Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
On Sunday, March 02, 2014 01:28:57 PM Doug wrote: On 03/02/2014 02:02 AM, Scott Ferguson wrote: On 02/03/14 16:53, y...@marupa.net wrote: On Sunday, March 02, 2014 04:25:13 PM Scott Ferguson wrote: On 02/03/14 11:28, Ralf Mardorf wrote: On Sun, 2014-03-02 at 10:55 +1100, Scott Ferguson wrote: Here's mine:- troll elsewhere - try rabbleRus.org or LetMeTellUWhat2Do.mob :D We Arch users made a poll. Even if more users would have been against systemd, the developers would have switched to systemd, but most users wanted systemd. We, around 49% and me were against systemd, but around 51 % were pro systemd. Nowadays it makes live easier for all of us who use several different distros, when _all_ or at least the most important distros will switch to systemd. To discuss pros and cons of systemd a time machine is needed, to go back more than 3 years ago. To discuss it in 2014 is a little bit to late. Same with Debian based on what I read, the vote was fairly evenly split, which is why it went to the Technical Committee, who were also fairly evenly split. Which probably demonstrates why there's no hidden agenda going on surrounding systemd and there were legitimate reasons why it was finally chosen. My concern is that it's a divisive issue that would be tempting for third parties to exacerbate and exploit. Commercial software vendors, and the companies that do their marketing and public relation might want to take advantage of the situation to reduce the market share they lose to Debian (and Linux as a whole). It wouldn't be that far from the sort of dirty tactics they've employed in the past. Definitely reasonable concerns, though to be honest, Linux's detractors would have looked for something else to latch onto if systemd wasn't divisive enough. As well as? In a few more years I imagine most people opposed to systemd won't have a problem with it being there after all after using it for a bit. I'd be very surprised if it wasn't modified to suit the needs of the majority of developers - and they tend have the same itches as the users, just slightly less conservative about their needs. But I'm not a futurist. Though I did try voting conservative for a change - not surprisingly I was disappointed ;p Has it occurred to anyone that the devs keep making changes to things that work perfectly well, because if they didn't, they wouldn't have anything to do, and might be out of a job? --doug Well, while I wouldn't rule out change for change's sake, I do personally believe this was an actual needed change, between how inefficient and problematic initscripts can be to how badly Linux needs an actual system manager capable of unifying configuration, device management, and service control... Not to mention sysvinit has even been stated by it own upstream maintainer that it's become a trouble to upkeep. Sure, systemd has its flaws (While I like the journal, there are downsides to a binary-based log when your system is screwed up and your only resource is a LiveCD. I don't know if there's a way to read the journal outside the system that created it.), but ultimately between our choices: Stick with SysV, Upstart (Which takes an everything and the kitchen sink approach to its dependency startups and encourages complexity.), and OpenRC (Which utterly misses the reasons why SysV needs replacing.), I'd choose systemd. The only arguments I've seen against systemd, at least in this thread is either it's change, and change is evil and Red Hat/Lennart did it, so it must be bad. I think a lot of the resistance seems grounded in an irrational hatred of corporate involvement in Linux. IT's VERY irrational given that a huge portion, if not most of, the kernel itself is corporate code from companies like Red Hat, IBM, Intel, Motorola, Google, HP, and even Microsoft... A significant portion of the drivers in the kernel tree are, themselves, provided by the company that made the hardware in the first place. Drivers for Intel GPUs on Linux ARE the official Intel-provided driver and are part of the tree. Strip away all corporate contributions and support and Linux really IS a hobby OS no one can use for anything. Conrad -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/2195697.RESnpIPavN@twilight
Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
On Sunday, March 02, 2014 01:34:20 AM Ralf Mardorf wrote: On Sun, 2014-03-02 at 10:55 +1100, Scott Ferguson wrote: Here's mine:- troll elsewhere - try rabbleRus.org or LetMeTellUWhat2Do.mob : :D We Arch users made a poll. Even if more users would have been against systemd, the developers would have switched to systemd, but most users wanted systemd. We, around 49% and me were against systemd, but around 51 % were pro systemd. Nowadays it makes live easier for all of us who use several different distros, when _all_ or at least the most important distros will switch to systemd. To discuss pros and cons of systemd a time machine is needed, to go back more than 3 years ago. To discuss it in 2014 is a little bit to late. I'm a very happy Arch user. And I admit at first even I had a little resistance to the systemd idea because at that time I hadn't seen it really proven yet. I had found myself wary because I had been burned almost every time I used Pulse Audio. (I could go on for ages of why I think PA should die in a fire, but I'll spare you.) I've also had some negative experiences with Avahi I won't get into here. Then I finally did the systemd switch. Liked how fast it made things and how much easier it made perusing events that happened on my system through the journal and the fact it can tell me the states of all my units. It makes figuring out why INSERT DAEMON HERE did not run as expected. Then I did research into more of why the change was made and found it even nicer than the traditional BSD-style init Arch used previously, found it was trivial to look into unit files instead of having to decypher initscripts. I say kudos to the Arch devs for implementing systemd. And kudos to Debian for actually wading through all the non-technical fearmongering people have about systemd and actually sticking to the facts about systemd and why it's a better, if not best, choice for Linux right now. Conrad -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/11912912.Ax8Hmizaqh@twilight
Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
On Sunday, March 02, 2014 04:25:13 PM Scott Ferguson wrote: On 02/03/14 11:28, Ralf Mardorf wrote: On Sun, 2014-03-02 at 10:55 +1100, Scott Ferguson wrote: Here's mine:- troll elsewhere - try rabbleRus.org or LetMeTellUWhat2Do.mob :D We Arch users made a poll. Even if more users would have been against systemd, the developers would have switched to systemd, but most users wanted systemd. We, around 49% and me were against systemd, but around 51 % were pro systemd. Nowadays it makes live easier for all of us who use several different distros, when _all_ or at least the most important distros will switch to systemd. To discuss pros and cons of systemd a time machine is needed, to go back more than 3 years ago. To discuss it in 2014 is a little bit to late. Same with Debian based on what I read, the vote was fairly evenly split, which is why it went to the Technical Committee, who were also fairly evenly split. Which probably demonstrates why there's no hidden agenda going on surrounding systemd and there were legitimate reasons why it was finally chosen. My concern is that it's a divisive issue that would be tempting for third parties to exacerbate and exploit. Commercial software vendors, and the companies that do their marketing and public relation might want to take advantage of the situation to reduce the market share they lose to Debian (and Linux as a whole). It wouldn't be that far from the sort of dirty tactics they've employed in the past. Definitely reasonable concerns, though to be honest, Linux's detractors would have looked for something else to latch onto if systemd wasn't divisive enough. In a few more years I imagine most people opposed to systemd won't have a problem with it being there after all after using it for a bit. And then there's NSA (and the companies they outsource to) - they *do* have an agenda that would be furthered by creating divisions and uncertainty in Debian. They've made large investments in software hooked to the existing init system - and while they'll have to retool to use systemd it doesn't mean they have the same access required to replace existing malware installations, additionally they would probably enjoy seeing less people use Debian. The trouble is, how effectively can the NSA hook itself into open source software? How easily could they get backdoors into something without upstream noticing? Might be effective getting hooks into something downstream, but I don't see the NSA getting anything into something upstream without someone noticing, since patches are generally reviewed before integration. To sum up my thought on that, the NSA needs cooperation from someone OUTSIDE the NSA to get their hooks in. How likely is it a Debian package maintainer would be compromised? Would someone else notice? Would the maintainer be removed? I'm not saying it's implausible so much as it doesn't sound like it'd last long if they could get something in. Could you perhaps give me some insight into ways the NSA could do this? I just don't see most upstream people cooperating. Can the NSA force anyone to actually put backdoors in their own code? I'm not saying the OP is a shill/disinformation/agent provocateur - just because it looks like a duck, paddles like a duck, and has it's head hidden, doesn't mean it is a duck. Could be just a decoy. Even though the spooks do like the French Guinea TLD and get their scripts from PsyOps... just a thought, probably paranoia on my part. Kind regards Conrad -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5689487.fCBUTfHKWg@twilight
Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
On Sunday, March 02, 2014 07:21:28 PM Chris Bannister wrote: On Sat, Mar 01, 2014 at 11:53:28PM -0600, y...@marupa.net wrote: On Sun, 2014-03-02 at 10:55 +1100, Scott Ferguson wrote: And then there's NSA (and the companies they outsource to) - they *do* have an agenda that would be furthered by creating divisions and uncertainty in Debian. They've made large investments in software hooked to the existing init system - and while they'll have to retool to use systemd it doesn't mean they have the same access required to replace existing malware installations, additionally they would probably enjoy seeing less people use Debian. The trouble is, how effectively can the NSA hook itself into open source software? How easily could they get backdoors into something without upstream noticing? Might be effective getting hooks into something downstream, but I don't see the NSA getting anything into something upstream without someone noticing, since patches are generally reviewed before integration. To sum up my thought on that, the NSA needs cooperation from someone OUTSIDE the NSA to get their hooks in. What! You mean that they want someone to act like Edward Snowdon? Though I know you're making a joke, I'm really serious, I'm not certain how NSA spyware works in source code readily available to the public. Conrad -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/3182814.TKkp6ehV4I@twilight
Re: Am I paranoid?
On Monday, February 24, 2014 04:40:39 PM ha wrote: On 02/24/14 16:24, ha wrote: Hi! Try to find that file. ( run something like find / -name vmtoolsd ) I did. It only shows that files are there: /etc/pam.d/vmtoolsd /usr/bin/vmtoolsd By the way, there is also /etc/vmware-tools folder This rather highlights why I like Arch's package manager (Pacman.) more than APT. Pacman features a command (pacman -Qo file) that explicitly checks a file you specify for package ownership. Rather than getting paranoid, go see if APT has a tool that does the same thing. I find it doubtful you've been compromised. Conrad -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1943927.mP18IQJb7E@twilight
Re: Am I paranoid?
On Monday, February 24, 2014 03:48:04 PM Karl E. Jorgensen wrote:
Hi
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 09:43:39AM -0600, y...@marupa.net wrote:
On Monday, February 24, 2014 04:40:39 PM ha wrote:
On 02/24/14 16:24, ha wrote:
Hi!
Try to find that file. ( run something like find / -name vmtoolsd )
I did. It only shows that files are there:
/etc/pam.d/vmtoolsd
/usr/bin/vmtoolsd
By the way, there is also /etc/vmware-tools folder
This rather highlights why I like Arch's package manager (Pacman.) more
than APT. Pacman features a command (pacman -Qo file) that explicitly
checks a file you specify for package ownership.
dpkg --search ${filename}
Thank you. Using that command it'd be trivial to see if those files were
installed by the package manager, maybe a dependency, which is more likely
than being compromised, in all honesty.
Conrad
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1521775.fCcAIDVUWK@twilight
Re: .xsession-errors
On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 12:12:20 PM Frank McCormick wrote: I have been noticing this error in .xsession-errors file lately: glibtop: Non-standard uts for running kernel: release 3.12-1-686-pae=3.12.0 gives version code 199680 Can someone explain what's this about ? Should I be concerned? Thanks This is probably not the best advice but: If nothing slows down/crashes/screws up data, then you can probably ignore it. Conrad -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1670744.o8VPmNICbx@twilight
Re: Disk heads won't park
On Monday, February 17, 2014 04:55:48 PM Ralf Mardorf wrote: On Mon, 2014-02-17 at 16:46 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote: For each drive $ sudo smartctl -a /dev/sd... now and a few minutes later, then compare the RAW_VALUE for ID#4 Start_Stop_Count and/or ID#193 Load_Cycle_Count. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.M.A.R.T.#Known_ATA_S.M.A.R.T._attributes This will show you if a drive does spin up and down. Some software, e.g. GVFS and KDE's equivalent to GVFS could make drives spin up and down again and again. I'm e.g. using Xfce4 without GVFS, but after using K3b my Green WD USB drive spins up and down again and again, if I have GVFS installed this happens all the times. I don't think KDE has anything like GVFS. I use KDE and see nothing extra mounted shows up in my mtab. This is fine since I never saw the point in GVFS at all in the first place. Conrad -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1411744.YXNcZSAktK@twilight
Re: [OT] KDM No Longer In KDE ?!?
On Monday, February 17, 2014 12:00:23 PM y...@marupa.net wrote: On Monday, February 17, 2014 06:02:47 PM Erwan David wrote: Le 17/02/2014 17:27, y...@marupa.net a écrit : On Monday, February 17, 2014 04:13:11 PM Nick Boyce wrote: Sorry - this isn't strictly a Debian KDE question, but I figure somebody here will know something about this. In the latest KDE Commit-Digest (Issue 322, dated 12th.Jan.2014) [1] the following very terse and (to me) bizarre statement is made : KDM has been removed ... KDM goes the way of the Dodo. It's exactly, to the day, 6 years ago that we released KDE 4.0, while this is of course entirely unrelated to this commit, let's celebrate this anniversary with the deletion of kdm from kde-workspace. There is no explanation for this, no clarification about a replacement of some sort. A quick bit of googling for such terms as KDM removal [why] reveals nothing. Can anyone here enlighten me please ? I'm just trying to stay educated :) [1] http://commit-digest.org/issues/2014-01-12/ Cheers, Nick http://www.thepowerbase.com/2013/03/plasma-workspaces-2-coming-to-waylan d- kdm-not-invited/ Conrad So it seems linux is becoming a new windows, loosing features after features to be only a cvlone for the dumb people who want windows without learning anything else. If you read the article, they give excellent reasons for it. KDM doesn't suit the needs of KDE into the future. Instead they want to pick an existing DM that will already have good Wayland support. Seems reasonable to me. What can we use to keep remote dispaly whch wayland does not ahve (and no a remote desktop is NOT a remote display of a program). When is the last time, realistically, you've actually used XDCMP or X tunneling? Also, there's nothing stopping people from creating a compositor for Wayland that is network transparent. The problem with X's network transparency is that it's horribly inefficient (Slow even on broadband connections and takes a LOT of bandwidth for all the protocols X11 uses.) and has very little use in today's Linux desktops. You might not like it, but RDP/VNC are better alternatives. I personally just use SSH. I have no need for remote GUIs on Linux. People may choose to eat shit, the propblem is when they force it on other people. Then why choose to continue eating OLD shit? X11 is an ancient, cruft- encumbered pile with features that aren't needed at all anymore on today's desktop. Even the Xorg developers want to see the day they don't work on Xorg. Wayland isn't being forced on anybody, but it's generally agreed by users and developers alike it's a good move because it gets rid of stuff we just have no use for and takes advantage of actual modern features we could actually use on a Linux desktop like KMS and compositing, two features that were effectively hacked in to Xorg. It's like SysV Init, it's an old, tired, pain in the ass to maintain that is going to be replaced but has people who want it to stay around because change is bad. Conrad Accidentally didn't reply this to the mailing list. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/11053604.JMXGqIYsP4@twilight
Re: [OT] KDM No Longer In KDE ?!?
On Monday, February 17, 2014 07:18:40 PM Erwan David wrote: Le 17/02/2014 19:02, y...@marupa.net a écrit : On Monday, February 17, 2014 12:00:23 PM y...@marupa.net wrote: On Monday, February 17, 2014 06:02:47 PM Erwan David wrote: Le 17/02/2014 17:27, y...@marupa.net a écrit : On Monday, February 17, 2014 04:13:11 PM Nick Boyce wrote: Sorry - this isn't strictly a Debian KDE question, but I figure somebody here will know something about this. In the latest KDE Commit-Digest (Issue 322, dated 12th.Jan.2014) [1] the following very terse and (to me) bizarre statement is made : KDM has been removed ... KDM goes the way of the Dodo. It's exactly, to the day, 6 years ago that we released KDE 4.0, while this is of course entirely unrelated to this commit, let's celebrate this anniversary with the deletion of kdm from kde-workspace. There is no explanation for this, no clarification about a replacement of some sort. A quick bit of googling for such terms as KDM removal [why] reveals nothing. Can anyone here enlighten me please ? I'm just trying to stay educated :) [1] http://commit-digest.org/issues/2014-01-12/ Cheers, Nick http://www.thepowerbase.com/2013/03/plasma-workspaces-2-coming-to-wayla n d- kdm-not-invited/ Conrad So it seems linux is becoming a new windows, loosing features after features to be only a cvlone for the dumb people who want windows without learning anything else. If you read the article, they give excellent reasons for it. KDM doesn't suit the needs of KDE into the future. Instead they want to pick an existing DM that will already have good Wayland support. Seems reasonable to me. What can we use to keep remote dispaly whch wayland does not ahve (and no a remote desktop is NOT a remote display of a program). When is the last time, realistically, you've actually used XDCMP or X tunneling? Also, there's nothing stopping people from creating a compositor for Wayland that is network transparent. The problem with X's network transparency is that it's horribly inefficient (Slow even on broadband connections and takes a LOT of bandwidth for all the protocols X11 uses.) and has very little use in today's Linux desktops. You might not like it, but RDP/VNC are better alternatives. I personally just use SSH. I have no need for remote GUIs on Linux. I have. ssh +X remote display. I use it every day, and it simply *works* It works, but it's slow. I have a good network in my home and I've never seen it perform well even with compression. RDP takes less bandwidth than X forwarding, because it doesn't need to send all those X protocols over the network, just a bitmap display and input data. I've always found it faster. being obliged tpo launch a full remote desktop is completley inneficient, just ebecause of the volume of useless crap it obliges to transfer. People may choose to eat shit, the propblem is when they force it on other people. Then why choose to continue eating OLD shit? X11 is an ancient, cruft- encumbered pile with features that aren't needed at all anymore on today's desktop. Even the Xorg developers want to see the day they don't work on Xorg. Wayland isn't being forced on anybody, It is. You have every option to stay on Xorg even after Wayland is adopted. No one is dropping X11 support, but they are refocusing on Wayland because it's a better option than Xorg. It's not being forced on you. but it's generally agreed by users and developers alike it's a good move because it gets rid of stuff we just have no use for and takes advantage of actual modern features we could actually use on a Linux desktop like KMS and compositing, two features that were effectively hacked in to Xorg. KMS and compoisiting are no use for me. They could have been id theyt had not been flawed from the begining by putting them in the client. But I need remote display. I use it every day, and saying is not yuseful will not make the need disapear. If the feature disapears it is a REGRESSION. Nothing else If an unneeded feature that causes unnecessary complexity and makes it harder and harder to maintain a codebase is removed, it's STREAMLINING, not a regression. You might not LIKE it, but that doesn't make it a regression. One of the actual stated purposes of Wayland is to completely DROP the majority of useless features no one needs in X11 but are still there purely for backwards compatibility. You know how much of the Xorg codebase is dedicated to running obsolete features? It's a mess. It's like SysV Init, it's an old, tired, pain in the ass to maintain that is going to be replaced but has people who want it to stay around because change is bad. No just beacause the so called replacement DOES NOT REPLACE IT. Sure it does, with XWayland. And as I said, nothing stops anyone from
Re: Bombono DVD
On Sunday, February 16, 2014 06:24:10 PM LM--- wrote: Dear developers, I WANT BOMBONO DVD for the next Debian release ;-)) It's simply working great here! ludo What is a Bombono DVD? Conrad -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/2448151.FspCJjLXAZ@twilight
Re: FW: [CTTE #727708] Default init system for Debian
On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 04:50:49 PM Gian Uberto Lauri wrote: Ralf Mardorf writes: If we like it or dislike it, sysvinit / init scripts are dead. Sounds like a Bad News(TM). Why bad news? SysV init's been dead through most of the rest of *nix-land (Even most certified Unixen don't use it anymore.). Why do we need to stick with it? And initscripts are a slow and overcomplicated way to start up a system (With more than its share of technical problems.). It's much better to boot up via configuration, not scripting: Easier to maintain, much faster, and much more flexible. Not to mention it's a modern feature Linux could make good use of. SysV's been a dead-end option for a long time now, it just took this long for viable alternatives to mature for Linux. Conrad -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4521371.As9hA7Kjzy@twilight
Re: klondike ( freecell?) gone in jessie?
On Monday, February 10, 2014 11:24:14 AM Paul Cartwright wrote: I just upgraded to Jessie from wheezy. Took most of Saturday afternoon.. looks like most everything got upgraded ok, EXCEPT... I used to have klondike/freecell installed, but it isn't there anymore. The only thing still in Synaptic package manager are 2 packages- freecell-solver-bin and libfreecell-solver0 . what happened, or is it just not ready for jessie?? If you're a KDE user you can find both these games in KPatience. Conrad -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1608193.jCAhEra9uQ@twilight
Re: About to format the whole laptop, need some partitioning advice.
On Wednesday, February 05, 2014 08:27:15 AM David Guntner wrote: Zenaan Harkness grabbed a keyboard and wrote: On 2/5/14, Anubhav Yadav anubhav1...@gmail.com wrote: [...] Nowadays, the only partitions I use are: /boot - about 1GiB Unless you're planning on having a lot of different kernels installed, you really don't need a full gig for /boot (it doesn't hurt anything, though). Heck, unless you plan to multiboot with other Linux/Unix-likes there's little point in a separate /boot EXCEPT possibly as a way to keep your machine booting if you remove Linux (Probably better to just reinstall the Windows boot manager.). / - root partition, the rest How Windowsian of you. :-) This way, it's really simple, and the old reasons (for most home users at least) for having multiple partitions are no longer valid (separate backups, making sure /root does not fill up, etc), since the HDDs are so capacious. It's not just a matter of capacity. I've got a 1TB drive, and I still partition them into separate sections: $ df -k Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on rootfs 1818872 299704 1426704 18% / udev 102400 10240 0% /dev tmpfs 30954012812296728 5% /run /dev/disk/by-uuid/36f6b922-0e9a-4ce5-aeee-c92104fa2428 1818872 299704 1426704 18% / tmpfs 51204 5116 1% /run/lock tmpfs 10495600 1049560 0% /run/shm /dev/sda1 137221 20211109689 16% /boot /dev/sda12 67284600 16339432 47527264 26% /home /dev/sdb1 307665016 40081124 251955400 14% /backup /dev/sda9 28835836 351612 27019444 2% /opt /dev/sda6 288259269908 2666252 3% /tmp /dev/sda7 28835836 7400256 19970800 28% /usr /dev/sda8 48060296 15360908 30258020 34% /usr/local /dev/sda10 28835836 1455184 25915872 6% /var /dev/sda11 28835836 179364 27191692 1% /var/spool 1) What partitioning scheme should I choose now, If I want to have /home, /var, /usr, /tmp on different partitions and I just want a windoze partition of 50-60 gb. But WHY do you want them on separate partitions? XY problem? Can't speak for him, but for me it's a segmenting issue. If I have to wipe / for example, I'm not wiping things in /usr or /usr/local (where my locally-installed programs go) unless I have to, or even /home. Of course, there's no reason to want to protect /home from an install that wants to format the / partition, right? :-) Separate /usr is unneeded and actually complicates boot for little benefit. Most Linux distributions rely on /usr being present before the end of the early userspace. Preserving /usr between installations is a bad idea because you'll have all your software MINUS any information on any of it being installed available to your package manager. This means one reinstall later you're basically stopped from even upgrading most of it, can't remove it with the manager, etc. Separate /home is a must for me, though. That's the number one thing to persist between not only installations, but machines. Best thing to put on a dedicated hard disk if you can. 2) As you can see in the screenshot, gparted shows that the hdd is only 698 gb whereas when purchased it was 720 GB. Any ways to recover the lost sectors back? You lost none - 700,000,000,000 bytes is the correct and advertised size of the drive, as sold. 2^10^3 bytes is one GiB 10^9 bytes is a GB or the term used for advertising (historical, too much momentum to change it nowadays it seems). Don't forget, the capacity they list is the full, complete capacity of the drive - not the usable amount of space. You always lose some to formatting information, etc. --Dave Conrad -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/3135023.rs7QG44D6x@twilight
Re: Any reason not to run amd64 these days?
On Sunday, February 02, 2014 01:58:54 PM Rick Macdonald wrote: I've been running 32bit Debian since release 0.93, before buzz was released. I've been through a few PCs over these 20 years, and now my latest one is dying on me (HP Dual core Pentium D, 4GB RAM). Sorry to see your dual core is dying. I like running quad cores today, makes compiling stuff from source speedier. I'd like to take a step up and get a machine with more memory (12 or 16GB). I've done some searching and it seems these days there are no limitations with having access to all Debian packages, especially if one uses the multi-arch feature. Frankly there's still barely any justification to go above the 4 GiB limit. If you want lots of memory I'd still suggest saviing money and bumping up to 8 GiB, but the reality is that even if you're gaming on Windows 4 GiB is still plenty. Still, I'd like to ask on the list here. Are there any issues with switching to amd64? What about drivers? No real major issues, no. I've never had problems with drivers (Even binary blobs.) in 64-bit, and most Linux distributions have very good multilib capability. Though personally I think Debian's multilib support is not as good as Archlinux's (Arch simply provides a multilib repository, Debian does something weird with forcing architectures in apt and dpkg. Frankly if you have a 64-bit machine it's a waste of your machine's potential staying on a 32-bit operating system even with less than 4 GiB of RAM. You will, especially on this mailing list, get a lot of people who act like running 64-bit if you don't have more than 4 GiB of RAM is some sort of apocalyptic disaster, but I've been running on sub-4 GiB 64-bit rigs with 64- bit Linux since 2007 with absolutely zero issues. even when running 32-bit software on 64-bit Linux. The new machine will likely be an off-the-shelf HP I7-4470 CPU machine with an NVIDIA GeForce card, somewhere between a GT635 and a GTX660. If you're interested in mac performace (At a little higher cost.) I'd definitely recommend a dedicated card and never use integrated graphics. Looks like you have some in mind. I use a GT 640 in mine. What about running 32 bit windows and apps in wine or VMWare? No issues I've ever seen running 32-bit stuff in WINE or VMs on a 64-bit processor, again, because of multilib support, chances are when you install WINE it'll be a 32-bit version. There are 64-bit versions of WINE but most people use 32-bit because most Windows software is still 32-bit. Regards, Rick Conrad -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1394993.rn4JIBNPGP@twilight
Re: sad but true, Linux sucks, a bit
On Thursday, January 16, 2014 10:40:40 PM Zenaan Harkness wrote: On 1/16/14, Ma Xiaojun damage3...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 10:08 PM, Jarth Berilcosm ja...@yahoo.com wrote: Looking back on using Linux as a desktop OS for almost 15 years we've seen tons of features added but not much in terms of 'bite'. Also, how many projects can one need for a specific purpose built on the libraries of a parent project providing 80% of the functionality. How much of these improvements go upstream, if at all ? I suspect the open- and-free-model lacks the incentive to go forth with fusing projects to making delivery of targets more timely. I don't understand what you mean. What I see is that Red Hat is being more and more like a dictator. I'll bite - I DO want to see an end to this type of 'meme'! : Red Hat has been an absolutely outstanding Free/Libre software corporation, steadfastly sticking to fully libre licenses, including for numerous acquisitions the company has made! Time and again, Red Hat has developed software in house, and released it under a totally libre license! Time and again, Red Hat has purchased some external software house, which was under proprietary license, and then just to turn around and release it under a totally libre license! Of course they are judicious with what they purchase (just to turn around and release as libre software). Of course they are judicious with their in-house development human resources. Rightly so! And let's hope Red Hat the company remains judicious, and exemplary, and an outstanding member of the free software community (my definition thank you). For just one example: - I am unable to use systemd, due to some mismatches (bugs) between I, my current usage and knowledge patterns, and how Debian, and other software I use, currently all work together. - But based on all I've read, systemd, for Linux based systems, is quite superior to anything we've seen before, for what it does. We want a top-notch tradition computer desktop? I certainly do, and systemd, AFAICS, will certainly help us get there. And note: systemd was only adopted (by Red Hat/ Fedora) may be two years after Lennart started developing it in his own time. - Based on Red Hat's history alone, I believe that systemd has been chosed for technical superiority reasons. Yes, it will help servers. Yes, it will help desktops. I think that the main problem we libre software community face at the moment is as has been mentioned elsewhere in this thread - the talent pool has shifted at least somewhat to more exciting projects (a shiny new Android IM app anyone? we really could use another! :) :) We who are able ought to step up to those plates which are important to us (eg audio drivers, input systems, whatever). But let's not bash one of our community's greatest corporate allies ever - Red Hat! Regards, Zenaan PS, I even tried to use Red Hat once, not long before the community edition was split into Fedora, or perhaps just after, but at that time I was all command-line-only, and the different locations of things and different ways of doing things, just wasn't worth it to me. I think this attitude toward Red Hat stems from a subculture developing in the FOSS movement that corporation == evil. Thing is, you're right: Red Hat has been doing an examplary job, especially in developing technologies for Linux to make a usable personal desktop. I'm an Arch user on the desktop, and I use Debian Stable on my server. Let me tell you I would jump for joy if I could switch to systemd on my server without having to hand-write most the unit files I'd need to get it back in working order. Instead I'd rather see Jessie go to systemd. I know this would alienate Debian Hurd and Debian BSD people, but let's be perfectly frank here: They're fringe projects few actual real-world Debian users care about, and shouldn't slow real-world, actual Debian progress over. I definitely am for at least giving most of Red Hat's ideas they try on Fedora a spin. Systemd works like a charm on systems designed to make use of it (Arch and Gentoo (As a fully-suppored alternative to OpenRC.). No need to mention Fedora.) The worst option to follow these days is actually Ubuntu, which uses Upstart, which does what systemd does, only backwards and in a poorly thought out way, and the fact they want to jump to Mir (A half-baked, half-assed alternative to Xorg and Wayland minus compatibility for either.), which is going to effectively kill their usable software library as most upstream projects like KDE, Qt, and GTK+ have said in no uncertain terms they won't support Mir, which will mean Ubuntu will lose compatibility with 95% of the established desktop software base for Linux. Following Fedora on the desktop is a good idea. Following Ubuntu on the desktop is a BAD idea. I disagree that the FOSS talent has jumped ship, though (Heck,
Re: sad but true, Linux sucks, a bit
On Wednesday, January 15, 2014 04:53:15 PM Jarth Berilcosm wrote: On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 17:29:01 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote: I'm using a news-reader and could not find the off-topic mailinglist. Sorry to say so but your reply sounds more like rambling than anything. I'll reply to the part i was able to comprehend. Expectations ? Man, get a good night sleep. Computers are cheap crap because they can be made to be cheap crap. The production proces permits this. Most importantly this list is not an opinion. Almost every listed point has links to appropriate articles, threads and discussions centered on it, proving that I haven't pulled it out of my expletive . And please always check your facts. If you get an impression that Linux sucks - you are largely wrong. If I had to create a list of Windows problems, it would be almost as long as this one. - http://linuxfonts.narod.ru/ why.linux.is.not.ready.for.the.desktop.current.html Unworldly! A lot of people think like you, not understanding that digital technology can't compare to analog technology. Sure, using a computer humans can do some things that can't be done manually or by analog technology, but most things are from much higher quality, when done with analog technology or manually. Multimedia, toolmaking, ... an endless list. We use computers, because analog technology and handcrafted things are to expensive, the complete philosophy of human kind did go a step in the wrong direction. I'm pro computers, already using Linux for more than 10 years, but started much earlier with computers in the late 80s. It's a misunderstanding to guess that computer technology is that progressed. Computers are cheap crap. If you are aware that they are nothing but cheap crap, you can use them from an relatively objective point of view. Less expectations = less disappointment High expectations = high disappointment IOW your opinion is subjective from an unworldly point of view. Regards, Ralf PS: You sent to the wrong list. I only Cc'ed to Debian user and sent to the off-topic list. I suspect replies should go to this list only. These reasons why Linux is not ready for the desktop lists are so stupid. Sure they're objective. But you know how easy it is to take Windows or OS X, grab a list of THEIR flaws, and call them reasons *they* aren't ready for the desktop? This is practically trolling. Nothing to see here people, move along. Conrad -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1526474.kVutC6NRmJ@twilight
Re: sudo security Was: Reporting missing package during install
On Tuesday, December 10, 2013 11:15:26 AM John Hasler wrote: Gian Uberto Lauri writes: Some of your argument seems to suggest that the Debian installer should not offer the option of leaving the root password blank Gian Uberto Lauri IT DOES? AAARGH! It *disables* the root account. Thus there is only one vulnerable account. Not only that, but now whoever seeks to compromise your account has the added challenge of figuring out just what, exactly, the name of the account is. The problem with 'root' is everyone who would intend to compromise it knows its name. Conrad -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/6261204.3WviBqbffP@twilight
Re: Shutdown computer after a specific command has been executed
On Monday, December 09, 2013 03:56:12 PM Tony van der Hoff wrote: On 09/12/13 15:16, Lisi Reisz wrote: On Monday 09 December 2013 14:03:57 Muntasim-Ul-Haque wrote: I'm a Broadband Internet user and I'm billed for the time my Internet connection is active. Sometimes it happens that I've a large software to install like the TeXworks, which is about 650MB, I think. Or, the system up-gradation, if you may consider. In that case, that would take 6Hrs+ for my Internet connection. I'm puzzled. How can broadband take six hours to do an upgrade? I would expect dial-up to do so, but broadband?? I even looked in Wiktionary to see whether it was another word which changes its meaning as it crosses the pond, but that appears not to be the case. :-? I don't think he meant broadband. BB is always-on, and nobody gets charged by the minute. By the byte, more likely. Shutting down the computer won't disconnect the session. This depends on the ISP. My ISP does flat fees for its standard connection. But if you go for their uber fantastic awesome uber uber great awesome uber plans they'll start charging for overage and usually set their cap unreasonably low. Therefore one must conclude he's actually on dial-up, in which case both of his concerns (connect time and transmission rate) are valid. As someone else said, the sensible thing to do would be to drop theline, rather than kill the computer. Conrad -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1387432.NNSKksPXA6@twilight
Re: A rookie's query: Want to about Debian and the related
On Tuesday, December 03, 2013 12:12:36 AM Robert Holtzman wrote: On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 11:51:41AM -0600, y...@marupa.net wrote: .snip. Oh, that does clear it up. But again, I don't see that as a free vs. nonfree issue. Most software will choose defaults for you and you can change it, even Mozilla. I'm a KDE user, often a lot of KDE defaults I don't like or don't make sense, Kopete being perhaps the worst offender. I often don't care for software that requires user-side configuration to already be in place when run. By user-side I mean dotfiles in home directory. I do not really mind if I have to set something up in /etc, however, largely because I will most often be changing the defaults. What's the difference between setting something up in /etc and editing a dot file in your home directory? This shouldn't have to be explained to most Linux administrators. /etc is for system-wide configuration of software, meant to be handled by the administrator and if there's no default there's good reason for it. Most the configuration there is for stuff you don't want the average user to muck around with OR might cause trouble if poorly configured. Not to mention the average user has no permissions to change anything on /etc barring root privelege. It's not the place for an application to offer *preferences* but pure configuration to make sure it works with the system and how the administrator NEEDS it to. It is reasonable to expect anyone trying to change THIS configuration knows enough about the files to actually understand what they are doing. Dotfiles are all about enabling a user to supply preferences as opposed to pure configuration. Instead of it being about setting up the software to work correctly it's about getting it to be about how the user wants it to do its job. The reason why I think a sane application should just set up sane defaults is because an end user wants to run their application and then maybe change how it works in settings dialogs. *Not* open up a man page and figure out the details of the format, syntax, and semantics of a configuration file. It is NOT reasonable to expect the average user to understand what they are doing with that in this context. This might be fine for a power user (Of which I am one.) but I wouldn't put anything that requires manually editing text files for preferences on someone else's computer and expect them to use it. I prefer Google anyway, though, as I have yet to see a search engine that works nearly as well. I know a lot of people rave about Duck Duck Go, but every time I use it it loves to bring up results in an order that doesn't hit the same sort of relevance as Google. But Google using my search for advertising doesn't bother me. Neither, evidently, does it's personal data collection. Google is hardly the only service that does this. Chances are the second you set up with your ISP someone's already gotten ahold of your personal data. Going fear Google is unproductive because by the time you even visit their site for the first time some information on you is already had. Granted, your ISP is unlikely to blindly share it. I know it's all the rage to villify Google these days but it really is a constant double standard how people blatantly ignore the hundreds of other places you give up personal data to on and off the Internet. I'm not saying Google is justified, I'm just saying the near-blind Google hate is getting old and tired and I have no reason to really care about my personal data as I'm not dumb enough to shovel anything actually sensitive in my Google searches. There's no real guarantee of anonymity on the Internet even if you use things such as Tor. I feel fussing and going out of your way to try to get the non- existant 100% anonymity thing is a waste of productive time. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/3573143.ncNx42bVmC@twilight
Re: A rookie's query: Want to about Debian and the related
On Monday, December 02, 2013 05:14:17 PM Ralf Mardorf wrote: On Mon, 02 Dec 2013 15:14:27 +0100, AP worldwithoutfen...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 6:49 PM, Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote: I can't remember what I tested a while ago. Perhaps Claws, maybe Sylpheed. I'll try _both_ again. Have all tried Thunderbird? I am eager to know about it. Is it excellent? I used it for years, it was and likely is excellent, but not a native Linux app and as already mentioned before, I dislike the Mozilla policy. It's my eccentric, whimsical notion that I don't use Mozillas _if possible_, but I also guess that ... [1]. IOW Mozilla as a MUA for me never ever again. As browser I still use QupZilla and the Tor Browser Bundle quasi based on Mozilla software. Why would you say it's not Linux native? Is Thunderbird not compiled for Linux? It's not running on Java or Mono or anything, is it? I don't follow your logic here. Do you mean it's not exclusive to Linux? That's true, but why is that a bad thing? Conrad -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/28877626.c0ni3dsRTF@twilight
Re: A rookie's query: Want to about Debian and the related
On Monday, December 02, 2013 05:46:04 PM Ralf Mardorf wrote: On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 20:52 +0530, AP wrote: But still you say it good and the fact that many people use it, makes me a trust for it Perhaps more people use Outlook Express ;)? Seriously, Thunderbird might even be more used as Outlook Express on Windows, but this means, that it's an interesting target for attacks. A better way to put that is this. Popularity doen't necessarily translate to quality, however, popularity almost guarantees someone, somewhere, is looking at the code. This paradigm only really makes sense when source code is readily available, though, as we can't guarantee, say, a proprietary POP3 client written by a now-defunct company will ever see fixes or changes again. A wide install base of open source software pretty much assures us that there will be someone taking care of the software even if they themselves are not the upstream maintainer or developer. Open source is gaining ground as a model largely for this reason: You can spend more time and money trying to get a company to fix their proprietary solution for your organization, or you can have someone do it in-house at far less cost (Beyond costs associated with employing a developer to maintain your organization's infrastructure.) Personally, I use KMail. It's a lot less resource intensive than Thunderbird (Called Icedove in Debian.), does the job well, and integrates with KDE SC, including Plasma and Kontact. Thunderbird doesn't integrate well even in native GTK+ environments. Conrad -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/2673118.WsU7sLD1R6@twilight
Re: A rookie's query: Want to about Debian and the related
On Monday, December 02, 2013 05:56:09 PM Ralf Mardorf wrote: On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 10:27 -0600, y...@marupa.net wrote: On Monday, December 02, 2013 05:14:17 PM Ralf Mardorf wrote: On Mon, 02 Dec 2013 15:14:27 +0100, AP worldwithoutfen...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 6:49 PM, Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote: I can't remember what I tested a while ago. Perhaps Claws, maybe Sylpheed. I'll try _both_ again. Have all tried Thunderbird? I am eager to know about it. Is it excellent? I used it for years, it was and likely is excellent, but not a native Linux app and as already mentioned before, I dislike the Mozilla policy. It's my eccentric, whimsical notion that I don't use Mozillas _if possible_, but I also guess that ... [1]. IOW Mozilla as a MUA for me never ever again. As browser I still use QupZilla and the Tor Browser Bundle quasi based on Mozilla software. Why would you say it's not Linux native? Is Thunderbird not compiled for Linux? It's not running on Java or Mono or anything, is it? I don't follow your logic here. Do you mean it's not exclusive to Linux? That's true, but why is that a bad thing? If you want adapt a Microsoft/Apple policy to Linux, then Mozillas are perfect. Go and give Google all your private data, don't care about the freedom to choose a mail format, use mbox (yes, it's UNIX, not Microsoft, but how often is it used by Linux MUAs?) ... Mozilla software is excellent regarding to technically aspects, but not regarding to freedom. I don't see how POP3 or IMAP services are nonfree just because you have data on a server somewhere. There might be privacy concerns but those protocols are just as open as mbox is. Perhaps you can elaborate how Mozilla's approach is nonfree aside from the trademark issue we already know about. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1713734.KHCs1lFzrl@twilight
Re: A rookie's query: Want to about Debian and the related
On Monday, December 02, 2013 06:26:26 PM Ralf Mardorf wrote: On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 11:20 -0600, y...@marupa.net wrote: On Monday, December 02, 2013 05:56:09 PM Ralf Mardorf wrote: On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 10:27 -0600, y...@marupa.net wrote: On Monday, December 02, 2013 05:14:17 PM Ralf Mardorf wrote: On Mon, 02 Dec 2013 15:14:27 +0100, AP worldwithoutfen...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 6:49 PM, Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote: I can't remember what I tested a while ago. Perhaps Claws, maybe Sylpheed. I'll try _both_ again. Have all tried Thunderbird? I am eager to know about it. Is it excellent? I used it for years, it was and likely is excellent, but not a native Linux app and as already mentioned before, I dislike the Mozilla policy. It's my eccentric, whimsical notion that I don't use Mozillas _if possible_, but I also guess that ... [1]. IOW Mozilla as a MUA for me never ever again. As browser I still use QupZilla and the Tor Browser Bundle quasi based on Mozilla software. Why would you say it's not Linux native? Is Thunderbird not compiled for Linux? It's not running on Java or Mono or anything, is it? I don't follow your logic here. Do you mean it's not exclusive to Linux? That's true, but why is that a bad thing? If you want adapt a Microsoft/Apple policy to Linux, then Mozillas are perfect. Go and give Google all your private data, don't care about the freedom to choose a mail format, use mbox (yes, it's UNIX, not Microsoft, but how often is it used by Linux MUAs?) ... Mozilla software is excellent regarding to technically aspects, but not regarding to freedom. I don't see how POP3 or IMAP services are nonfree just because you have data on a server somewhere. There might be privacy concerns but those protocols are just as open as mbox is. Perhaps you can elaborate how Mozilla's approach is nonfree aside from the trademark issue we already know about. You misunderstood my point. There might be nothing bad with using mbox, but having the freedom to chose mbox or maldir is the freedom to chose. Mozillas nanny you, they chose the mail format for you, the chose Google as startpage for you, they make decisions for you. I want to decide on my own. I don't need somebody to make decisions for me. Regards, Ralf Oh, that does clear it up. But again, I don't see that as a free vs. nonfree issue. Most software will choose defaults for you and you can change it, even Mozilla. I'm a KDE user, often a lot of KDE defaults I don't like or don't make sense, Kopete being perhaps the worst offender. I often don't care for software that requires user-side configuration to already be in place when run. By user-side I mean dotfiles in home directory. I do not really mind if I have to set something up in /etc, however, largely because I will most often be changing the defaults. I prefer Google anyway, though, as I have yet to see a search engine that works nearly as well. I know a lot of people rave about Duck Duck Go, but every time I use it it loves to bring up results in an order that doesn't hit the same sort of relevance as Google. But Google using my search for advertising doesn't bother me. Conrad -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1461397.EcyO05a067@twilight
Re: Dotfiles
Package managers don't track .dotfiles. Those are created at runtime by your software. On Jul 2, 2013 3:49 PM, Hendrik Boom hend...@topoi.pooq.com wrote: There are lots of .dotfiles cluttering my home directory. No doubt some of them are useful. Many, though, are probably remnants of packages of years past -- packages I installed long ago, no longer need, and have removed. Is there any way of identifying which packages are using which dotfiles? And which ones are obsolete -- the user equivalent of configuration files, which are properly tracked by the package manager? Should there be? -- hendrik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/kqvebj$6h5$1...@ger.gmane.org
Re: Switching to 64 bit
Honestly, there's not really any major issue with Flash on 64-bit unless you use nspluginwrapper. Use native 64-bit flash. Debian's multilib is a lot better, so the only issue is maybe in support for software only available in 32-bit. Conrad On Jun 27, 2013 7:12 PM, Frank McCormick debianl...@videotron.ca wrote: I am running 32 bit Sid and am thinking about a new computer which has a 64 bit Intel CPU. How much of a hassle will it be switching my installation over ? I know there are some problems with Flash but what about the kernel and so forth- I am not a newby but this is the first time I've considered a a major change. Thanks for any advice. -- Cheers Frank -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.**debian.orgdebian-user-requ...@lists.debian.orgwith a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/**51ccd4ce.5010...@videotron.cahttp://lists.debian.org/51ccd4ce.5010...@videotron.ca
Re: Sid Libc6 Upgrade
I noticed if you set this to upgrade in Synaptic it will require you to pretty much remove your entire Debian install package by package. On Jun 21, 2013 3:40 AM, David Baron d_ba...@012.net.il wrote: These packages are held back right now because of a changeover from package:arch to package-arch, it seems. Ready to play, or should be back off for a while?
Re: administration of initscripts
On 04/16/2013 11:55 AM, Thilo Six wrote: Hello Michael, Excerpt from Michael Biebl: -- snip -- + dropping human readable textfiles in favour of c binary code, which makes it needless more complex to debug the whole show. That's non-sense. systemd unit files are text-files in ini-like format and much more readable then shell scripts with all their boiler plate. I think it was more in reference to the systemd journal, which is not plaintext by any means. It is by no means c binary code either. It is like saying gzipped log files are c binary code. I stand corrected. If i have time i might teach myself better the ins- and outs of systemd. It might be worth it even if you have no plans to use it yourself. The more familiarity you have with software in Linux the more you can help. Fortunately systemd is pretty easy to learn so long as you keep in mind it won't be like a traditional init. Conrad -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/516ebf96.6010...@marupa.net
Re: administration of initscripts
On 04/16/2013 03:02 PM, Kevin Chadwick wrote: Lets not pollute this useful thread with systemd It seems a thread about init systems and administration/tweaking of them is the most appropriate place for systemd to be mentioned. Not least that it can solve the problem the OP had. It should not be ignored or avoided from being mentioned just because some people hate it. Some people hate sysvinit. What we should not do is 'pollute' the thread with any misinformed bias or non objective statements about the suitability of something for a particular job. Let's stick to facts. Fair enough. I would always agree with that. I will say I am not biased in any way by my usage of BSD. but I will say it would be the absolute last on my list and actually systemd itself is incomptible with BSD not just udev and from my experience would be laughed out of the room by BSD devs even if it was POSIX compliant. Luckily we're on a Debian mailing list, then, isn't it, and not a BSD one! Systemd has assimilated udev, in a manner of speaking. Udev can still run completely without systemd, but for system builders they have to take a lot of extra steps to seperate udev from systemd and install it. Worse, some devs of systemd want to fully integrate udev into systemd and make it so you can't use udev without systemd. This is bad for many distributions as systemd may not be an option. Debian is an example: Debian has a couple pet prijects to be ported to things like HURD and BSD, which do not provide kernel features absolutely necessary for systemd. Some Gentoo developers have forked udev for this reason. I was merely replying to a few mails at once noting that the above suggests udev is the only non posix part. Systemd is too, such as cgroups which if you search for on the OpenBSD list you will see strong arguments for them actually being practically pointless. I haven't the time to look it up or talk about it here but it shouldn't be hard to find. Please also note that it is not about Linux or BSD either but POSIX. Without POSIX Linux negates itself from some major projects and turning POSIX into Linux only, negates POSIX. First off: Linux itself is not fully POSIX compliant, even without systemd: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POSIX#POSIX-oriented_operating_systems. So claiming importance of POSIX to Linux is not entirely correct. While POSIX is IMPORTANT to Linux, it's never been a design goal of Linux to full comply with POSIX. The Linux Standard Base is probably more omportant to Linux distributions. Second off, so many people misunderstand the goals and design of the POSIX standards. The entire set is largely geared for source compatibility between Unix-like systems. I challenge you to find anywhere in the POSIX standards that defines anythign about the init system or system manager. Third off: SysV is probably even WORSE for compatibility between Unix-like systems (And I doubt POSIX would even recommend SysV-like capabilities.), because while it itself will function in virtually any half-way POSIX environment: Initscripts themselves, which SysV cannot do anything without, are entirely platform-specific. For example: Debian initscripts will not work at ALL on an LFS system, which has its own initscripts. This effectively makes any advantage of usign SysV for promoting cross-compatibility null when you still have to use very platform-specific methods to use it. systemd's design with the unit files and how it works is to allow upstream developers to do what SysV, Upstart, and OpenRC certainly would not: A universal way for their daemon to be run by a Linux system. Fourth off: An example, lets look at OS X, which is not only fully POSIX compliant, but also fully SUS compliant and therefore a fully Unix system. It uses launchd, which systemd's entire design is based on, by the author's own admission. If systemd were so incredibly bad for standards as you claim, how come it functions almost entirely like a system manager for a full-scale POSIX/SUS system? Fifth off, and I know this should be taken with a bit of salt: According to Lennart, systemd is a lot closer to how Unix has always intended system management to be rather than SysV. Finally, being Linux-specific is ENTIRELY irrelevant to POSIX. BSD also has system-specific parts. So does OS X. So does AIX and Solaris and Windows and EVERY operating system. It is impossible, even under POSIX/SUS compliance for this to be done. It is better for udev and systemd to take advantage of kernel features to do their job *right* rather than meet your impossible goal of working universally well on all systems. If systemd were to have a BSD port, it'd lose some capabilites and admittedly gain some. The goal of systemd is to be a *Linux* system manager. The Linux-specific usage of systemd is hardly pointless, and you should consider the source of the people making that claim: BSD users. I know I''m generalizing here, but ever notice how
Re: administration of initscripts
On 04/16/2013 04:33 AM, Kevin Chadwick wrote: + dropping human readable textfiles in favour of c binary code, which makes it needless more complex to debug the whole show. That's non-sense. systemd unit files are text-files in ini-like format and much more readable then shell scripts with all their boiler plate. I think you miss the point which is those unit files depend on C code that is not as easy to follow or as well documented as tools which follow the unix philosophy such as grep and you also don't seem to have read between the lines about the detail of more complex to debug. In any case systemd has had more attention than it deserves so look inthis archive or likely any other archive (Gentoos a good one for a balanced view) and lwn.net for the arguments and make your own decision. Just don't believe the hype and understand that many pages on freedesktop.org aren't official or balanced but abused as if they are. The Unix Philosophy is overapplied and used way too much like gospel. Is it a bad approach to system software? No, of course not! Is it the One True Way and Every Other Other Way the worst/evil? No, of course not! The problem with the Unix Philosophy is it was created in a day where its design principles actually were essential. Today it really is less important and in some ways detrimental in software engineering. Am I saying the do everything approach is best? Absolutely not. But that's not systemd's goal either. It's just expanded from being merely a drop-in init replacement with a nice feature set to being something that is probably better for Linux, being a full-scale system manager with init-like capabilities. The problem with those objective views of systemd you speak of is that they're entirely based on incorrect assertions of precisely how systemd works. A lot of people, for example, automatically assume that systemd is against shell scripts. This is simply not true. It can run shell scripts, even init scripts, just fine. It's just that it identifies that shell scripts needn't be a *requirement* in bringing up or breaking down a system. It really is better for the init system to use a minimal approach to invoking daemons as systemd does and no initscript does. And of course, if you need to do more than just run a binary in the unit file, systemd doesn't stop you from using an initscript approach either. As far as C code that is easy to follow and is well documented I should point out a couple things. I don't see why it's important to know how systemd works at the SOURCE level to write a unit. Unit files are very simple and systemd has very well-written documentation on how to make/interpret unit files for yourself. I should also point out that those Unix Philosophy tools you cite, as well are C code that is not easy to follow and is not well documented. Ever try to grok grep's source code? Have you ever needed to to understant how you use it? Systemd is just as open source as any other compiled program you use on Linux, and I find this argument lacking in merit. I'm a programmer. I'd like to think I'm a skilled programmer. Do I REALLY need to know how GCC, the Linux kernel, Xorg, vi, ZSH, or any other of my tools are programmed to use them? Nope. All I need is good documentation on how to use them (And whatever APIs I program with.). Further, I also don't see it essential to delve into systemd's source code to debug unit files. In fact, I do believe systemd provides more than a suffificient framework to debug unit files. It just won't provide one to debug whatever it launches. Code quality of someone else's programming is not and should not be a goal of systemd. If you're using a buggy initscript in systemd, then look at the initscript, which systemd merely launched. I concede there's plenty of hype about systemd. But SysV really does need to be laid to rest, and Upstart does things in a very backwards way. OpenRC is good, but not as fast/flexible/well supported as systemd, and was primarily designed for Gentoo. Conrad -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/516d657e.6010...@marupa.net
Re: administration of initscripts
On 04/15/2013 05:02 AM, Kevin Chadwick wrote: I have been using Debian for many years now. In all of that time I have never wanted to manage init scripts. I always wonder. What are people trying to do? Hi Bob, For an example of where one will want to manage the init scripts, take a look at the thread in debian-user with subject Serveur with encrypted partition : 2 steps boot. started by er...@rail.eu.org . If you are not using a printer, it is also security 101 to disable it's listening service. I quite like OpenRC but am currently looking into file-rc, which I would prefer if direct changes to it were kept but I will have to find the time to work out how to do that without using commands like update-rc.d which are not my preference. I guess I simply prefer the OpenBSD method of an include file that would override runlevel.conf and may have to look into adding that to file-rc or a fork at some point. I lean more towards systemd as I am a desktop Arch user (I use Debian Stable on my server.). Warning, I'm not talkign too much ina Debian context here. It has a concurrent startup, meaning it brings a system up and down *very* quickly by starting independent units at the same time. Standard SysV init generally cannot do this, though it's hard to account for how initscripts will work, but I've not seen many distributions try and fashion a fully concurrent init system through init scripts. OpenRC allegedly also has concurrent startup, but when using it on Gentoo I've never seen it boot as fast as systemd brings up Arch. It also has a dependency-based startup. This I've generally seen done in SysV Init. It's nice in systemd though, since you can more finely define what kind of dependencies in unit files there are. This allows the concurrency decide whether to start some units together or sequentially, and in what order. This allows a daemons that must have networking up to have networking up and ready before systemd starts them simultaneously. Combining these two you get daemons started as soon as they can be started and they'll have the environment they need when they start. This is done in all init systems more or less, but systemd tries to get everything going as close to simultaneously as it can without breaking daemons. End result: Fast bootup that isn't broken. Systemd is easy to administrate, more or less. Unit files are declarative, not imperative, meaning you merely have to describe the daemon (In very few terms, no less.) to systemd and systemd will worry about the how to run of the daemon you described. The unit files are very small and easy to read/understand/alter. If you need initscripts, systemd can still handle them, it's as simple as creating a unit file for them. Most systems that use systemd will have a sysvinit-compatible unit or set of units so that systemd shouldn't break your distribution should you switch. Runlevels simply exist as a category of unit files called targets. It's much easier to set up targets in systemd than having to create custom runlevel scripts that might end up getting ignored by SysV. It's very easy to set these up in systemd. There are bad parts of systemd: Systemd has assimilated udev, in a manner of speaking. Udev can still run completely without systemd, but for system builders they have to take a lot of extra steps to seperate udev from systemd and install it. Worse, some devs of systemd want to fully integrate udev into systemd and make it so you can't use udev without systemd. This is bad for many distributions as systemd may not be an option. Debian is an example: Debian has a couple pet prijects to be ported to things like HURD and BSD, which do not provide kernel features absolutely necessary for systemd. Some Gentoo developers have forked udev for this reason. Systemd is not simple on a technical level. Whereas SysV is simply a program that uses simple rules to decide when to execute shell scripts (Whiich is where the complexity and actual functionality of an init is found, ultimately.), systemd is a more complex program that uses simple configuration files to determine how to run everything. This puts a lot of capabilities on systemd instead of on the daemon. Related to the above two downsides, systemd is not really a crowning example of a developer following the UNIX Philosophy of one simple task and do it well. If systemd is not the official init system for a distribution, it's a lot more work setting it up to get it working on par with the system's chosen init, as distributors will likely not provide *any* unit files for it. This isn't hard to overcome considering how easy it is to roll a unit file, but still. Systemd requires a violation of the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard and demands one put /run right in / instead of /var/run. This is really a non-issue and most Linux distributions have wound up gradually moving away from the FHS in some ways to make life easier on
Re: administration of initscripts
On 04/15/2013 07:13 PM, Michael Biebl wrote: Am 15.04.2013 21:35, schrieb Thilo Six: + dropping human readable textfiles in favour of c binary code, which makes it needless more complex to debug the whole show. That's non-sense. systemd unit files are text-files in ini-like format and much more readable then shell scripts with all their boiler plate. I think it was more in reference to the systemd journal, which is not plaintext by any means. It has nice usability to it when things are going well, but I think a lot of pros would sooner run a syslong daemon alongside it so that they can read what happened in a plaintext environment where journalctl may not be able to help. UNLESS, does anyone know if journalctl works fine inside a LiveCD/DVD/USB/Ferret/Whatever on another systemd setup? Or, maybe as a better way to put it, use a live media's journalctl to use a non-running systemd's journal? Conrad -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/516cb6bc.7050...@marupa.net
Re: dual-boot: writing to windows partition?
On 04/14/2013 09:04 AM, Charles Blair wrote: Is there a safe way to write, from linux to the windows part of a dual-boot system? Assuming the version of Windows is XP or better: NTFS-3G can mount a Windows filesystem read-write with no issue. Conrad -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/516abd4a.6080...@marupa.net
Re: MICROSOFT HIRED THESE PEOPLE TO SABOTAGE OPEN SOURCE
On 04/09/2013 06:55 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote: (snip) Why does Debian by default have the iced Mozillas? Because they're the only distribution that cares about the free software zealotry enough to comply with the Firefox trademark guideline? Just spitballing there. Most people consider firefox free software despite the trademark thing because trademarks are only skin deep and have zero effect on the software's capabilities like patents and copyright do. Argue Firefox with me if and when Mozilla acually makes it proprietary in a way that actually impacts the use of the browser or how you can modify its source. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/51643692.5040...@marupa.net
Re: MICROSOFT HIRED THESE PEOPLE TO SABOTAGE OPEN SOURCE
On 04/08/2013 10:07 PM, Joel Roth wrote: On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 04:49:40AM +, Dirk wrote: http://i.imgur.com/6Oja0bm.png https://boards.4chan.org/g/res/32881623 I wondered about this. Looking at one example: D-Bus, with which I was minimally acquainted. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-Bus D-Bus has replaced Bonobo (originated by the Gnome project) and DCOP (originated by the KDE project). It seems to have technical merits. Clearly the effort is a troll, created by a kid (or childish adult) with nothing better to do. Quite a lot of that image is trollish. I know it's stupid to feed the troll, but still: 1. Complaining about a minor inconvenient feature change (Moving most of the save functionality into export mode. Annoying, but hardly a dealbreaking move.). Never mind that I find GIMP's new interfact introduced in 2.8 is a vast improvement over the old UI which had users having to deal with the window manager wehenever they'd wanna do something as simple as select the paintbrush tool. GIMP's UI is much more improved than ruined. Disagreeing with someone about a feature change is hardly evidence of a Microsoft insider. 2. HAL is gone, not worth complaining about. In Linux Udev took ever everything HAL did after a while. When HAL was current it was hardly bloated and enabled the average user to run a desktop environment without having to pick their way through lots of configuration and pray the driver supports what they have. Udev *is* an improvement over HAL, but I'm not pretending HAL was bad. I don't know what this guy has against DBus, it's a very effective IPC mechanism and wound up unifying desktop IPC on Linux, something that was desperately needed, and most setups I've seen will often not load DBus until something needs it. GConf I *think* was merely a GNOME construct, so if you're not a GNOME user you don't have to bother with it. There wasn't really much of a technical issue with it except it emulates the Windows Registry in superficial ways. What's wrong with console-kit? Does the person who made the image have something against desktop-style permissions that can allow users to mount removable media WITHOUT invoking root privilege? The guy's complaining about numerous technologies that were pretty much essential to making Linux a viable desktop platform. Just because you don't *like* a program doesn't mean it's poison from Microsoft. 3. Since when did a web browser need to be enterprise focused? There's nothing wrong with a Mozilla developer pointing out there's more market for end users than anything else in web browsers. And I say this working in a company that runs on a lot of web technology. Dissent with critics is a normal part of software development and hardly proof someone works for Microsoft. 4. First off, nothing in that image has anything to do with what the guy says. At any rate, not wanting to contribute to open source gaming hardly puts someone in Microsoft's employ. Now this guy is most likely a troll. Otherwise he's one of the more zealous free/open source people who think this sort of thing actually helps Linux. Now on the more tongue and cheek side. Why not go for the more obvious Microsoft traps? If I were to troll I'd go after stuff like Mono, HyperV drivers in the kernel, Miguel de Icaza, GNOME allegedly trying to make Linux more like Windows, etc. (I am joking about the aforementioned. Please don't take me seriously.) Conrad. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/51638aac.8020...@marupa.net
Re: has your squeeze ever crashed?
On 03/13/2013 10:53 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote: Long Wind wrote: linux is stable, or is it? flash player Linux is stable and flash player isn't Linux, flash player development for Linux already is dropped, there will be no future versions for Linux. If people want Microsoft/Apple, regarding to Apple flash player is a bad example ;), they should use Microsft/Apple. Linux is an OS for itself, not a Replacement-OS for other OS. It's a misconception. If you need flash player, then Linux isn't a good choice for your needs. I'm fairly certain Adobe is still developing Flash Player for Linux and has no plans to stop. I just got an update on Arch maybe a week ago. Please cite this assertion with some official announcement from Adobe. Otherwise you're just making that up. Apple has a Flash Player? Flash is fine for me on Linux. So yes, Linux suits my needs for Flash just fine. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5140b371.2060...@marupa.net
Re: has your squeeze ever crashed?
On 03/13/2013 12:19 PM, Kelly Clowers wrote: On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 10:12 AM, Yaro Kasear y...@marupa.net wrote: On 03/13/2013 10:53 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote: Long Wind wrote: linux is stable, or is it? flash player Linux is stable and flash player isn't Linux, flash player development for Linux already is dropped, there will be no future versions for Linux. If people want Microsoft/Apple, regarding to Apple flash player is a bad example ;), they should use Microsft/Apple. Linux is an OS for itself, not a Replacement-OS for other OS. It's a misconception. If you need flash player, then Linux isn't a good choice for your needs. I'm fairly certain Adobe is still developing Flash Player for Linux and has no plans to stop From https://www.adobe.com/devnet/flashplatform/whitepapers/roadmap.html : Linux Adobe has been working closely with Google to develop a single, modern API for hosting plug-ins within the browser. The PPAPI, code-named Pepper, aims to provide a layer between the plug-in and browser that abstracts away differences between browser and operating system implementations. You can find more information on the Pepper API at http://code.google.com/p/ppapi/. Because of this work, Adobe has been able to partner with Google in providing a Pepper implementation of Flash Player for all x86/64 platforms supported by the Google Chrome browser. Google now distributes this new Pepper-based Flash Player as part of Chrome on all platforms, including Linux. For Flash Player releases after 11.2, the Flash Player browser plug-in for Linux will only be available via the Pepper API as part of the Google Chrome browser distribution and will no longer be available as a direct download from Adobe. Adobe will continue to provide security updates to non-Pepper distributions of Flash Player 11.2 on Linux for five years from its release. Flash Player will continue to support browsers using non-Pepper plug-in APIs on platforms other than Linux. Adobe will not be providing a Pepper-based debug player implementation of the Flash Player browser plug-in on Linux. As of Adobe AIR 3, Adobe has discontinued support for Adobe AIR for Linux operating systems. Cheers, Kelly That's still a far cry from NO FLASH EVER FOR LINUX, which was the original assertion. Just no Flash outside of Chrome. Further, the citation you gave doesn't say that Flash users outside of Chrome are cut off entirely, they just won't get NEW Flash. Apparently security updates are still a go. Knowing the ingenuity of Linux users, hackers, and developers, someone will find a way to get this Pepper thing working on Firefox. Further, it's still not a big thing. Gnash, while certainly not up to par with Flash itself, is fine for most usage. And another couple years will see HTML 5 supercede Flash anyway. As for AIR... I can't think of a single Linux app I use that actually deployed it, except maybe Hulu Desktop (Did that use AIR?) So is that even a loss? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5140b6bf.1060...@marupa.net
Re: Not for me.
On 03/04/2013 09:59 AM, Mark Filipak wrote: Thank you all. I've learned a lot here. I did manage to get Debian installed, though it was through a side door that was opened by Debian Live. I'm grateful for that. I will continue to look for a Linux with which I can live. In private messages with some list members I advocated for focus testing. I now realize that this list *is* the focus test. That's too bad as I expect most of the list doesn't know or want that. Since this list is not attended by developers, I'll minimize my bandwidth load by being brief. Should anyone want my focus test conclusions regarding Debian, I'd be happy to document them, but lacking at least one request from a serious maintainer (or a developer if one should emerge), I'll not waste my time on something that doesn't have a ready and attentive audience. Also, if anyone has a suggestion on which Linux tribe I should join, I'd welcome it. I believe you all have my email address. I want a Linux system so I can remove networking from Windows XP. I don't trust Windows and when XP loses support next year, I'll be cut off. So I want to use Linux as a computer-hostable Internet appliance. Understand, that's the only use I will make of Linux, at least for the foreseeable future. I'll continue to use Windows XP for engineering and other projects, only as an isolated operating system without networking. I'd like to leave you with one reflection that may cause pause. If tomorrow Debian were to suddenly become twice as popular as it currently is, this list would be flooded by people exactly like me. Regards, Ciao, and Good Luck - Mark. Flooded with people who had trouble with the installer because they didn't read the documentation and start blaming everyone when they can't figure out why they couldn't install the system as a result? Most people who switch to Linux and have issues at least have an open mind about these things instead of approaching asking for help with hostility. Chances are, though, most people will be able to install Debian just fine if they take just ten extra minutes to RTFM, like you should have. And certainly would not hijack an entire mailing list for almost a week acting like everyone owes them an explanation for why *they* couldn't get the system to work, blaming the process, the developers, and the people who tried to *help* for your negligence in reading documentation or in providing and clarifying relevant details. I am curious how you intend to get Windows XP to use your Linux box as a gateway without networking. It still seems to me like you're still exposing the Windows XP box anyway. Regards. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5134d886.9030...@marupa.net
Re: Not for me.
On 03/04/2013 02:44 PM, João Luis Meloni Assirati wrote: Em 04-03-2013 17:09, Mark Filipak escreveu: On 2013/3/4 2:35 PM, João Luis Meloni Assirati wrote: So you cannot reproduce the bug, right? I didn't try, João Luis. For you, I will. No, not for me. This list is archived and new Debian users may read your postings and conclude that the GUI installer does not work or has lower quality. In fact, they may think that the whole Debian is low quality because your comments are all derogatory. After being able to install Debian with the kind and patient help of some list members, it is only fair that you contribute back giving the recipe on how to reproduce the bug or admit that it was your fault and the bug does not exist at all. It will take me an hour or two. It took much more that two man-hour to help you. This experience has brought me a realization - every problem comes with an opportunity in one of its hands, isn't that true? Oh yes, I'm sure that some people learned a lot here. Linux is not a GUI-OS. It's an X-Windows host. There's a big difference. The primary interaction with the Windows kernel is through GUIs. The primary interaction with the Linux kernel is through the command line. That's why Linux seems so hostile, and that realization should point the way to making it friendlier. Of primary importance: The first impression Linux makes during installation. How can someone who did not try the standard install tools come to that conclusion? You are simply wrong and leading others to err. João Luis. Not to mention off the mark. Most desktop-based Linux distributions have plenty enough X11-based tools available to keep a lot of users from having to open a terminal emulator unless they absolutely have to. But so what? I personally think the ooh, command line, therefore inferior mentality is only really put forward by people who an inferior understanding of how system software works. GUIs are 99.9% there to make things easy. And usually in doing so it's through the sacrifice of some *very* powerful usage. But when it comes to sheer flexibility, automation and speed? A flexible command line is way more powerful than a GUI. Saying that, I'm a KDE SC user on Arch Linux, and use Debian on my server. I don't use Windows unless I have to (And most certainly *not* on my server. I find Windows should not be on servers, ever.), and so far I have very few use cases requiring Windows. But I also have yakuake put in as a very speedy way to get a shell and do something that'd take me a little longer and restrict my options through a GUI. You can still run a very successful desktop system on Linux without installing Xorg server at any point. The only command line that hasn't modernized even a little bit is DOS. By the way, to Mark, neither the GUI or text-based installer are that hard to use. They only are if you stubbornly refuse to read documentation and treat those who help you with hostility. Regards. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/51350a1a.2040...@marupa.net
Re: Not for me.
On 03/04/2013 08:07 PM, William Ivanski wrote: On 04-03-2013 22:39, Yaro Kasear wrote: When (U)EFI completely replaces BIOS THEN DOS will be completely dead. Right now it's just a horribly obsolete OS used by people afraid of kernels or enterprises that refuse to upgrade some of their infrastructure. It's also used by people who, many years ago, paid for a vital system which runs on DOS, and nowadays can't pay for a better modern system. Well that's mostly what I meant by enterprises that refuse to upgrade some of their infrastructure. I do know sometimes a company can't or won't upgrade their equipment. My own company is only just this year moving away from our onlly DOS software for in-house web stuff that does the same things, but better. Due in no small part to the bit rot of the ancient DOS software we've been using. Regards. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5135576e.3030...@marupa.net
Re: Not for me.
On 03/04/2013 08:48 PM, Doug wrote: On 03/04/2013 09:07 PM, William Ivanski wrote: On 04-03-2013 22:39, Yaro Kasear wrote: When (U)EFI completely replaces BIOS THEN DOS will be completely dead. Right now it's just a horribly obsolete OS used by people afraid of kernels or enterprises that refuse to upgrade some of their infrastructure. It's also used by people who, many years ago, paid for a vital system which runs on DOS, and nowadays can't pay for a better modern system Well, it's also used, occasionally, by people who have software the equivalent of which does not exist on a modern system. In addition to programs that were specifically written by a user to solve some problem, there are some commercial programs that have no modern equivalent. One that comes immediately to mind is Eureka, which I think was sold by Borland. Eureka will solve math problems using standard keyboard notation, ala BASIC, which to my mind is much easier to deal with than something like MathCad. If you've ever tried to enter an equation into MathCad, without months of previous experience, you'll know exactly what I mean. I have a DosBox routine installed specifically to run Eureka, which fortunately is now in the public domain. (I once had the non-free floppy disks, but even if I could find them, they are probably unreadable by this time. Or they were 5¼, which amounts to the same thing.) Another program, which I used until I retired in 2002 was EEsof's Touchstone. An extremely expensive RF cad program, it worked with netlist inputs. When HP bought the company, they imposed their graphical interface, which would have worked really nicely if you had a screen about 4 feet by 5 feet to draw your circuit on! I suppose a 30 screen would have worked, but nobody had one in those days. What you could do in two typed pages of netlist would fit nicely on a D- or E-sized drawing, graphically. Sure, you sketched it out on several pieces of paper first by hand, but you didn't put in 4 or 5 parameters for every last component like HP required. There is no modern equivalent that I know of, and the old program is not available at any price. This is progress? (I'm only kidding about that last remark--I wouldn't give up my GUI, but I could wish that some of the old smarts still existed. If you think that the modern graphical approach is so great, try taking pictures outdoors with one of those nice 2 x 3 LCD displays. Give me an eye-level viewfinder any day!) --doug Oh no, if you read my e-mail a few replies ago my point was NOT GUI can/should do everything. It was the opposite. I stated I felt this fear of the command line was bad (I like my desktop, I just find there's oodles of power and speed to be had on a command line not had on a desktop.) I was talking about DOS's command line. I *love* POSIX shells, I can do just about anything with them. Not much capability in COMMAND.COM, if you get my meaning. I'm trying to understand what you're meaning on the Touchstone software... what feature exactly did it have that the billions of other CAD tools don't? I don't know what netlist is. Regards. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/51355eca.10...@marupa.net
Re: [OT] re: trolls and operating systems [was: Install failed - let's start again, without bogus assumptions, please.]
On 03/02/2013 03:13 AM, Joe wrote: On Fri, 01 Mar 2013 23:59:21 -0600 Yaro Kasear y...@marupa.net wrote: If he is a troll, then why are we still feeding him? Because we're all hoping to pick up some scraps ourselves. It's rare that even this kind of discussion produces absolutely nothing of any use to anyone. Oh, fair enough. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/51321bea.7020...@marupa.net
Re: 10 top myths of debian
On 03/01/2013 05:19 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: On Friday 01 March 2013 22:33:37 Dick Thomas wrote: Debian is always out of date and even the stable is unsecure as its backported fixes rather than updates Sorry to answer piecemeal. Debian stable starts to go out of date as soon as it is released, or even before, while it was still testing, but in freeze. It has security updates throughout its life and for the first year of being Old Stable. It is very secure. Nothing, and no distro, is totally secure, but Debian Stable is as close as you are likely to get. Many people therefore use Stable only for servers. Testing is more up to date, and is as stable as many released versions of other distros. It does not, however, get up to date security updates. Many people in fact run Unstable on their desktops and just upgrade with caution. I understand that it does get security upgrades, but although I have installed it to look at it, I have never had the nerve to install it on my workhorse machine. Lisi I don't know if Debian's the most SECURE distribution. It doesn't really have a hardened profile or anything like what Gentoo offers. (Gentoo isn't a prime example of a secure Linux system, I more point to the concept of having a hardened base available, whihc Debian doesn't really offer.) Debian's known for being incredibly STABLE and high quality, and embraces FOSS standards pretty well. But unless Debian is bundling an alternate base system built around stuff like Tomoyo, GrSecurity, PaX, or SELinux and starts loading up their packages with hardened patchsets I wouldn't boast about it being a security-focused distro. The backports are an excellent thing. And the Debian security team does an excellent job. Lets just be realistic and a little more honest and say Debian is one of the most secure but I can't call it THE most secure unless the system can go hardened readily. Cheers. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/51317176.1030...@marupa.net
Re: [OT] re: trolls and operating systems [was: Install failed - let's start again, without bogus assumptions, please.]
On 03/01/2013 11:57 PM, Joao Luis Meloni Assirati wrote: Joao Luis Meloni Assirati wrote: Joao Luis Meloni Assirati wrote: Windows-NT 3.5 was probably the finest OS ever written Let us see who will be the first to bite the troll :) Do you really want to start a debate on best OS ever? Talk about an ugly religious argument, even if we exclude anyone dumb (or trollish) enough to consider any version of Windows anywhere close to in the running. :-) But I think it is not about a debate on best OS ever. It is about getting everybody working for him. Everyody must solve his problems to show that Linux is better than Windows. This is a classic case of trolling. He used this zombie technique before when he said that Windows is much easier to install than Linux, and managed to get people enslaved, desperate to show that Linux is so superior that even unspeakable problems can be solved. I'm not sure that's it. I think it's just that we can't let go of a problem to solve; or this guy is irritating us, or something. I'm pretty sure that nobody here really feels we need to prove the superiority of Linux over Windows. (Now if we wanted to talk serious operating systems, then we'd be talking about Tenex, ITS, Plan 9, Symbolics, Apollo/Domain, but that a religious argument for another day :-) Look, he did it again in the other thread: Linux has the concept of virtual terminals (VTs). Ah, yes. Windows had such a switcher addin about 20 years ago. I don't know if some people in the list fall for the trick, but he is definitely using it. He uses other tricks too, like saying that he will accept anyone's suggestion but from person X. Then everybody starts to work for him, including person X who has remorses. Here X is for example Lisi, who solved the problem ages ago (partitioning problem). João Luis. If he is a troll, then why are we still feeding him? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/51319539.3050...@marupa.net
Re: PulseAudio--is there a viable alternative?
On 02/05/2013 09:50 AM, Nate Bargmann wrote: Those of you who don't use PA, how do you do network streaming? That is my usecase for PA as it's handy to start a stream on my desktop and send it to the Myth box for playback through the amp. I can do that from the laptop if I choose as well. The trick is to use the Sid/Wheezy version of pavucontrol where individual application playback can be selected. I find PA is useful for directing playback to my set of Logitech portable USB speakers and my laptop. At one time I found PA to be maddening. For the past year or so, it has become quite useful to me. - Nate Short answer: I have zero use for that feature. Long answer: It's a pretty fringe feature to have in exchange for a sound daemon that frequency breaks sound on a lot of Linux boxes I have to fix every day. The only sound I stream is HTTPD music through MPD, which would probably do it a far cry better than Pulseaudio ever would. Conrad. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/51127ac3.9010...@marupa.net
Re: PulseAudio--is there a viable alternative?
On 02/05/2013 01:44 PM, Martin Steigerwald wrote: Am Dienstag, 5. Februar 2013 schrieb darkestkhan: Mixing works out of the box here too - some integrated Intel audio chipset. AFAIK in recent versions of ALSA / distributions shipping it, by default dmix is automatically configured and used. On my ThinkPad T530 mixing works out of the box as well, whether via software or via hardware… ALSA has never given me any problems across the several different hardware configurations I've had. Never had problems with sound mixing, and I do agree with you, it does seem dmix seems to be included with the ALSA packages required to use ALSA in the first place. Conversely, every hardware configuration I've had Pulseaudio has never worked properly. Conrad -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/51127b6c.3070...@marupa.net
Re: PulseAudio--is there a viable alternative?
On 02/03/13 08:28, Carl Fink wrote: So PulseAudio continues to be buggy to the point of infuriation. Developers, after years of work, have signally failed to fix it. Is eSound still usable? Mabye ALSA? Anything? Just get rid of PA (Unless you're using GNOME 3) and just use ALSA barebones (Or through your DE's audio library or daemon.). Despite Lennart's claims to the contrary, ALSA works great without sound daemons telling it what to do. My experience is that PA causes more problems than it actually solves. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/510e8e8d.8010...@marupa.net
Re: Gnome 3 Fallback Mode forked
On 01/20/2013 06:35 AM, Mark Allums wrote: Slashdot reported that SolusOS has announced a fork of the Gnome 3 Fallback Mode. It is designed to bring back the mode that was cut from Gnome 3 with version 3.8. Like the original fallback mode, it uses gtk3 and does not require hardware acceleration. It also allows a lot of old GNOME 2 goodies to be used again. Is there the slightest chance of getting something like this into Debian? I really like fallback mode, and if it works as well as it sounds, it would be the answer to everyone's prayers. For instance, I run a lot of X desktops under virtualization, and this sounds ideal for that. I considered opening a wish list bug, but I thought I would get some feedback first. Comments? Um... isn't this basically just Cinnamon? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/50fc0bef.1090...@marupa.net
Re: What are some common problems when using Debian GNU / LINUX?
On 01/19/2013 05:07 PM, ventur...@yahoo.com wrote: Hello: Please provide some examples of common problems when using Debian GNU / LINUXso that I may more effectively gain a better handle on the trouble-shooting process. Thank you! Sincerely, Herschel Maybe the primary problem comes with Debian's more zealous adherance to the Free Software philosophy. It is a good thing, for the most part, but it has some disadvantages, particularly in the realm of hardware and the sort of support a lot of open source drivers offer, specifically with display drivers or wireless networking.. Biggest example of this having a downside for Debian is official debian media not providing nonfree firmware for wifi chipsets, making it often much more difficult to install the system if you can't simply wire up. I've also got to be perhaps a little frank... Debian's multilib/java support has always been a bit of a low point for me. Debian does offer non-free software in unsupported repositories, but at install time these are usually not accessible. Don't misinterpret this as me not likign Debian, I really do like Debian for servers (I use Debian on my server.). I don't generally find it as ideal for desktops as many other distributions for the reasons above. Debian Stable is maybe not the best for desktops if you're interested in having more up-to-date software. The concept behind Stable is near-implausible levels of quality control on the packages. There is testing and unstable. Testing is actually maybe better thought as the Debian best for desktops by many because it gets into that balance of recent packages with a still somewhat reasonable amount of stability. Sid is not recommended for anything but actual testing and quality control purposes. It's full rolling release but because it's about developing packages as opposed to providing a full-on usable system as rolling release, it's not ideally suited for desktops or servers. If you like rolling release and want to use it as a stable Linux system I'd recommend Arch instead. But I digress. Debian is a wonderful system! Great community, very high quality packages, and easy to get help for. Just watch out for the caveats that come with a Free Software mentality. Conrad
Re: What are some common problems when using Debian GNU / LINUX?
On 01/19/2013 06:55 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote: On Sun, 20 Jan 2013 01:39:55 +0100, Yaro Kasear y...@marupa.net wrote: Linux system I'd recommend Arch instead. Which I don't call a rolling release. Arch was my preferred distro. If you have a distro with releases you can make hard transitions. For Ubuntu the transition from init to upstart wasn't an issue, for Arch the transition from init to systemd made me dropping Arch for the moment. It is unfortunate you've been having problems. But the trouble with making transitions still doesn't make Arch not rolling release. The arch devs generally expect a certain level of diligence on the part of their users and usually make a point of putting news about impending rocky transitions on their site. But still, and don't interpret me as being aggressive here: Just because you had problems doesn't preclude a system from being rolling release. Arch is *precisely* what rolling release is. And it's my preferred model to waiting for my distributor to come around to making a new hard transition before I can get a new kernel, for example. BUT, that is a matter of preference. To the OP, and back on topic here: Debian is a wonderful system. It's fantastic for applications where you may prefer outright stability even at the expense of having latest software. Going to testing somewhat alleviates the age of packages at the sacrifice of a little quality control. Right now, since Wheezy is in the process of going stable Testing is in a general freeze, and I'm not sure how much that's affected the versions of packages. This makes testing get described as semi-rolling release though it'll still be generally more frequently updated than things such as Linux Mint Debian Edition, also reportedly a semi-rolling release. Bottom line for desktop users on Debian is your biggest issues will likely be contending with the free software enthusiasm of the Debian development team. It's a good thing, generally, but has the big disadvantage of making it very hard to get the use of your hardware unless you make use of packages often considered by Debian as unsupported. This is not generally a major roadblock except at install time if you have a wifi chipset and no physical access to your router. Wifi has an unfortunate model of requiring OS-provided firmware (An all-around poor model of hardware support, in my opinion.), which in Linux is usually supplied by firmware those like the Debian developers consider non-free and exclude from the official install media. This'll make it difficult, sometimes even impossible, to install Debian without considerable support (Or unofficial custom media with the firmware back in.). I'm not the type who gets overly concerned about licensing, though. Even the non-free stuff provided for Debian in their official repos or in many third party repos is perfectly safe and usable. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/50fb79be.7070...@marupa.net
Re: What are some common problems when using Debian GNU / LINUX?
On 01/20/2013 12:26 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote: On Sun, 20 Jan 2013 05:59:42 +0100, Yaro Kasear y...@marupa.net wrote: Even the non-free stuff provided for Debian in their official repos or in many third party repos is perfectly safe and usable. non-free provided by Debian is safe regarding to third party repos the OP should ask the list for experiences of a repo he might want to add OT: Arch and transitions. There are different kinds of transitions. systemd not only stopped the rolling for many experienced users, it also caused that the mailing list became moderated and some users were completely banned from the list. IMO those banned users shouldn't have been banned. However, for Debian this isn't an issue, even if Debian will switch to systemd, for averaged desktop users nothing will change, just tons of Wikis needs to be edited. Debian probably won't be doing the switch to systemd. Systemd required very Linux-specific kernel features and Debian has a couple non-Linux ports that'd make going systemd impractical (However I believe systemd is available in the repos and officially supported.) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/50fb92ae.9080...@marupa.net
Re: how is debian filling /dev/
On 01/15/2013 02:18 AM, Bob Proulx wrote: Michael Biebl wrote: Am 15.01.2013 09:04, schrieb Bob Proulx: Maroš Žilka wrote: device files are creatied by /dev/MAKEDEV but in my debian stable That documentation is the classic legacy way. It has since been completely obsoleted. The new way is with udev. The goal is to Actually, this information is outdated too. Nowadays, the devices in /dev are created by the kernel itself using a tmpfs callsed devtmpfs [1]. Udev only creates symlinks or applies permissions. [1] http://lwn.net/Articles/330985/ I stand corrected. And I am only four years out of date! :-) Thanks for the nice reference too. Bob I'm not sure about that. That article doesn't say anything about it being the standard way and from what I have seen udev is still pretty much part of any core Linux system and used extensively as described. Back when I used Gentoo most times the devtmpfs system wasn't even enabled in my kernel or in its default configs. From all I can find out devtmpfs is merely an option most distributions don't actually use that much because udev already handles these things. With udev being merged into systemd and their devs working on dropping support for non-systemd machines this may change, however, and devtmpfs may be used as one half of a new device management system for non-systemd machines. Conrad -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/50f57435.8030...@marupa.net
Re: Is this OK in C++ and C?
On 12/31/2012 12:33 PM, Zbigniew Komarnicki wrote:
Is this OK or is this a bug, when the wariable 'n' is
initializing by negative value? There no any warning.
Is this normal? I know that value -5 is converted
to unsigned but probably this should by printed a warning,
when this is a constant value. What do you think about this?
// prog.cpp
#include iostream
using namespace std;
int main()
{
const unsigned int n = -5;
cout The variable n is: n endl;
return 0;
}
Results:
$ g++ -Wall -W prog.cpp -o prog
$ ./prog
The variable n is: 4294967291
Thank you.
I do not believe this is an issue. The warning is probably just telling
you that you tried to initialize a constant unsigned int with a signed
value. I don't know if the compiler converts it to 5 or it converts it
to the unsigned value that takes form where -5 would take in a signed
value. I suggest experimenting with that to make sure that any important
behavior dependent on the value works properly. Thought o be honest if
they were planning on using a negative value for something important
they should have left the variable signed.
Yaro
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/50e1e1db.7060...@marupa.net
Re: admin password?
If that option doesn't work out, you can usually grab any old Linux live media of the same architecture as what you have installed and set up a chroot onto your install, which will get you root access onto your installed system. Then you just run passwd to change it. On 12/29/2012 11:58 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote: If your normal user is in /etc/sudoers, then run sudo su - root to become the root user. With sudo, you have to enter your normal password to use it. good luck On 12/30/12, Dionyssis Goulimis dionyssi...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I downloaded the last edition of Debian yesterday but I can't remember my Admin password, what is the best way to stop using an Admin password? Best, Dionyssis Goulimis 2012/12/30, Dionyssis Goulimis dionyssi...@gmail.com: Hi, I downloaded the last edition of Debian yesterday but I can't remember my Admin password, what is the best way to recover it? Best, Dionyssis Goulimis -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/cabx4qa8dsu4xew-x3thyv3aaobrwe_rj0sppx_i4leodrwk...@mail.gmail.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/50dfdc8c.3090...@marupa.net
Re: Debian multimedia repository
On 08/01/2012 02:18 PM, Titanus Eramius wrote: On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 21:20:59 +0300 Teemu Likonentliko...@iki.fi wrote: Gary Dale [2012-08-01 13:55:09 -0400] wrote: Agreed. I would also advise people to stay away from debian-multimedia. It's packages are incompatible with standard Debian packages in many cases. [...] debian-multimedia can be too much of a headache. It has worked fine the seven or eight years I've been using it. So, it depends. Different Debian releases and different packages vary so much that I think we can't say that Debian multimedia is good or bad as a whole. Instead we could warn users that occasionally there are incompatible packages. My 2 cents on this is, that once packages is installed from Debian Multimedia it's very hard to go back to stable. But if one keeps using Debian Multimedia there are rarely any problems. Cheers Most desktop end-users may find it more worthwhile to use Debian-Multimedia for multimedia due to a couple factors, anyway. In my case, I'd prefer using Debian-Multimedia anyway for my music/videos/what have you. Debian doesn't even give me libdvdcss because of questionable legal status. Since almost all DVD movies on the market since the dawn of time are content scrambled, this is a case of Debian-Multimedia Debian for media enthusiasts. Sorry if that seems rather negative to Debian. I'm not the obsessed with free-as-in-freedom type. I use what works, and I don't lose sleep over libraries like libdvdcss or the w64codecs. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to flame or diss Debian. But objectively there are definite downsides to an all-free lifestyle, and end users on OSen like Windows and OS X look at Debian and wonder why we would choose NOT to have DVD support (Remember, from their point of view, it's a bit of an all or nothing perspective. libdvdread and libdvdmenu are safe even by Debian standards, without CSS it's still no DVD support.). It's important to a lot of people, but it is often the attempts to make open source moral/ethical issues that scares a lot of would-be adopters of Linux away. Just... food for thought. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5019f86f.7050...@marupa.net
Re: Debian multimedia repository
On 08/01/2012 02:55 PM, Andrei POPESCU wrote: On Mi, 01 aug 12, 22:30:52, Teemu Likonen wrote: Titanus Eramius [2012-08-01 21:18:03 +0200] wrote: My 2 cents on this is, that once packages is installed from Debian Multimedia it's very hard to go back to stable. But if one keeps using Debian Multimedia there are rarely any problems. Now I got curious because that sound so general. What makes it very hard? In my experience installing and removing packages has always been easy in Debian. The versioning scheme of Deb Multimedia packages is meant to take priority over the Debian proper packages, but this can create problems under certain circumstances. Kind regards, Andrei I haven't been using Debian as long as many on this list. Are failures with Debian-Multimedia that overtly common or are they rather circumstantial? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5019f994.7000...@marupa.net
Re: Debian multimedia repository
On 08/01/2012 11:06 PM, Gary Dale wrote: On 01/08/12 11:52 PM, Yaro Kasear wrote: On 08/01/2012 02:55 PM, Andrei POPESCU wrote: On Mi, 01 aug 12, 22:30:52, Teemu Likonen wrote: Titanus Eramius [2012-08-01 21:18:03 +0200] wrote: My 2 cents on this is, that once packages is installed from Debian Multimedia it's very hard to go back to stable. But if one keeps using Debian Multimedia there are rarely any problems. Now I got curious because that sound so general. What makes it very hard? In my experience installing and removing packages has always been easy in Debian. The versioning scheme of Deb Multimedia packages is meant to take priority over the Debian proper packages, but this can create problems under certain circumstances. Kind regards, Andrei I haven't been using Debian as long as many on this list. Are failures with Debian-Multimedia that overtly common or are they rather circumstantial? It's not failures so much as conflicts. Certain Debian packages will not upgrade because the requisite libraries have been replaced by Debian-multimedia ones. It's a shame because there are some very nice tools in Debian-multimedia that I'd love to be able to use but not at the expense of core Debian packages. And how promptly do the Debian-Multimedia developers resolve these conflicts? Is this a big issue or just an occasional minor hiccup? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/501a0137.3000...@marupa.net
Re: [OT] Intelectual Property Law [WAS: Re: what graphic card to buy?]
On 07/31/2012 01:42 PM, Celejar wrote: On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 10:30:50 +0300 Andrei POPESCUandreimpope...@gmail.com wrote: On Jo, 19 iul 12, 22:50:25, Celejar wrote: Quite true - and completely irrelevant to my point. I don't deny that money can be made with FLOSS, just that it's pointless to try to sell copies of one's software if it's freely copyable. The examples you give are all of models other than the straightforward sale of licenses or copies. IMO a business model that relies on the possibility to sell copies that basically cost nothing to produce is broken. Is this a moral claim, a business one, a legal one, or just plain dogma? Celejar Ironically, selling GPL software you had absolutely no hand in developing or contributing to is an actual right the GPL guarantees. This might not be the best example of how advantageous open source can be. And probably not one of those cases in the GPL that guarantees morality as the FSF might see it. Theoretically, I can buy a 500 stack of DVDs, burn Debian to all of them, and sell them for $50 a pop because the GPL says I can. There is a difference, though, between having the right to do so and actually have even a small sampling of success. Worse, I come off as a leech from the community, especially if I don't give a nickel of that money back to the Debian project. I forget the point I'm making. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5018c5c1.4040...@marupa.net
Re: what graphics card to choose
On 07/30/2012 03:25 AM, Gary Dale wrote: On 30/07/12 03:04 AM, Mark Fletcher wrote: hvw59601hvw59601at care2.com writes: Camaleón wrote: On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 10:41:00 -0400, Michael P. Soulier wrote: Then choose one that you like (because of price/design) and then check about its current support status in Linux ecosystem, though I would go for nvidia; their closed source driver (sigh...) is rather good. Indeed it is. Hugo Actually, right now, the nVidia-provided nVidia driver packaged in Debian has a number of problems with 3D support on several cards. For example I use an nVidia GeForce 9800 GTX+ which is 2-3 years old -- in other words, neither old nor bleeding edge -- and 3D support is completely broken right now and has been since the last working version at 290.10. You can get a Gnome 3 session going but once you start to exercise the graphics subsystem, eg watching a video, playing a 3D game, even just exercising the Gnome eye candy heavily, the X session locks up completely and only a reboot will return your machine to you. I am currently running Gnome-classic which works fine with the nVidia driver. The problem seems to be upstream as opposed to in the Debian packaging, but nVidia themselves are less than anxious to solve the problem it seems. If you are buying a new system I'd stay away from nVidia cards for now, even though they are good cards generally, because of the uncerainty about whether a given card will work properly even with the proprietary driver. But check out the nVidia website -- once they find and solve this problem, I'd personally go back to recommending nVidia chipsets. HTH Mark Yet another reason why open source is important. NVidia might not be interested/able to solve the problem, but I'm sure the open source community could. This is why it'd be great to see Nouveau take supporting hardware-accelerated OpenGL more seriously. And clean up on some of the other issues. KMS is a wonderful feature, but I personally would rather see good OpenGL support than KMS, though. Nouveau's getting there, but it's support for OpenGL (Through Gallium.) isn't really mature enough yet. I also get some odd mouse-stuttering when I use Nouveau. Until this is fixed, I elect to use nVidia's official drivers, which I personally haven't had any issues with to date. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/501669cb.6080...@marupa.net
Re: systemd
On 07/29/2012 03:27 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote: On Sun, 2012-07-29 at 16:09 -0400, Tom H wrote: On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 3:26 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote: On Sun, 2012-07-29 at 14:05 -0400, Tom H wrote: /media/mount_point switched to /run/media/user_name/mount_point It's not an Arch change. It's an upstream change; I've forgotten which upstream. http://forums.opensuse.org/english/get-technical-help-here/pre-release-beta/473837-opensuse-factory-warning-announce-upcoming-changes-upstreamsystemd-regarding-media-tmp-var-run-var-lock.html FWIW I'm not using systemd on any of my Linux, but Arch already made several other changes for the file system hierarchy. My experience with systemd hasn't been the greatest. It seems like for it to be useful without a lot of trouble a distribution has to already make it the primary init replacement so that all the init scripts (Or modules or whatever systemd calls them.) will be produced for them, meaning I could often not even get things like kdm/slim running on runlevel 5. On Arch when I tried it, it also seemed to completely ignore my fstab and not mount my /home. I have not tried it on Debian. But on Arch and Gentoo I had too much trouble for it to be worth it. As for Arch's changes to the hierarchy, I can't remember, but they weren't very FHS-compliant changes, which also disturbed me, since the FHS has a lot of sane practice to it. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5015a490.6050...@marupa.net
Re: gnome doesn't know monitor size under nvidia x server
On 07/28/2012 02:41 PM, Gary Dale wrote: On 28/07/12 03:24 PM, Britton Kerin wrote: I installed all the nvidia driver kernel xserver packages, but now it seems that gnome doesn't know what size the monitor is anymore (all fonts way too large etc.) System-Preferences-Monitors looks like the attached screenshot The odd thing is the explicitly set resolution value is correct. But there is also all the stuff about the monitor being unknown. Any help or advice how to fix this greatly appreciated, Britton Had the same problem myself with an ATI card. X uses kernel mode switching these days, or at least tries to, and that usually means loading a kernel module for your video card in addition to having the correct xserver drivers. Since the official (And proprietary.) nVidia driver has no support for KMS, this sort of feature never natively works in a desktop environments' own monitor settings. My recommendation is to install nVidia's settings utility and use that, since it WILL accurately report both monitors and their resolution. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/50144ee3.1060...@marupa.net
Re: gnome doesn't know monitor size under nvidia x server
On 07/28/2012 04:14 PM, Robert Holtzm wrote: On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 03:43:15PM -0500, Yaro Kasear wrote: .snip... Since the official (And proprietary.) nVidia driver has no support for KMS, this sort of feature never natively works in a desktop environments' own monitor settings. My recommendation is to install nVidia's settings utility and use that, since it WILL accurately report both monitors and their resolution. I see a number of nVidia packages that could be the one you're referring to, ie nvidia-settings, nvidia-smi and nvidia-xconfig. One of these or another? Oh! Forgive me. That would be nvidia-settings. It's actually a pretty neat utility, worth looking at! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/501492a6.7060...@marupa.net
[p][off - topic] suscripción
Necesito la direccion web para suscribirme a la lista, ya que cambiaré de buzón gracias _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.
RE: /dev/lp0
Hace dos semanas en la compañia compraron unos servidores Compaq, No le instalaron el Smart Start y creo que por eso no detectaban el /dev/p0. La Solucion fue: Crear la impresora por printtool, sale el mensaje que no detectó el puerto paralelo, pero sigo adelante y queda configurada. luego desde la consola escribi nombreimpresora=0x0378,7 y funcionó nombreimpresora= El nombre con la que creaste la impresora en mi caso el default es lp 0x0378 = la io ad. del puerto paralelo 7 = Irq default de este para no escribirlo siempre coloque esta linea /etc/rc.d/rc.local Asi me funcionó!!! Me confirma si le funcionó por mail - Original Message - From: Jose Antonio Ortega Garcia [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: debian-user-spanish@lists.debian.org Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2000 10:29 AM Subject: /dev/lp0 Hola: Cuando hago dmesg | less me dice: lp: no encuentra el dispositivo. Lo mismo si hago cat /dev/lp0.Me imagino que si no existe el dispositivo amen de no poder imprimir tendre que crearlo. cd /dev y despues ./MAKEDEV lp0 y va y me dice que no sabe como crear el dispositivo.Sabeis como debo de crearlo? Y depues como se configura? En el kernel le he dado soporte al puerto paralelo. En definitiva lo que pretendo es poder imprimir.El /etc/printcap lo tengo bien configurado. Mi distribucion es la de la firma.Con la Mandraque me funciona perfectamente la impresion. Gracias espero vuestra ayuda para poder resolver este problema. Jose Antonio Ortega Garcia User:104420 E-mail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.airtel.net/personal/califa11 E-mail:[EMAIL PROTECTED]GNU/Hurd Debian Potato-2.2.15 (Frozen) -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
