sites worth reading that don't work in webkit? actually it looks like webkit wins over opera right now. The only quirks i found were worse in opera. I'm amazed. going for uzbl. yey. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] xf86-input-evdev conflicts with xorg-server. Remove xorg-server?
Arvid Picciani wrote: warning: cannot resolve hal=0.5.13, a dependency of xorg-server never mind my bitching. rebuilding xorg-server without hal was a matter of abs,edit,makepkg 3 arch -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] xf86-input-evdev conflicts with xorg-server. Remove xorg-server?
Aaron Griffin wrote: On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Daenyth Blank daenyth+a...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/12/1 Arvid Picciani a...@exys.org: Arvid Picciani wrote: warning: cannot resolve hal=0.5.13, a dependency of xorg-server never mind my bitching. rebuilding xorg-server without hal was a matter of abs,edit,makepkg 3 arch Are you using -Syu or are you trying to just randomly -S things? Normally a full upgrade should not have conflicts to this degree. -Syu Unless his system is fairly old and he hasn't updated in a while. xorg-server depending on hal happened a fairly long time ago, didn't it? nope. The hal crap has been added to X a while ago as optional (meaning X would just freeze without it, but at least pretend to start) , but the forced dependency is new (as in, it doesnt start when compiled with hal, but no hal present). The difference is that previously you could get get away with a hack in xorg.conf without having to rebuild xorg without --enable-config-hal I guess the new way is better, since it seperates the ubuntu aproach from power user systems in a clean way. If my source is reliable (some dude on irc), X.org will continue to support both versions and seperate them clearly, maybe even with modules. That'd be _nice_! -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] xf86-input-evdev conflicts with xorg-server. Remove xorg-server?
Aaron, Oh shit, seriously? Looks like I'll have to rebuild this as well. It's your distro. I fail to see the whole reason why you have always been in support of KISS and the arch way, but never seem to take action to enforce it. Maybe it's something social, which i tend to be ignorant towards. Serious question: does ANYONE have a keyboard that didn't automatically work before this debacle? External keyboard always Just Worked without needing to do anything. The same with mice if I used /dev/input/mice. Sure, I didn't have a crazy Xtreme Gaming Mouse 9000 or anything, but it never once failed for me under ordinary usage... Xorg had and still has decent hardware detection. I do have crazy gaming hardware and it isn't correctly detected on ubuntu while it works just fine here on my customized arch without hal ever since X.org. Without any xorg.conf i might add. I'm not going to go as far as claiming the hal/dbus thing is social engineering, but it sure as hell smells like it. However, some chatter on their mailing list suggests it actually has a positive effect for some users, while the negative effect remains undiscovered by the (majority of gnu/linux)~(ubuntu) users. I guess the new way is better, since it seperates the ubuntu aproach from power user systems in a clean way. If my source is reliable (some dude on irc), X.org will continue to support both versions and seperate them clearly, maybe even with modules. That'd be _nice_! Oh a module would be wonderful There is hope. Mostly due to the fact that X is used on embedded systems. Beware though, that argument is fading, as embedded devices get more powerful and users expectations shift from usable to shiny. Even your toaster is going to run kde in the long run. It won't do toasts anymore, but at least it has the latest fashionable widgets. The solution to this political problem is indeed political. Some people can't be educated at all, but the average arch user proves to be capable of learning the basic unix, kiss, and arch philosophies. Back to the point. As long as the X.org upstream is reminded, that the arch/unix/kiss user base is still worth supporting, i'm positive they will continue to support it. In fact we're probably the reason they fixed xft? No one else is using it. I find it hard to argue about the mentioned user base, since its supposed favorite distro archlinux, does in fact add downstream patches to ADD the very features i am opposing. I assume, for now, removing those again via abs is acceptable for most power users, including me and you, until someone finally forks arch. You'd be perfectly suited to throw the first stone, Aaron. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
[arch-general] Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises (was: xf86-input-evdev conflicts with xorg-server. Remove xorg-server?)
Aaron Griffin wrote: Which package has patches to add these features? Looking at xorg-server, I only see one extraneous patch that simple replaces the default grey stipple pattern with black. The rest seem (at a glance) to fix real bugs You have a point here, in that i have used a fuzzy description of the problem, in the assumption you and possible other readers remember the numerous rants on this ML. At very least I'd except You to remember your own blog. I'm going to post some hard facts to your convenience. a...@andariel: ~ egrep 'enable|disable|patch -N' /var/abs/extra/xorg-server/PKGBUILD | wc -l 24 Jan has always done a good job in the past of keeping Xorg as impartial as possible without breaking things, and I'm assuming he did the same here. i was about to state that i didnt target him at all. Then i ran this: a...@andariel: ~ (for i in $(grep Jan de Groot /var/abs/ -r | cut -d ':' -f 1); do egrep enable|disable|patch -N $i; done) | wc -l 543 Now you're propably saying numbers of downstream decisions doesn't say anything. Very true, which is why i prefer arguing about intent a...@andariel: ~ grep Maintainer /var/abs/core/dbus-core/PKGBUILD # Maintainer: Jan de Groot j...@archlinux.org and bias a...@andariel: ~ (for i in $(grep Jan de Groot /var/abs/ -r | cut -d ':' -f 1 | cut -d '/' -f 5); do if (pacman -Si $i | grep gnome /dev/null); then echo $i; fi; done) | wc -l 149 The point is, just because *I* prefer something one way doesn't mean it's a good decision at the distro level. So there is the name of some guy, who approves the unix philosophy, on this distro, but that guy decides it's a good idea that people who prefer ubuntu make the vital decisions. I claim, You are leading a project whichs developers mainly disprove what You stand for, or claim to stand for. Which is why, ... You'd be perfectly suited to throw the first stone, Aaron. I'm confused by this. It seems rather standoffish and I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. .. i have offered my support numerous times. I can see how the daily nuisance of fixing upstream bugs can blur the own goals. Alternatively, You lie about your goals. The very reason, for me to again zombify this minor issue into an open attack, is that you have responded to it, agreeing to the user base you promised to support, but not taken action. we have maintainers we can generally trust about these decisions. Your opinions on trust vary, depending on topic. Last time we had this, You promised to kick out tpowa. You didn't. I don't track if the abuse is ongoing, since I maintain all these packages myself now. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] xf86-input-evdev conflicts with xorg-server. Remove xorg-server?
Jan de Groot wrote: On Tue, 2009-12-01 at 19:45 +0100, Arvid Picciani wrote: nope. The hal crap has been added to X a while ago as optional (meaning X would just freeze without it, but at least pretend to start) , but the forced dependency is new (as in, it doesnt start when compiled with hal, but no hal present). The difference is that previously you could get get away with a hack in xorg.conf without having to rebuild xorg without --enable-config-hal Looks like nobody ever reads documentation. Read the freaking wiki link posted when upgrading/installing xorg-server and you'll know you can disable hal interaction from xorg.conf with one single option. Is it that hard? hah there he is seeking the frontal battle. counter point: Looks like no one ever reads mails completely before assuming the other side is a complete moron. Where did i say i have a problem related to that upgrade? In fact, let me requote that to prove you didnt read it. On Tue, 2009-12-01 at 19:45 +0100, Arvid Picciani wrote: The difference is that previously you could get get away with a hack in xorg.conf Jan de Groot wrote: and you'll know you can disable hal interaction from xorg.conf with one single option. Thanks for being so smart and education me though! -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
Aaron Griffin wrote: On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 4:51 PM, Arvid Picciani a...@exys.org wrote: ...stuff... Not sure what just happened here. I thought we were having a legitimate discussion about xorg-server and this ballooned into something crazy. You wanted detailed proof, here you are. i doubt you have grasped the essence of it in the 5 minutes you bothered to invest. Apparently, you've been holding onto this for some time. for 3 years now. iterating each 6 months. If you have legitimate, actionable fixes for anything you take issue with, please post them to the bug tracker. Until then, this is just hot air. I take that as an invite to post packages to the tracker that adhere to the arch way. If this turns out to be another false promise, i will add that to the next iteration. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
Giovanni Scafora wrote: 2009/12/1, Arvid Picciani a...@exys.org: I take that as an invite to post packages to the tracker that adhere to the arch way. If this turns out to be another false promise, i will add that to the next iteration. is this a threat? :-) if patches are lethal, YES :D -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
Giovanni Scafora wrote: 2009/12/1, Ng Oon-Ee ngoo...@gmail.com: When I started on here the mantra was Arch is what you make it. Packagers strive to make packages which are as vanilla as possible (without breaking) and provide the utility expected of such packages. Of course, if you want a system without hal/dbus, there's ABS and AUR. I don't see why your dislike of particular implementations implies that every user of Arch should forgo those implementations. I totally agree here. glad we all agree on that :) i'm about to post packages which work for both of us. They have been stripped of dbus and happen to be the upstream default. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
Aaron Griffin wrote: On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 5:03 PM, Arvid Picciani a...@exys.org wrote: I take that as an invite to post packages to the tracker that adhere to the arch way. If this turns out to be another false promise, i will add that to the next iteration. Assuming you meant packages to the tracker that DON'T adhere to the arch way, then that is fine. Assuming of course it isn't just a bug report saying package foobar doesn't adhere to the arch way. I'd hope there's be some why and how to fix parts my sentence was stating exactly that, condensed and in inverse order. i was saying, i will post my fixed packages, which i manage downstream anyway. Let me know if this bugformat works for you: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/17341 -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
Ray Kohler wrote: 2009/12/1 Ng Oon-Ee ngoo...@gmail.com: When I started on here the mantra was Arch is what you make it. Packagers strive to make packages which are as vanilla as possible (without breaking) and provide the utility expected of such packages. Of course, if you want a system without hal/dbus, there's ABS and AUR. I don't see why your dislike of particular implementations implies that every user of Arch should forgo those implementations. I've been thinking about this particular part of the Arch way. I think what causes the conflict in some of these cases is that trusting upstream - one of our major principles - only works when upstream is sane. Wacky things (like what freedesktop.org has been doing to Xorg for a while now) make me begin to think this assumption is violated in some important cases. When upstream ceases to really care about Arch-like systems and only support more Ubuntu-like systems, we have a problem with our don't patch philosophy. This implies that you're not ok with what happened to X. So you support my position. What you did not realize, however, is that these things are not upstream defaults. They have been specifically enabled downstream by the arch maintainers. It is likely that the upstream will, as a reaction to my suggestion to reset to upstream defaults, add these options as default. I then suggest to still keep the upstream defaults, and maintain a fixed version of the package on aur. The sanity here is very biased, hence there is no non-biased correct solution, other then that suggested by the founder Judd. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
Ray Kohler wrote: What I personally am in support of, in the general case, is suckless.org-style minimalism, rather than following upstream's direction. So if upstream changes the default to enable the hal and dbus bits, I will then be in favor of Arch disabling them, and we'll be in disagreement then. (That said, if that actually does happen, I won't asking the Arch devs to implement my wishes, since they'd clearly be in violation of the Arch way.) Indeed. As brought up by others, forcing minimalism is as much violation as forcing bloat. However, arch has been built around the idea that users are capable of customizing packages to non-upstream settings. I urge you to do exactly that. I have posted and will continue to post various bugs to the tracker to restore upstream defaults in favor for minimalism. If these reverts get rejected in favor for bloat, the clear bias is a disregard of the very core ideas of arch, and I will eventually fork arch entirely, given enough support. Either way, i'd welcome if you contribute, in order to get the user experience you (and others including me) desire. That is, either contribute packages to aur, to fix insane upstream defaults, or contribute to an eventual fork to restore upstream defaults. Will you? :) -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] usable browser?
Ionut Biru wrote: IE. ie combines all the flaws of the other browsers into one single browser. i guess its a joke though. you run out of options here. yeah ... i figured that much. i hoped there is a corner i missed -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] MUA
Daenyth Blank wrote: I just saw a link on reddit this morning for notmuch, a sup-inspired mail reader. Might be worth looking into http://keithp.com/blogs/notmuch/ well its really not much. i wouldnt consider this a mua. its more a search engine for muas. a pretty decent one though. maybe i should build my own mua on top of that. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
[arch-general] MUA
Mutt grows old and still doesn't do threads the way i want. i've tried sup, but find it too early in development. Especcially it is unusable slow. Can somone recommend another MUA? thanks -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] MUA
Sergej Pupykin wrote: Arvid Picciani wrote: Mutt grows old and still doesn't do threads the way i want. i've tried sup, but find it too early in development. Especcially it is unusable slow. Can somone recommend another MUA? thanks emacs/gnus emacs/wanderlust ? humm.. i didn't know emacs has... oh well i should have known, should i? :D thanks. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] MUA
Antony Jepson wrote: On 2009-11-17, Patrick Brisbin wrote: In gmail's web interface a thread is vertical, sorted by time. However here in mutt, I can see that I've replied to you in our own little thread branch. I definitely prefer the proper threading available in Mutt. I often find myself navigating through my email more quickly using Mutt than I do by using Gmail - however, this is probably because I still point and click when using the web interface. i WOULD find mutts way perfect, if it actually worked in real live. People NEVER reply on the correct branch, so its sort of useless. you have to crawl the entire tree anyway to find the responses you want to read. On the other hand, gmail thinks conversations never branch, which is just as wrong. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] MUA
Daenyth Blank wrote: I just saw a link on reddit this morning for notmuch, a sup-inspired mail reader. Might be worth looking into http://keithp.com/blogs/notmuch/ looks very promising. thanks for sharing. couldnt compile it, but maybe someone less lazy them me can educate that dude that there is something beyond debian. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] MUA
Ionut Biru wrote: On 11/17/2009 07:07 PM, Arvid Picciani wrote: Mutt grows old and still doesn't do threads the way i want. i've tried sup, but find it too early in development. Especcially it is unusable slow. Can somone recommend another MUA? thanks you could try thunderbird. thunderbird 3 which is now beta is very nice compared with thunderbid2. i'm using it right now because sup broke and i'm to lazy to resetup mutt. It's HORRIBLE. Its quick to setup and was able to send email quickly, but its nowhere near comfortable and never will be. - It can't open attachments. You get that defect gnome box and the only option is download and open with, which leads to another defect gnome box that lets you open arbitary files, then it crashes. awesome. - the imap support is crippled. it doesnt recognise subfolders at all. How do people windows people use imap? like pop? - you can't kill threads. - But that doesnt matter since they don't bump anyway. - It responds to the sender despite the mail clearly has a list header. - it does ugly blue bars instead of just for indent. Oh sorry, not ugly,i mean shiny shiny shiny vista look! *claps hands like a retard* - it tries to be smart and spamprotect me against status reports from my own machine. oh right, windows doesn't have cron. - it's dead ugly. yeah educate me that gnome has a setting, dude i dont have windows. - printing doesnt work, that weird windows gui dialog only has Postscript/Default and if you click print basicly nothing happens. - it autocorrects me when i type an email address and enters someone i didnt intent to address. - it requires a mouse - whatever the fuck the keys 1234 do, its dead annoying when i accidently press them (alt+1234 is my WM) - no option to save mail to drafts, but a draft folder. what the? K Windows K Live K Mail and Gnome Windows Dissolution are around the same quality. However i have to grant them one positive side: i was able to write a mail without actually reading a manual, which is good if you just broke your system and are in a hurry or something. On the other hand that's propably because i had to setup a couple of failbirds for coworkers with windows machines. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] MUA
Alessandro Doro wrote: Patch the Makefile (you don't need to run ./configure) then make. --- Makefile2009-11-17 21:36:47.0 +0100 +++ ../Makefile 2009-11-17 21:36:03.0 +0100 @@ -4,14 +4,14 @@ hey that compiled. thanks. i didn't realize it has a makefile despite failed configure. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] We have lost the desktop war. The reason? Windows 7.
RedShift wrote: Conclusion We are losing ground. We are losing it fast. Our competitors recognize what the user wants and delivered. I can't remember fighting for that ground, and I'd be totally happy if the people who do would just go away. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] We have lost the desktop war. The reason? Windows 7.
hollun...@gmx.at wrote:
The problem is that the Desktop Environments, GNOME and KDE, in their
quest for integrated desktop experience push more and more stuff
that's really only useful to those DEs deeper and deeper into the
system.
If you as a user need or want it or not, you get it.
I warned about that 2 years ago, and no one would listen. Thankfully we
are at a point were it gets so undenyable that the anger about the
problem is gaining momentum.
I'm lurking in my corner waiting for the day that the crowd is big
enough to form a community (maybe even a distro)
Until then, here are some steps to punch some sanity into your
(arch)linux destop:
1) http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/ABS_-_The_Arch_Build_System
2) IgnorePkg = dbus dbus-core gconf hal
3) foreach in {xorg,emacs,qt,webkit,..}
3.1) find and remove --enable-dbus, --enable-gconf ,
--enable-hal, --with-hal, --other-shite
3.2) makepgk sudo pacman -U
4) foreach in {iron,chromium,cups,...}
4.1) take a random library, rename it to
libdbus, libgconf, libwhatever, and LD_PRELOAD it.
4.2) notice that that the software will gracefully
handle the missing symbols, despite it needs them
5) foreach in $unfixable_software
5.1) pacman -R $unfixable_software
6) pacman -R dbus-core dbus gconf
7) remove shit from /etc/cron.d/
8) Happy face
--
Arvid
Asgaard Technologies
Re: [arch-general] We have lost the desktop war. The reason? Windows 7.
Aaron Griffin wrote:
You read my mind. I was debating adding a little rant here about the
necessity of hal, consolekit, policykit, devicekit,
whatever-the-hellkit to do the stupidest things. It's real
counter-intuitive. And don't even get me started about linux audio -
apparently the core market for linux audio developers are people doing
live, realtime, studio recordings with a line-in jack on a laptop[1] -
not the people who just want their machine to beep at them.
I absolutely positively hate that all this shit is getting integrated
into the lower level portions of the operating environment. The
xorg/hal coupling is gross and disgusting if you don't want or need
hal. Soon enough, I'll bet udev and devicekit are going to require
each other. When this starts to happen, it's time to stop using this
crap
cat /var/abs/extra/xorg-server/PKGBUILD
8--
--enable-config-hal \
--enable-config-dbus \
--8
cat /var/abs/extra/qt/PKGBUILD
8--
patch -p1 -i $srcdir/kde-qt-${_kdeqtver}.patch || return 1
--8
cat /var/abs/extra/cups/PKGBUILD
8--
--enable-dbus
--8
It's not like anyone but you is forcing those upon us, Aaron.
--
Arvid
Asgaard Technologies
