Re: Поддержка процессора Vortex86SX.
Redirecting to debian-russian, debian-project to bcc. On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 02:50:31AM +0400, Сергей Шпаков wrote: > Добрый день, у меня есть проблема. Настроил сервер LTSP (debian > 6.0.4), но при подключении тонкого клиента eBOX-2300SX-H он почему то > не грузится. Проблема с поддержкой процессора. Подскажите как решить > проблему??? Заранее спасибо!!! -- Jurij Smakov ju...@wooyd.org Key: http://www.wooyd.org/pgpkey/ KeyID: C99E03CC -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120421232047.ga15...@wooyd.org
Re: Voting on messages: a way to resolve the mailing list problems
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 12:40:24PM +, MJ Ray wrote: > Jurij Smakov wrote: > > The 'mailvoting' alioth project [0] has been created. There are also > > two mailing lists, 'mailvoting-discuss' and 'mailvoting-devel', for > > general discussion and implementation discussion, respectively. Please > > subscribe [1] to them, if you are interested in contributing. > > > > [0] http://mailvoting.alioth.debian.org/ > > [1] http://alioth.debian.org/mail/?group_id=100282 > > So this means ignoring any concerns and pressing on regardless? This is something which I'm undertaking of my own accord, out of curiosity and belief that it can make a difference. This effort is not officially endorsed by the project in any way, there is no intention to push for such an endorsement in the nearest future either. As for the concerns, I've seen approximately 5:1 ratio of positive-to-negative feedback on the idea, so yes, I don't have a problem ignoring these concerns. > What's a rant about zionism got to do with this? Is it spam? > If so, why didn't the list admin block it? This was spam, which got through, because the lists are created with configuration which allows everyone to post to the lists. After I saw it, I've changed the configuration to limit posting to subscribers only (I know it's controversial, but I guess that's a lesser evil then getting them flooded with spam). Best regards, -- Jurij Smakov ju...@wooyd.org Key: http://www.wooyd.org/pgpkey/ KeyID: C99E03CC -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Voting on messages: a way to resolve the mailing list problems
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 06:05:09PM +, Jurij Smakov wrote: > > Another point is that most people are probably going to be pretty busy > with holiday stuff over the last couple of weeks (I'm leaving for a > two-week vacation myself tomorrow), so we'll have to get back to > implementation details in the New Year. I was thinking about creating > an Alioth project for it, but I'm open to other ideas. The 'mailvoting' alioth project [0] has been created. There are also two mailing lists, 'mailvoting-discuss' and 'mailvoting-devel', for general discussion and implementation discussion, respectively. Please subscribe [1] to them, if you are interested in contributing. [0] http://mailvoting.alioth.debian.org/ [1] http://alioth.debian.org/mail/?group_id=100282 Best regards, -- Jurij Smakov ju...@wooyd.org Key: http://www.wooyd.org/pgpkey/ KeyID: C99E03CC -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Results of the Lenny release GR
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 08:37:06AM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 08:22:58AM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > > > > You're the Secretary. You're supposed to give answers, not speculation. If > > the ballot was ambigous, or confusing, it is YOUR responsibility. > > Bdale, > > After sleeping over this, I really think I've been unnecesarily harsh, and > at the same time I failed to explain accurately what I meant here. So please > bear with me, and let me rephrase it in a way that doesn't make it a less > serious problem, but at least more sympathethic. > > I know you didn't explicitly request being appointed Secretary; it sort of > happened "by accident", but you had the opportunity to refuse all the time, > so I must take it that you accept it, at least temporarily. > > When you accepted your position as Secretary, you knew this implied making > tough decisions, and being responsible for them. You decided that the ballot > was "good enough" to be voted on; you could have cancelled the vote, or you > could have announced the results saying they're basically useless, but you > didn't. Fair enough, it's your decision. And I don't see a problem with the > ballot myself. > > However, when you were asked about the way you're interpreting the results, > what you're essentially telling us is that the ballot was ambigous, and > badly worded. You probably think this is my fault because I wrote a > significant part of it, but that doesn't matter: you already decided the > ballot is good enough, and (unless you want to retract that) you're bound > to your own decision. > > So, what I think would be the honest approach to this problem, is for you to > either announce that your interpretation is the way it is because the ballot > was flawed, or change your interpretation to make it consistent with the > ballot. > > I assume you won't be doing the latter, but if you choose the former instead > of > not doing anything, you have my support on that. I don't usually participate in these discussions (so I can be considered a member of the "silent majority"), but this thread has been going on for long enough for me to want to voice my opinion. Personally, I'm happy with Bdale's interpretation of the vote, and I think that you need to make peace with the fact that vast majority of developers is more pragmatic than you, when it comes to DFSG compliance and interpretation. As such, I would be happy to see us proceed with Lenny release based on the results of the vote. If this is not acceptable for you, as a developer you are entitled to affect this outcome using a number of different options available (and I'm not talking about trying to convince anyone by repeating the same thing over and over). Best regards, -- Jurij Smakov ju...@wooyd.org Key: http://www.wooyd.org/pgpkey/ KeyID: C99E03CC -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Voting on messages: a way to resolve the mailing list problems
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 01:49:44AM +, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 10:35:14AM +0000, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> > * "Vocal minority" dominates "silent majority" by contributing a
> > disproportionate amount of list traffic, [...]
>
> Note that voting can have a similar drawback -- in that if you've got
> enough like-minded people voting for a particular viewpoint (eg, "Joe
> Random sucks, give him what for!") people with a different viewpoint
> (eg, "stop berating people, argh") aren't going to bother voting ("the
> score's already +50, why bother with a -1?"). This seems to happen on
> digg a fair bit. Probably someting to be aware of.
It is a good point, however the original idea was only supposed to
address the issue of rude/offensive/inflammatory/useless posts on the
lists (at least, that was my impression), not provide a voting forum
for particular viewpoints. Thus, it would be wrong for people to vote
down valid, constructive posts, expressing the opinions which they
happen to disagree with. Of course, there are multiple ways to abuse
this system, so the results should be taken with a grain of salt,
that's why I would like to avoid getting involved in the
interpretation, at least for now.
Best regards,
--
Jurij Smakov ju...@wooyd.org
Key: http://www.wooyd.org/pgpkey/ KeyID: C99E03CC
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Voting on messages: a way to resolve the mailing list problems
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 05:02:23PM +0100, David Paleino wrote: > On Sat, 20 Dec 2008 10:35:14 +0000, Jurij Smakov wrote: > > > I believe that at this point Nick Rusnov, John Goerzen and myself have > > expressed interest in working on the first stage of the project. If > > you have any ideas or comments - please share, we would also welcome > > your contribution if you decide to help out with it. > > I might be interested in joining too, but unfortunately I don't have a very > stable internet connection (apart from two weeks starting from today). Would > you mind setting up a wiki page with implementation details? Or a mailing > list? > Or anything else? First of all, I would like to thank everyone who has offered their insights. I've heard only one negative comment so far, and in response I would like to reiterate that the only current goal is to collect the data, the effort is driven by a small group of people, and not officially endorsed by the Debian project as a whole in any way. When/if the project will decide that this data can be potentially useful for some official purpose, I'm sure that every DD will be given a chance to express their opinion about it. Another point is that most people are probably going to be pretty busy with holiday stuff over the last couple of weeks (I'm leaving for a two-week vacation myself tomorrow), so we'll have to get back to implementation details in the New Year. I was thinking about creating an Alioth project for it, but I'm open to other ideas. Best regards, -- Jurij Smakov ju...@wooyd.org Key: http://www.wooyd.org/pgpkey/ KeyID: C99E03CC -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Voting on messages: a way to resolve the mailing list problems
Hi, It is generally perceived that there are currently a couple of problems with the way discussions happen on our mailing lists: * Some people are put off from participating in the discussions on important topics because they are not willing to expose themselves to offensive behaviour and personal attacks, which, unfortunately, is seen more and more often on our lists; and * "Vocal minority" dominates "silent majority" by contributing a disproportionate amount of list traffic, not necessarily expressing the opinion of the project as a whole and, effectively, blocking other active contributors, not willing to engage in flame wars, from voicing their opinion. Existing mechanisms (such as GRs and requesting mailing lists bans for certain individuals) are clearly not efficient in dealing with these problems, both due to them being considered exceptional measures and inadequacy of these tools for solving social problems. I have also seen opinions that other "obvious" ways of addressing the issue, such as moderation of the lists or a new organizational entity, which would act as a list watchdog, is not the way to go, as it adds yet another layer of bureacracy and raises the usual questions of choosing the "right" people for the privileged position. So, what can we do about? During a little brainstorming session on IRC last night a following idea has emerged: let's have a way to express our opinion about the mailing list posts. The proposed implementation is straightforward: you can "vote" a particular mailing list message up or down by signing it with your key and forwarding it to an email address like praise@ or curse@, depending on your personal opinion. That will provide a low-threshold way for the "silent minority" to express their opinion about a particular message without getting into a yet another flame war, and provide a feedback loop for the authors, informing them of other's opinions about their posts. Now, I know that for a bunch of geeks like us it is very tempting to start discussing the technical details and how the scoring is going to be implemented, and how the results are going to be used, and so on. The way I would like to see this idea developing is that it starts as an unofficial project, with very simple rules (like, "you can vote once for each message ID"), which simply collects the data and makes it publicly available in some way. Interested parties and individuals can then use the data to provide their own metrics (and try to convince others that their way of calculating the mailing list "karma" is the right one). Eventually, we should be able to settle on one authoritative way of calculating it, which can become "official", and used to develop procedures for warning the offensive posters that their behaviour is considered disruptive, for example. I believe that at this point Nick Rusnov, John Goerzen and myself have expressed interest in working on the first stage of the project. If you have any ideas or comments - please share, we would also welcome your contribution if you decide to help out with it. Cheers. -- Jurij Smakov ju...@wooyd.org Key: http://www.wooyd.org/pgpkey/ KeyID: C99E03CC signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian's job is not to help people who think the world is unfair (was: Linux System Engineer (100%) in Zurich)
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 06:17:45PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote: > also sprach Gunnar Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.11.26.1807 +0100]: > > And no, it's not Debian's flaw or problem - but Wolfgang's > > complaint is IMHO very well in place. It will reach the clueless > > HR recruiter, and -as he posted to -jobs- probably other HR people > > pondering on writing to Debian. > > This is precisely my problem, it comes across as a statement from > Debian, when in fact it is the voice of a few people (who seem to > have little idea about HR and running a business). This is why > I replied on -jobs, because Debian does *not* have any policy > preventing or allowing job offers with age restrictions. You are correct, we don't have such a policy in place. However, one of our foundation documents (which I'm reasonably proud of) claims that we will not accept any software with license which discriminates "against any person or group of persons" into the distribution. Yes, it's a stretch, because we can be fairly sure that people (as opposed to firmware :-) are not software, and they don't have a license. I, however, have a difficulty understanding the mindset of people who can, at the same time, stand behind these principles, and be comfortable with what looks to me as a clear-cut example of unfair age discrimination (thanks to Ben for suggesting the correct wording). > If you don't like the job offer, don't apply. If you want that job > but you are too old, convince them and go to court if you feel like > they are acting unlawfully. > > But please refrain from calling it unfair (it's a bloody *offer*) > and expecting the project to do something about it. I don't see why the project shouldn't feel empowered to do something about it. It was not my intention, however, to start a flame war, and I'm not going to pursue the idea of modifying posting guidelines for debian-jobs, given quite unexpected fierce resistance. I already got my fair share of entertainment out of this thread and not going to contribute to it further. Best regards, -- Jurij Smakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] Key: http://www.wooyd.org/pgpkey/ KeyID: C99E03CC -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Linux System Engineer (100%) in Zurich
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 10:11:13AM +0100, martin f krafft wrote: > also sprach W. Martin Borgert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.11.25.2017 +0100]: > > I would very much appreciate, if Debian would not publish job > > offers that discriminate on the grounds of race, ethnic origin, > > disability, age, gender, sexual orientation or religion. Not > > only it is illegal in some countries, I find it highly > > inappropriate for our project. Thanks for your attention. > > Wolfgang, please stop this. Putting a maximum age into a job > description is standard practice because a company does not want to > invest time and money into a new employee for various reasons, be > they simple age and thus time left to work for the company, > absorptive capacity, or company culture. Sorry, but I'm with Wolfgang on this one. I'm pretty sure that this "standard practice" is illegal in most of EU countries (judging by existence of EU directive 2000/78/EC) and in the US, and I would expect similar laws to exist in any country to be considered civilized. It's pretty unfortunate that Switzerland does not have any law in place preventing age discrimination [0], and I believe that in the spirit of Debian we should not provide a forum for posting discriminatory job offers. I suggest to have the blurb at http://lists.debian.org/debian-jobs/ modified to reflect this. [0] http://www.agediscrimination.info/international/Pages/Switzerland.aspx Best regards, -- Jurij Smakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] Key: http://www.wooyd.org/pgpkey/ KeyID: C99E03CC -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dropping sparc32 for Lenny (was: Scheduling linux-2.6 2.6.21-[23])
On May 18, 2007, at 5:39 AM, Frans Pop wrote: On Friday 18 May 2007 14:05, Bastian Blank wrote: I have to acknowledge the message from Dave[1]. Until there is a new kernel upstream it may be possible to compile it but it is impossible to fix real problems. Yes, I completely agree with that. However, when you casually propose to _deprecate_ (instead of temporarily disable) sparc32 as part of a kernel upload proposal, then I feel the discussion needs to be moved to a wider audience. On Friday 18 May 2007 14:12, Bastian Blank wrote: On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 04:23:00AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: Has there been any input from the sparc porters on this last change? There are very few really active porters for sparc. Most active over the past couple of years has been Jurij Smakov, and he launched the proposal to drop sparc32. Working on sparc32 during the last year was anything but fun. There were a few near misses when I was not sure whether it will be in good enough shape for etch. I consider it a lucky coincidence that it ended up in somewhat less broken state in time for release. I think it's time to put it to rest and improve sparc64 performance by turning on Ultrasparc-specific optimizations for our package builds. Best regards, Jurij. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
