Re: [gentoo-user] Thunderbird 78
On Wed, 2020-08-19 at 17:52 -0400, james wrote: > > If you like, elaboration is appreciated. > In no particular order: - MailExtensions change would have broken some of the addons I use to fix deficiencies in the feature set - The change to integrated PGP, rather than an addon, means Linux users have to maintain their configuration twice, since T-Bird can no longer use the native gpg setup - Recurring tasks aren't handled properly for CalDAV setups (though this could be an addon's fault, admittedly) - General disillusionment with Mozilla software (debatable and personal)
Re: [gentoo-user] Thunderbird 78
On 8/19/20 2:37 PM, james wrote: > Fellow Thunderbird aficionados: > > > It was release mid July: > > https://blog.thunderbird.net/2020/07/whats-new-in-thunderbird-78/ > > > Any idea where the first 'beta' version can be grabbed, as an ebuild? > > > James > There is a mozilla project at gentoo who deal with this package. You could try to ping them if there needs to be any urgency of upgrade. Else I think it might be a few more days/weeks. Also the fact that there is going to be a lot of testing needed before releasing that as an official package for users (there are A LOT of changes)
[gentoo-user] Thunderbird 78
Fellow Thunderbird aficionados: It was release mid July: https://blog.thunderbird.net/2020/07/whats-new-in-thunderbird-78/ Any idea where the first 'beta' version can be grabbed, as an ebuild? James
Re: [gentoo-user] Thunderbird 78
On Wed, 19 Aug 2020 14:37:30 -0400, james wrote: > It was release mid July: > > https://blog.thunderbird.net/2020/07/whats-new-in-thunderbird-78/ > > > Any idea where the first 'beta' version can be grabbed, as an ebuild? https://bugs.gentoo.org/733062 "Mozilla Thunderbird 78.0 is now available. However, we don't plan to bump until 78.2 release because of known problems and upstream's advice not to upgrade yet. Thunderbird 78.2 is scheduled for end of August 2020." -- Neil Bothwick *Libra*: /(Sept 23--Oct 23)/ An unfortunate typo on your application results in your being accepted into the Legion Of Superherpes. pgpn5UiWNo49P.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Thunderbird 78
On 8/19/20 4:22 PM, Matt Connell (Gmail) wrote: On Wed, 2020-08-19 at 15:41 -0400, Aisha Tammy wrote: (there are A LOT of changes) At the risk of derailing the thread, I moved to using Evolution because of the T-Bird v78 changes. If you like, elaboration is appreciated. James
Re: [gentoo-user] Thunderbird 78
On Wed, 2020-08-19 at 15:41 -0400, Aisha Tammy wrote: > (there are A LOT of changes) At the risk of derailing the thread, I moved to using Evolution because of the T-Bird v78 changes.
Re: [gentoo-user] tips on running a mail server in a cheap vps provider run but not-so-trusty admins?
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Wednesday, August 19, 2020 7:10 PM, Grant Taylor wrote: > Per protocol specification, SMTP is EXTREMELY robust. > > It will retry delivery, nominally once an hour, for up to five (or > seven) days. That's 120-168 delivery attempts. > > Further, SMTP implementations MUST (RFC sense of the word) deliver a > notification back to the sender if the implementation was unable to > delivery a message. this queue re-transmission, and failure notification, can be done with a small python script.
Re: [gentoo-user] tips on running a mail server in a cheap vps provider run but not-so-trusty admins?
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Wednesday, August 19, 2020 12:25 PM, Ashley Dixon wrote: > I don't think you fully understand Grant's point. Whilst HTTP(/2) may be more > featureful for serving web pages, it makes absolutely no sense to use for > anything but. Protocol age absolutely is not irrelevant: SMTP has been > ubiquitous in mail transportation for many years, and thus, every single mail > client supports it pretty close to the RFC. Moreover, as Grant mentioned in > the > previous message, it is the only reliable method of reliably transferring > messages to and fro systems which, in most cases, differ quite vastly in every > element except their understanding of SMTP. there are two aspects: (1) backwards compatibility: sure, email is better if the goal is to deal with a large audience. but this is not necessarily my goal because i don't talk to everyone. and for rare cases when i need to send an archaic email, i can just open gmail.com, protonmail.com, etc, and use their web gui. (2) technically irrespective of backwards compatibility: there is no doubt that a http/2-based mail system will be much more efficient than smtp's archaic format where all attachments are base64-ed into giant mono text balls. the only reason we're using smtp's archaic text base64-ed balls is pure history. but, fundamentally, contents of emails are in the same scope as of web pages. so emails' contents is not alien to http/2. the only reason we don't have http/2-based mail is pure history, and that people resist change. > Interoperability is the entire point of protocol standardisation in the first > place, and if you're going to suggest a revision, or complete overhaul, of a > standard as well-understood as SMTP, you need to provide extremely compelling > evidence which supports your proposed replacement. So far, you haven't done > that. SMTP can be tricky and unwieldy to configure on certain (most) > implementations, but that does not indicate a lack of features. The complete > opposite, in fact. but i'm not proposing a standard for "everyone". it's about my case of using cheap vps with untrusty admins. so i don't "need" to present any compelling evidence, because i don't care about the approval of these standardization organizations. worst case scenario i can shove an smtp-client leg into gmail and call it a day, and thrive with only 1 listening tcp port (for https). in fact, if possible, even if we wanted to go as far as changing a protocol, we better create our own standards free from them, specially with the likes of w3c which have absolutely no respect for us (they slapped us with drm despite our cries, simply because netflex/google paid enough). currently we're being treated like sheep and get told which disgusting protocols to use.
Re: [gentoo-user] Thunderbird 78
On Wed, 2020-08-19 at 14:37 -0400, james wrote: > > Any idea where the first 'beta' version can be grabbed, as an ebuild? > Doesn't seem to be one available, yet. https://gpo.zugaina.org/mail-client/thunderbird
[gentoo-user] Fvwm manual page
Greetings, after a routine upgrade from Fvwm version 2.6.5-r3 to version 2.6.9 I'm missing file "/usr/share/man/man1/fvwm1.bz2". Several other Fvwm manual pages are there, but I can't tell whether or not "fvwm1.bz2" is the only one missing. Does anybody know what's happened to "fvwm1.bz2"? Sincerely, Rainer
Re: [gentoo-user] tips on running a mail server in a cheap vps provider run but not-so-trusty admins?
First, well said. On 8/19/20 2:27 AM, Ashley Dixon wrote: Apologies for my unintended verbosity. My subconscious _really_ wanted to point out that SMTP is (generally) RELIABLE. ;-) Second, this is an understatement. Per protocol specification, SMTP is EXTREMELY robust. It will retry delivery, nominally once an hour, for up to five (or seven) days. That's 120-168 delivery attempts. Further, SMTP implementations MUST (RFC sense of the word) deliver a notification back to the sender if the implementation was unable to delivery a message. SMTP's ability to deliver email without end-to-end connectivity is almost unmatched. UUCP and NNTP are there with it. -- Grant. . . . unix || die
Re: [gentoo-user] Time to switch back to AMD?
On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 11:44 PM Grant Edwards wrote: > > How are the AMD "Wraith Stealth" fans? I've been using the fan that > came with the old Core-i3, and it gets a little annoying when it's > time to compile chromium (or when flying planes/helicopters). I have two Ryzen processors with these fans and I find them to be adequate, but I'm not super-sensitive to noise. Ryzen in general is much better heat-wise than previous generations. I'm sure it won't compare to something water-cooled with really large fans. For OEM cooling it seems pretty decent. > Any issues with Gentoo and Xorg on AMD integrated Vega 8/11 GPUs? I have a Gentoo system with the Ryzen 3-2200G and I have no issues with the integrated graphics using a completely vanilla kernel (5.4 series right now). I'd probably use at least 4.19 with this CPU - I forget when all the zen/vega changes were integrated but older kernels may lack them. I don't use the system for gaming, but I do run X11 on it with KMS/etc. I can't vouch for gaming performance but my understanding is that AMD in-kernel drivers are decent. I'm sure the integrated graphics won't compete with a $500 GPU. As long as you're using in-kernel drivers they should basically be supported forever. It is only proprietary drivers that have issues with losing support, and I'm not sure if AMD still has those. I suspect a video adapter from 1997 will work with a recent kernel, assuming you can find a motherboard you can plug it into. The only thing I'd bear in mind is that Zen3 is coming soon, so you might benefit from delaying your upgrade. Either way AMD is almost certainly the way to go these days as they seem to be ahead. Maybe for some single-threaded niches Intel still has some areas where they're ahead, but I'm not even sure about that. And if you're running Gentoo you're going to want that multi-thread performance for builds/etc. -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-user] Time to switch back to AMD?
Dale wrote: > Grant Edwards wrote: >> For several decades, I was a loyal AMD customer. But the last time I >> upgraded my home desktop (2013), AMD just didn't seem to have anything >> that could complete with the Core-i3/5 CPUs with integrated graphics. >> The Intel HD-2500 GPU was plenty fast enough for everything I did back >> then, so I went with an i3-3220T (2 cores, 4 threads), and have been >> very happy with it (except for the security vulnerabilties). It even >> handled it fine when I started working from home and added a second >> monitor. >> >> But, after the last update to the Heli-X flight simulator, I did >> notice that I'm bouncing off the rev-limiter on the GPU. In order to >> get a reasonable frame rate and sort-of-smooth background panning I >> had to dial-down or turn off all the configurable graphics features >> (anti-aliasing, smoke, reflections, etc.). Even with all of the fancy >> stuff turned off, it still sometimes struggles and the frame rate >> drops to below 20. >> >> I thought about buying a video card. A $40-50 Radeon or NVidia card >> would be more than enough GPU. In the past I've been burned by ATI >> cards being abandoned within a year or two of purcase. Is AMD any >> better about support? Of course, dealing with closed-source NVidia >> drivers is also annoying. >> >> Also, the motherboard/CPU are almost 8 years old. Maybe it's time for >> a new AMD Ryzen with an integrated GPU. Even the low-end sub-$100 >> Ryzen 3 with Vega 8 GPU would be a big jump in performance from the >> current Intel HD 2500. For another $40, a Ryzen 5 with Vega 11 GPU >> would completely outclass what I have now. >> >> How are the AMD "Wraith Stealth" fans? I've been using the fan that >> came with the old Core-i3, and it gets a little annoying when it's >> time to compile chromium (or when flying planes/helicopters). >> >> Any issues with Gentoo and Xorg on AMD integrated Vega 8/11 GPUs? >> >> AFAICT, the drivers are all open source, and it ought to "just work" >> with recent kernels. >> >> Unfortunately, the capaciters on the existing motherboard are all >> solid and probably aren't going to pop any time soon. > > So far, I've always bought AMD video cards too. > > Dale > > :-) :-) That should be Nvidia based video cards. I had AMD on my brain. lol Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Time to switch back to AMD?
Grant Edwards wrote: > For several decades, I was a loyal AMD customer. But the last time I > upgraded my home desktop (2013), AMD just didn't seem to have anything > that could complete with the Core-i3/5 CPUs with integrated graphics. > The Intel HD-2500 GPU was plenty fast enough for everything I did back > then, so I went with an i3-3220T (2 cores, 4 threads), and have been > very happy with it (except for the security vulnerabilties). It even > handled it fine when I started working from home and added a second > monitor. > > But, after the last update to the Heli-X flight simulator, I did > notice that I'm bouncing off the rev-limiter on the GPU. In order to > get a reasonable frame rate and sort-of-smooth background panning I > had to dial-down or turn off all the configurable graphics features > (anti-aliasing, smoke, reflections, etc.). Even with all of the fancy > stuff turned off, it still sometimes struggles and the frame rate > drops to below 20. > > I thought about buying a video card. A $40-50 Radeon or NVidia card > would be more than enough GPU. In the past I've been burned by ATI > cards being abandoned within a year or two of purcase. Is AMD any > better about support? Of course, dealing with closed-source NVidia > drivers is also annoying. > > Also, the motherboard/CPU are almost 8 years old. Maybe it's time for > a new AMD Ryzen with an integrated GPU. Even the low-end sub-$100 > Ryzen 3 with Vega 8 GPU would be a big jump in performance from the > current Intel HD 2500. For another $40, a Ryzen 5 with Vega 11 GPU > would completely outclass what I have now. > > How are the AMD "Wraith Stealth" fans? I've been using the fan that > came with the old Core-i3, and it gets a little annoying when it's > time to compile chromium (or when flying planes/helicopters). > > Any issues with Gentoo and Xorg on AMD integrated Vega 8/11 GPUs? > > AFAICT, the drivers are all open source, and it ought to "just work" > with recent kernels. > > Unfortunately, the capaciters on the existing motherboard are all > solid and probably aren't going to pop any time soon. I don't know if they still available but I have a Cooler Master HAF-932 case that has those large fans. I also bought a much larger CPU cooler than the tiny little toy that comes with CPUs. It has a 140MM fan. When I'm doing updates, I can't hear any of the fans even in a quiet room with me sitting right beside it. There may be other cases that have similar setups by now. Those large fans are very quiet but move a lot of air. Right now while the CPU is idle, the CPU fan is running at about 1,000RPM. The rear fan is also a 140mm running at 600RPMs. The large fans are running at around 700RPMs each. I think the best idea is the top fan. As we know, heat rises. That top fan really pulls out some heat. The side fan doesn't have a RPM monitor but it appears to turn at about the same speed as the front and top. BTW, the front fans blows air across the hard drives. At idle, CPU temp is about 100F. Ambient in the case is about 85F. Room temp is about 71F. I'm guessing something warm is close to the temp sensor on the mobo. When I'm compiling and maxing out the CPUs, it tends to run at about 124F. If it hits 125F or so, I get my air blower and blow out the dust. While the fans do speed up, I still can't hear anything. This case supports water cooling systems but since I always buy large CPU coolers and cases with a lot of fans, I've never seen the point of water cooling. I might add, other than systems someone gave me, I've never had a Intel based system. I always build systems with AMD CPUs. So far, I've always bought AMD video cards too. I've read where some say ATI has better support but I don't know myself. Of course, I always buy older cards so it doesn't matter much. As with most anything, most problems are with very new stuff that doesn't have good stable Linux drivers yet. One reason I try to get parts that are based on older tech. Of course, I don't play heavy duty games either. I have a cousin that used to build a new system every couple years for gaming. Several years ago, they just started buying game boxes. They use their computer for email etc and use the game boxes for playing games. When needed, they buy new game boxes. They say it makes things a lot easier on them. Tends to be cheaper too. Just some thoughts you might want to ponder on. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Time to switch back to AMD?
On 19/08/2020 04:44, Grant Edwards wrote: How are the AMD "Wraith Stealth" fans? I've been using the fan that came with the old Core-i3, and it gets a little annoying when it's time to compile chromium (or when flying planes/helicopters). If you're talking about what I think you are, I'm building a new system and you can't hear the the thing. I did an emerge -e world, and never noticed it ... Cheers, Wol
Re: [gentoo-user] tips on running a mail server in a cheap vps provider run but not-so-trusty admins?
On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 09:25:11AM +0100, Ashley Dixon wrote: > reliable method of reliably transferring Apologies for my unintended verbosity. My subconscious _really_ wanted to point out that SMTP is (generally) RELIABLE. ;-) -- Ashley Dixon suugaku.co.uk 2A9A 4117 DA96 D18A 8A7B B0D2 A30E BF25 F290 A8AA signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] tips on running a mail server in a cheap vps provider run but not-so-trusty admins?
On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 01:34:46AM +, Caveman Al Toraboran wrote: > sure, smtp is older, but protocol age is > irrelevant. > > right now http/2 is more developed and much more > efficient (e.g. compressed binary, pipelining, > single connection multiplexing, encryption by > default). even http1.4 was a more efficient > replacement. I don't think you fully understand Grant's point. Whilst HTTP(/2) may be more featureful for serving web pages, it makes absolutely no sense to use for anything but. Protocol age absolutely _is not_ irrelevant: SMTP has been ubiquitous in mail transportation for many years, and thus, every single mail client supports it pretty close to the RFC. Moreover, as Grant mentioned in the previous message, it is the only reliable method of reliably transferring messages to and fro systems which, in most cases, differ quite vastly in every element _except_ their understanding of SMTP. Interoperability is the entire point of protocol standardisation in the first place, and if you're going to suggest a revision, or complete overhaul, of a standard as well-understood as SMTP, you need to provide extremely compelling evidence which supports your proposed replacement. So far, you haven't done that. SMTP can be tricky and unwieldy to configure on certain (most) implementations, but that does not indicate a lack of features. The complete opposite, in fact. With that said, if you'd like to propose a standard and write a reference implementation, that is how most new ideas in computing arise. I don't think anyone would attempt to stop you from doing that; we're merely suggesting that your current idea of the HTTP-for-mail protocol is flawed. -- Ashley Dixon suugaku.co.uk 2A9A 4117 DA96 D18A 8A7B B0D2 A30E BF25 F290 A8AA signature.asc Description: PGP signature
