Re: [arch-general] conclusion: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
There is customizepkg in AUR which can greatly simplify and help. I agree that it is not practical to build everything(otherwise it will be a gentoo). However,what i have seen is dependencies are like A->B->C and C gets A added sometimes as dependency, in which case recompiling B alone should help. If it is 1 or 2 packages only, then build :) On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 2:10 AM, André Ramaciotti da Silva < andre.ramacio...@gmail.com> 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). > > > > (snipped) > > The problem is that using ABS is impracticable if you have a big number of > custom PKGBUILDs. > > OTOH, having packages with minimal dependencies isn't so great. During the > (short) time I've used Gentoo, I noticed the consume of RAM is a little > lower, but there isn't a big difference in performance. The problems arise > when you compile packages with way to minimal dependencies, and later > realize it was a mistake, and now you have to recompile lots of packages. >
Re: [arch-general] conclusion: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 3:40 PM, André Ramaciotti da Silva 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). >> >> (snipped) > > The problem is that using ABS is impracticable if you have a big number of > custom PKGBUILDs. > > OTOH, having packages with minimal dependencies isn't so great. During the > (short) time I've used Gentoo, I noticed the consume of RAM is a little > lower, but there isn't a big difference in performance. The problems arise > when you compile packages with way to minimal dependencies, and later > realize it was a mistake, and now you have to recompile lots of packages. True. Although I favor minimalism, it's practically never worth actually doing anything to get it. Right now I've achieved zero use of both ABS and AUR. The resulting ease of maintenance totally trumps any gains I'd get by tweaking PKGBUILDs.
Re: [arch-general] conclusion: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
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). > > (snipped) The problem is that using ABS is impracticable if you have a big number of custom PKGBUILDs. OTOH, having packages with minimal dependencies isn't so great. During the (short) time I've used Gentoo, I noticed the consume of RAM is a little lower, but there isn't a big difference in performance. The problems arise when you compile packages with way to minimal dependencies, and later realize it was a mistake, and now you have to recompile lots of packages.
Re: [arch-general] conclusion: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
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). And secondly, if you have stuff like hal/dbus running, it is not going to slow your system unless you are running it on your mobile or a 100MHz CPU. I have tried hal/dbus with and without. I don't see a noticeable latency. But disabling dbus can help in situations where you are not using that DM or some other reason.(for example - evince - i disable it, thunar - i disable it) Finally, true anti-desktop is using lynx or watching mplayer with ascii renderer :) , all in virtual terminal(with directfb if required) On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 10:41 PM, Aaron Griffin wrote: > 2009/12/2 Ng Oon-Ee : > > On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 11:06 -0600, Aaron Griffin wrote: > >> On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 5:53 AM, Arvid Picciani wrote: > >> > 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? > >> > >> In general, it is called the WIMP paradigm - Windows, Icons, Menus, > >> Pointing Device > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WIMP_(computing) > > > > Ouch, I'm sure that's a correct term, but I fail to see how using WIMP > > in a combustible conversation is going to help any =) > > Yeah I just noticed the wiki page even points out that most people > find it derogatory. >
Re: [arch-general] conclusion: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
2009/12/2 Ng Oon-Ee : > On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 11:06 -0600, Aaron Griffin wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 5:53 AM, Arvid Picciani wrote: >> > 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? >> >> In general, it is called the WIMP paradigm - Windows, Icons, Menus, >> Pointing Device >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WIMP_(computing) > > Ouch, I'm sure that's a correct term, but I fail to see how using WIMP > in a combustible conversation is going to help any =) Yeah I just noticed the wiki page even points out that most people find it derogatory.
Re: [arch-general] conclusion: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 11:06 -0600, Aaron Griffin wrote: > On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 5:53 AM, Arvid Picciani wrote: > > 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? > > In general, it is called the WIMP paradigm - Windows, Icons, Menus, > Pointing Device > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WIMP_(computing) Ouch, I'm sure that's a correct term, but I fail to see how using WIMP in a combustible conversation is going to help any =)
Re: [arch-general] conclusion: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 5:53 AM, Arvid Picciani wrote: > 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? In general, it is called the WIMP paradigm - Windows, Icons, Menus, Pointing Device http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WIMP_(computing)
Re: [arch-general] conclusion: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 9:53 AM, Arvid Picciani wrote: > "gnomies" "mouse users" > etc is all the same level of offensiveness. > I lack ideas here. No, I think you just are furious because you can have things working without losing 5 days of your life. Maybe you are just old and until they make a time machine, you'll not be able to come back to the 70's and work like a "real man". Sorry, but I never understood this mindset of being against automatic configuratino when it makes sense. Why don't you just use dd for every read and write operation to the disk? Why do you need a filesystem? Pff Anyways, you should really try gnome or kde nowadays, you would be impressed. Maybe with a system without xorg.conf which recognizes automatically a new monitor when plugged in. This happened to me just the other day. Best whishes. -- --- Denis A. Altoe Falqueto ---
Re: [arch-general] conclusion: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
On Wed, 02 Dec 2009 12:53:21 +0100 Arvid Picciani wrote: > > can you help me find another term i should use > to denote the desktop idea, that is not offensive? > "integrationist" ?
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
Re: [arch-general] conclusion: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 17:15 +0530, Piyush P Kurur wrote: > But you can see your xorg-server-antidesktop into the official > packages. Have a look at the wiki for AUR. It clearly says that > packages start as being in AUR and then finally end up in the official > repository after getting enough support. > > I think there are others who would also like to have a non hal/dbus > xorg-servers. They will support you. But please don't fork Arch. The > issue you pointed out is too minor, at least to me, to justify such a > drastic action. Disabling hal/dbus in xorg-server is a matter of one extra option in xorg.conf, so there's no need for such a package unless you absolutely hate hal and dbus so much that you don't want those packages to exist on your system. As for the config-dbus thing in xorg-server: I think we can remove it. It's not used by anything, and upstream has intentions to kill it anyways. As for hal support in xorg-server: Upstream is still debating about this, but in the future hal will get killed and xorg-server will use udev directly. They're still debating about details though, as configuration will have to move from hal .fdi files to somewhere else. This could be udev rules, xorg.conf or even an xorg.conf.d/*.conf implementation. Until upstream makes that switch, hal will remain a dependency.
Re: [arch-general] conclusion: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
On Wed, Dec 02, 2009 at 12:03:36PM +0100, Arvid Picciani wrote: >> 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? I am a mere user of Arch and as of now have not contributed in any way to the Arch system. Dont find myself, a hot headed fundamentalist, in the role of a mediator. But you can see your xorg-server-antidesktop into the official packages. Have a look at the wiki for AUR. It clearly says that packages start as being in AUR and then finally end up in the official repository after getting enough support. I think there are others who would also like to have a non hal/dbus xorg-servers. They will support you. But please don't fork Arch. The issue you pointed out is too minor, at least to me, to justify such a drastic action. If there aren't many supporters you AUR package will remain there. That should also be fine, after all world domination is never a goal with free software. It is just a side-effect. Regards ppk
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
Arvid Picciani schrieb: like what? maybe you are feeling insecure about it? Yes, I am so insecure. You are right, I am going to kill myself just now. There is a saying in my native language that goes like: "Dogs only bite if you hit their spot." Old sayings like this are usually stupid. The other devs at least managed to respond in professional and calm way, which ultimately convinced me that they are right. Until now, I was professional and managed to ignore this thread completely. But you just had to pull the Windows card. You were trying to convince people that you were right by telling them "either you agree with me or you are just another Windows user who doesn't want to pay". That is not acceptable and breaks the rules of any discussion between grown-ups. Again: Comparisons like that just mean you are out of arguments and are still trying to convince people. Tell me why you think what we do is bad without mentioning Windows or Ubuntu or any comparison to anything and we can talk professionally. but because Arch is very different from either of those and I am quite proud of that and insecure. Okay okay okay, after this e-mail I will definitely kill myself, sorry for keeping you waiting. and I will not tolerate such statements. my address is publicly available. go find me? Don't bother - all I will do is be an ass about it every time. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [arch-general] conclusion: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
On Wed, Dec 02, 2009 at 11:28:37AM +0100, Arvid Picciani wrote: > Piyush P Kurur wrote: > > >> 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 Okey so you agree that Arch != Ubuntu. Now we have a way forward. Arvid's reply to me made me search for antidesktop (I did not know about such a movement) and I find this xorg-server-antidesktop 1.6.1.1 in AUR. Whatever happended to it I do not know. Arvid can you start maintainning it and may be give it the status that if finally makes to the official Arch repository ? You dont have to fork Arch for that. 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. Regards ppk
Re: [arch-general] conclusion: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
I don't think arch general list is the appropriated to fight like kids so please continue your little fight using your own personal email. On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 7:38 PM, Arvid Picciani wrote: > 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
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: 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
Arvid Picciani schrieb: Thanks to enough input i have learned two things of this thread: 1) The problem IS upstream related. Some packages do enable dbus when it is available, for the convenience of those users who do not understand what dbus is and hence need it. So every user who wants to use dbus is dumb? Needing dbus is a criterion for not understanding what it is? dbus is something very cool and useful and allows applications to conveniently interoperate, which is something that has to happen in every modern computing environment. Archs philosophy dictates, that if the upstream is retarded, so shall be the package. I used this as argument, and i shall comply to it equally. In a sense yes, but we can make it less retarded to some extent. 2) I am in fact the minority, not those who see linux as a free windows copy. Hence i should Insult number one, watch your step. 2.1) stfu and obey the will of the mass 2.2) find or found a distro that is not based on the will of the mass Arch is not based on the will of the mass, but on the will of the developers who use and develop it. Those developers happen to want cool systems instead of feature-free ones. And you know what? I don't see your problem, because my system works just fine and does everything I want it to exactly like I want it to. For me, nothing else counts. The combination of 1 and 2 invalidates everything i have said in this thread. No, some of the things you have said are invalidated by them being just rants and stupid. Jan did a great job at packaging clearly broken packages in the least harmful He did, yes. way for the majority of users, who happen to have a microsoft windows background. Insult number two. I give you one piece of advice: Apologize for being an asshole. Resorting to calling what you don't like the "Ubuntu way of doing things" and calling the majority of Arch's developers "people with Windows background" doesn't help you here. In fact, I feel personally insulted by these statements. You can either apologize to me now or STFU and get yourself another distro - preferably one whose developers like being insulted like this. It is one thing to discuss the sense and nonsense of how we do things. It is another to be an asshole about it and insult the people who do not share your opinion. And there is one thing that Arch definitely does not need: assholes. And before people start bitching about what I just said: Statements like "Arch is becoming Ubuntu" and "Arch is for users who want a free Windows replacement" (and many similar ones) are made mostly because someone is out of arguments and wants to make the other end of the discussion angry (which Arvid succeeded in). I consider such statements an insult (not because Ubuntu or Windows are evil, but because Arch is very different from either of those and I am quite proud of that) and I will not tolerate such statements. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [arch-general] conclusion: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
On Wed, Dec 02, 2009 at 10:55:22AM +0100, Arvid Picciani wrote: > Thanks to enough input i have learned two things of this thread: > > 1) The problem IS upstream related. Some packages do enable >dbus when it is available, for the convenience of those users >who do not understand what dbus is and hence need it. > >Archs philosophy dictates, that if the upstream is retarded, >so shall be the package. I used this as argument, and i shall >comply to it equally. > > 2) I am in fact the minority, not those who see linux >as a free windows copy. Hence i should > 2.1) stfu and obey the will of the mass > 2.2) find or found a distro that > is not based on the will of the mass > > The combination of 1 and 2 invalidates everything > i have said in this thread. > I think you are just reading more that what is said. Many GNU/Linux distros and Arch and Debian in particular are definitely not free Windows. I run Arch and Debian servers and desktops and have never install any of the gnome/kde stuff unless asked to on gunpoint. I use xmonad and share your dislike for hal/dbus. This however does not justify not having a decent PnP particulary when you want to install it for non-experts. To my eyes Arch has been quite snappy and minimalist, even made me 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. Regards ppk
Re: [arch-general] conclusion: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
On 02/12/09 09:55, Arvid Picciani wrote: Thanks to enough input i have learned two things of this thread: 1) The problem IS upstream related. Some packages do enable dbus when it is available, for the convenience of those users who do not understand what dbus is and hence need it. Archs philosophy dictates, that if the upstream is retarded, so shall be the package. I used this as argument, and i shall comply to it equally. 2) I am in fact the minority, not those who see linux as a free windows copy. Hence i should 2.1) stfu and obey the will of the mass 2.2) find or found a distro that is not based on the will of the mass The combination of 1 and 2 invalidates everything i have said in this thread. Jan did a great job at packaging clearly broken packages in the least harmful way for the majority of users, who happen to have a microsoft windows background. Sorry about being too ignorant to see these in the first place. I'll go do 2.1 or 2.2 now. have a nice day. lol, i didn't see that one coming.
[arch-general] conclusion: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises
Thanks to enough input i have learned two things of this thread: 1) The problem IS upstream related. Some packages do enable dbus when it is available, for the convenience of those users who do not understand what dbus is and hence need it. Archs philosophy dictates, that if the upstream is retarded, so shall be the package. I used this as argument, and i shall comply to it equally. 2) I am in fact the minority, not those who see linux as a free windows copy. Hence i should 2.1) stfu and obey the will of the mass 2.2) find or found a distro that is not based on the will of the mass The combination of 1 and 2 invalidates everything i have said in this thread. Jan did a great job at packaging clearly broken packages in the least harmful way for the majority of users, who happen to have a microsoft windows background. Sorry about being too ignorant to see these in the first place. I'll go do 2.1 or 2.2 now. have a nice day. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
