[Trisquel-users] How do I turn on and use the Tor network and browse with IceCat using it?
Hello, I am new to Trisquel linux. How do I turn on and use the Tor network and browse with IceCat using it? Thank you
Re: [Trisquel-users] grub asks for password for booting windows in dual boot setup
PS: And the issue tracker is also broken hence adding here. What kind of a problem are you having with it?
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
Indeed. But what's even more alarming, is the presence of (gasp) Emacs! Let's put on our tinfoil hats guys- who reviewed that before it got put in the repos? Or- gosh- KDE? or linux-firmware? or GNOME? or libreoffice? or nano? Or (I tremble at the name) sl! Perhaps behind its seemingly innocent ASCII art facade, there lies a vile plot to destroy our entire planet, daresay our entire universe! Didn't see that one coming, did'ya? -- SELinux is old. It is under the GPL. It's not that big. It has been examined. It is OK. Stop worrying. And would you please stop ending every post with that annoying ominous ellipsis of yours?
Re: [Trisquel-users] Re : MonoDevelop fails to start
I already tried. Output: $ monodevelop $ and nothing. Not even the invisible 'starting' window as when I launched it from the menu. I'll try mono-devel for the time being, just to compile the bloody thing. I heard that 4.0.1x is a horrifically buggy release. Any ideas as to why it worked in Xfce only a week or so ago, and did so consistently throughout the entire time I used Xfce? I may have to switch back to Xfce just to use it.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Why Can't I Use The New Firefox Reader In Abrowser?
I agree SuperTramp83. Less is more is the way to go. I know it's difficult to keep track of all the free add-ons and free software programs available. but that's what forums like this are for (among other things of course)! If everything available was included in the .iso you'd need 10 DVDs to hold it all. That;s what the repos are for. Trisquel Rocks!
Re: [Trisquel-users] Nvidia FX5200, GeForce 7200 GS
I don't believe in throwing out functional hardware just because certain components will not work without non-free firmware. Ideally, one would buy hardware that supported free software, (as I do) but in the vast majority of cases this simply isn't going to happen. The cause of software freedom can never make any progress if we shun those who have bought devices with closed components. Even GNU releases free software for Windows. This may not be fanatic enough for you, but I put the environment before free software. Make do with the hardware you have, run free software on as much of it as you can and minimise usage of that on which you can't, and next time round buy freedom-respecting hardware. I run Trisquel. My computer has a non-free BIOS, and isn't supported by coreboot. That doesn't mean I'll just chuck it out and buy a Libreboot (as much as I would love to)- I'll wait until I actually need a new computer. Again, running Debian with non-free wifi firmware is vastly preferable to running Windows. Maybe I'm still trapped in the 'Debian mindset', but it seems fairly rational to me. My first recommendation to anyone would be Trisquel. If that is not possible, Debian is as good as it gets. PS. That was a pretty stupid way to end a post. I was tired. Sorry.
Re: [Trisquel-users] How do I turn on and use the Tor network and browse with IceCat using it?
sudo apt-get install xul-ext-torproxy
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
Ah yes! Sorry (I was also looking at a few of MB's posts here so must've mixed up yours with his).
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
Someone said Unnunntu Kylin? http://www.ubuntu.com/download/ubuntu-kylin An OS made for Chinese people and very welcomed by one of the greatest dictatorships of the entire stupid World.. I wouldn't trust Ubunnuntu on anything. But then again, I am paranoid and that is just my thought..
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
It was me, not Magic Banana, but yes, that's exactly what I was talking about. :)
Re: [Trisquel-users] How do I turn on and use the Tor network and browse with IceCat using it?
You don't need to- the Tor Project have already done the heavy lifting. Tor Browser is a modified Firefox preconfigured to work with Tor. You can get it here: https://www.torproject.org/download/download
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
Well, I meant that if it had a malicious feature, it shouldn't have been licensed under GPL. Nonetheless, by reading other comments I'm more relieved to the fact that no one has found anything about it... but we should be aware...
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
Has it been fixed? Or do they continue doing that?
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
Yeah, I've been doing a little research, and it seems that everybody is saying: It's licensed under GPL, we should be safe and You can look into the source code But so far, nobody was reviewing it... I think we're not being so cautious...
Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser for other Distros just like IceCat
For some reason the Gnewsense page is SO SLOW! That's why I was using DuckDuckGo...
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
The difference is that the guys from Debian and Ubuntu (mainly) are not as concerned as the guys from Trisquel are...
Re: [Trisquel-users] Translation Issue
Answered in the Spanish forum.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Re : Is Trisquel documentation available in .pdf format or some other more convenient form?
Most web browsers (including Firefox and derivatives) can save HTML pages, recursively even.
[Trisquel-users] Re : Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
If SELinux had malware, it would be certainly known. Thanks to its GNU GPL license (SELinux's has never been relicensed). Anyone has the freedom to study SELinux's source code. You cannot directly do so because you are not a programmer. But other users do (starting with all Linux hackers who show interest in security). Moreover, the code coming from the NSA certainly is more studied than any other code.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
As far as I know, the GPL doesn't say anything about malicious features inside the software. Richard Stallman say that malicious features, killing people with software, etc.. Don't have be regulated by licenses as copyright isn't for that, the rest of the law is for that.
Re: [Trisquel-users] How do I turn on and use the Tor network and browse with IceCat using it?
GNU
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
I hereby mark this thread as solved
Re: [Trisquel-users] grub asks for password for booting windows in dual boot setup
1. Make the /etc/grub.d/01_PASSWORD file empty (or remove it). (You need Sudo) 2. perform sudo update-grub from the terminal.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Uninstalled metapackage trisquel-mini, lost WiFi
# ifconfig wlan0 essid ATT2G3X2z5 Error for wireless request Set ESSID (8B1A) : SET failed on device wlan0 ; Operation already in progress. You probably have some sort of WLAN autoconnection set up. I didn't know Trisquel did that. By the way, it's iwconfig for this step, not ifconfig. Anyway, congratulations on getting it working. You'll have to tell me whether Trisquel Mini did indeed appear on boot. PS. You mentioned attached dmesg output- there were no attachments. Are you sure you sent some? Maybe Drupal stripped them.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Uninstalled metapackage trisquel-mini, lost WiFi
https://u.teknik.io/WtARxF.png
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
Please consider that when Unity started doing something malicious (automatically sending search queries to Canonical's servers), it was very quickly discovered. I don't think anyone's made a fixed fork of Unity, but that's more because of a lack of interest in Unity than anything (the only party particularly interested in Unity is its developer, Canonical). SELinux is old. I was in Kindergarten at the time. If it was malicious, it would have been discovered long ago. Malicious features simply do not thrive in libre software.
Re: [Trisquel-users] How do I turn on and use the Tor network and browse with IceCat using it?
I'd suggest you forego IceCat's Tor support and use the Tor Browser Bundle instead (just extract the appropriate GNU/Linux binary somewhere in your home directory).
Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser for other Distros just like IceCat
As onpon4 said, there is no real difference between Abrowser and other rebranded Firefoxes. Since gNewSense is based on Debian, I'm sure that the famous Iceweasel must be floating around somewhere in the repos. If you want to search for 'abrowser', not 'a browser', then you can surround the term with speech marks like so: abrowser to narrow your search and only count exact hits. Why are you looking packages up in DuckDuckGo anyway? Doesn't gNewSense have a package list on their site somewhere?
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
Oh, if the NSA had added any malicious feature that we are not aware of, it must have been licensed differently. Well, at least because it's licensed under GPL the programmers can look into the source code.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
Guys from Ubuntu and Debian, yes (and if, IF you don't trust any of those guys then why trust the rest of Trisquel's repos?).
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
Just to be sure, before it gets to my repos, was there someone reviewing it before adding it to the repositories?
[Trisquel-users] MonoDevelop fails to start
I am running Trisquel 7 with all repositories enabled. I installed MonoDevelop (4.0.12, I think) with apt-get, and the installation went through fine, with MonoDevelop being added to my main menu. However, when I attempt to launch MonoDevelop, I can see 'Starting MonoDevelop...' in the window switcher for about 10 seconds, then it closes, and nothing. MonoDevelop doesn't show up in the system monitor either during launching or after. Has anyone else experienced this issue? I looked it up, but I'm slightly wary of replacing files I don't understand. Funnily enough, it worked perfectly under Trisquel Xfce (4.11). Help! PS. In the meantime, are there any command-line C# compilers in the Trisquel repos I could use? This has to be done for Tuesday... If only we were taught in a less Windows-centric language.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
Trust me- you're not the first to have ever been concerned about SELinux. People have had a look at it before, and there really is nothing to worry about. If there was (since it's GPL) there would have been an uproar, and it would have been modified or rejected by the GNU/Linux community. Sure, it comes from the NSA. But it's also under the GPL. There is nothing to fear.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser for other Distros just like IceCat
I see. Anyway, why gNewSense?
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
They're still at it. https://fixubuntu.com/
Re: [Trisquel-users] How do I turn on and use the Tor network and browse with IceCat using it?
https://www.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html Operating system: GNU Kernel: Linux Distro: Trisquel GNU/Linux US pronunciation: Triss-cull guh-noo slash linnucks Spanish pronunciation: /tri:skel nju: kon li:nuks/
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
Don't know either what you're talking about nor how was the adoption of X. All I know is X is portable between *nix systems and was intended to be used in GNU. So if the adoption of X was any better than systemd, maybe that has something to do. Also, how systemd replaced other inits in some distributions, could have something to do with why people feel is being imposed. An ex-user of Fedora: I ended up figuring out a way to install Fedora 15 starting from a minimal system without using Systemd. And it worked, too. But I had to maintain the SysV scripts myself with rsync after every system update because the various package maintainers were beginning to make their update rpms delete their old SysV and Upstart stuff.[1] In arch linux systemd was pushed in an update, so if didn't saw the change list before applying the update, you would get another init without ever asking. An ex-user of Arch: In a recent update, it was made apparent to me that systemd includes udev, and dbus requires systemd (on Arch) in order to function. Since I was unable to excise systemd from my Arch Linux installation[2] [1] https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-from-scratch-13/what-is-so-bad-with-systemd-4175500300/#post5145285 [2] http://sporkbox.us/misc/old_posts/95.html
Re: [Trisquel-users] How do I turn on and use the Tor network and browse with IceCat using it?
Unrelated, but: I like your SPUTNIK avatar.
Re: [Trisquel-users] grub asks for password for booting windows in dual boot setup
grub version 2.02~beta2-9ubuntu1+7.0trisquel4
Re: [Trisquel-users] Is Trisquel documentation available in .pdf format or some other more convenient form?
if anyone might know if the same documentation might be available in .pdf format? if your running icecat/abrowser/firefox you can just use ctrl p to print your current web page as a pdf
[Trisquel-users] grub asks for password for booting windows in dual boot setup
There is agrub superuser password setup in /boot/grub/grub.cfg and makes booting Windows impossible. I had to look inside grub.cfg to see the password and enter it to boot to Windows. By default grub should not set the password or entering password should not be required for booting windows. PS: And the issue tracker is also broken hence adding here. ### BEGIN /etc/grub.d/01_PASSWORD ### set superusers=grub password grub 26073 ### END /etc/grub.d/01_PASSWORD ###
Re: [Trisquel-users] cant install mate
Which version of Trisquel are you using?
[Trisquel-users] Re : MonoDevelop fails to start
Try launching the IDE from a virtual terminal. Some useful messages may appear there. To get the complete development environment without the IDE, install the mono-devel package (for instance using the Synaptic package manager in the System settings). For the sole compiler, install mono-mcs.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Why Can't I Use The New Firefox Reader In Abrowser?
Your logic doesn't seem quite all right to me deavmi. There are hundreds of free software addons for Firefox. Does that mean that all of them should come pre-installed?? What about the philosophy (particularly fit in the security models) of the less is better and if you don't use it, remove it, or better yet, don't install it at all if you don't need it?
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
This is indeed very interesting: https://micahflee.com/2013/11/canonical-shouldnt-abuse-trademark-law-to-silence-critics-of-its-privacy-decisions/
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
SELinux and RedHats connections to the US gov./spy agencies is the main reason why SUSE/openSUSE created AppArmor, (Immunix actually). You also have Tomoyo as another alternative and grsec-kernel if you really want security.
[Trisquel-users] Re : Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
SELinux and RedHats connections to the US gov./spy agencies is the main reason why SUSE/openSUSE created AppArmor, (Immunix actually). Is it another lie? Or do you have a reference (other than discussion on a forum) this time?
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
You used a few ellipses (...), which are commonly pretty ominous. The difference is that the guys from Debian and Ubuntu (mainly) are not as concerned as the guys from Trisquel are regarding privacy. The Debian project as a whole is pretty big on privacy, security, and software freedom-- as much as Trisquel is, I'd say. Just because the module was written by the NSA doesn't mean it's malicious. The module's been pretty much looked through in through, you've nothing to worry about. Oh, and is that Lelouch I see? Er... Zero?
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
funny, for what part?
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
I beg your pardon, what do you mean by ominous ellipsis? Did I say something offensive or disgusting? (I never intended that, if so, my apologies...)
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
But no distribution audits all of the software it bundles (and even if they did, it is likely that several vulnerabilities go undetected); in specific, Ubuntu and Debian don't. For discovering vulnerabilities distributions mostly rely on public discoveries. Debian mentions the name of the discoverer of vulnerabilities in announces in the read only mailing list “debian-security-annou...@lists.debian.org”. In one occasion, Debian introduced a vulnerability, possibly accidentally, it was discovered and fixed. There have been vulnerabilities which have remained undiscovered for years like CVE-2014-6271 (use a search engine for more information).
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
It seems to me that the only valid criticism of systemd is that it only works with GNU/Linux. This hasn't been shown to harm BSD or other Unix-like systems too much, however. It seems that the BSD crowd isn't really interested in having systemd, anyway. If the lack of a BSD version isn't doing too much bad, then it seems that the lack of portability isn't as big a bad thing as people are making it out to be. The issue with systemd being Linux-only is not systemd itself, but the programs that depend on it. as can make harder the porting of these programs to other *nix systems. For instance, it seems to me that Wayland use udev, though I don't know if it's actually required in the protocol. Also, *BSD isn't the only affected but also GNU Hurd.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Uninstalled metapackage trisquel-mini, lost WiFi
Sorry. I'm doing all of this through the mailing lists- when you said attachment I was expecting to find and *e-mail* attachment. Sorry.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
Sorry, but Linux and Windows are two different operating systems and systemd isn't about free choice and freedom of administration of the system. It's about controlled automation and a lack of core principles of system security. The systemd developers are chanting in their basements, candles raised and human blood in wine glasses, Down with freedom! Admins should drown! Security is for suckers! Is this a conspiracy or something? Yea, it's pretty easy to say that they are going against principles of system security, whatever your definition of that is, but it's harder to bring evidence showing that they are doing something bad for security. systemd can be administrated just as well as upstart can, it's just done differently. There's a learning curve, run away! It seems to me that the only valid criticism of systemd is that it only works with GNU/Linux. This hasn't been shown to harm BSD or other Unix-like systems, however. It seems that the BSD crowd isn't really interested in having systemd, anyway. If the lack of a BSD/Unix version isn't doing any bad, then it seems that the lack of portability isn't as big a bad thing as people are making it out to be. I mean, GNOME 3.16 is working on OpenBSD even with it's systemd dependency, for example.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
An ellipsis is three dots: ... (or, more correctly, . . ., but pretty much no one does that).
[Trisquel-users] Re : Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
I could go on And you did. But those many messages do not prove anything. You quote people chatting in a non-technical way, and without a single reference, the state of systemd three years ago (well, the discussion is not focused, e.g., the first two pages are more about PAM, udisk, vmware/virtualbox, computers substituting humans, secure boot, BSD's userspace, etc.).
[Trisquel-users] Re : Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
For instance, it seems to me that Wayland require udev, though I don't know if it's actually required in the protocol. udev is used to detect devices: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wayland_%28display_server_protocol%29#/media/File:Libinput_for_Wayland_compositors.svg But it did not disappear. It was incorporated into systemd. On the contrary, udev has never appeared on BSD! Wayland was mainly intended to run on Linux. This time, the main Linux feature that is wanted is Kernel Mode Setting (KMS): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mode_setting FreeBSD and OpenBSD have KMS for Intel and Radeon GPUs. A port of Wayland to FreeBSD was started: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=MTMwMzE Wayland uses some features of systemd-logind but it looks optional: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=MTM4Mzc http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=MTQ0NTI GNOME 3.16 is working on OpenBSD even with it's systemd dependency GNOME does not depend on systemd's init. It has an optional dependency on systemd-logind. So systemd actually run with openBSD? systemd's init cannot run on another kernel because cgroups are at the center of this init and they are a Linux-only feature (until now). But, again, systemd is an umbrella project. And a student worked on re-implementing some of systemd's daemons, namely hostnamed, localed, timedated, and logind, for OpenBSD: http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=articlesid=20140915064856 https://uglyman.kremlin.cc/gitweb/gitweb.cgi?p=systembsd.git has not received any commit this year. The development may now happen elsewhere (or not).
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
And Systemd's not one programme, it's an umbrella prohject of programmes that do one thing, or not too many more than that, at least competently.
[Trisquel-users] Re : Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
Some Gentoo developers, who happen to hate systemd, forked udev in 2012, right after udev was merged into systemd. The fork is called eudev. Up to last year, systemd could still use the old-style udev. With the message you quote, Lennart Poettering announces that this support will stop. To follow their plans the Gentoo developers either had to prepare another kdbus userspace or ship their udev. They chose the second option, by the way.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
Note to Rueben, people should not be able to +1 their own posts. Magic. You are correct about when they dropped Gnome, however, you obviously cannot tell the difference between Patrick (public voice/P.C.) and how he feels about certain things in GNU/Linux. That is obvious. Here is a link to several of the Slackware dev's and users discussing systemd, pay close attention to Pat's and AlienBob both developers for along time...and keep in mind that Slackware is the oldest distro, and has the street cred's to back up what they say. https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/systemd-and-slackware%27s-future-4175416339/
[Trisquel-users] Re : Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
That kind of attitude is disappointing. I agree. What do you mean by ship eudev? I thought that eudev was not stable at that date. But, I was wrong: https://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo-x86/sys-fs/eudev/ChangeLog eudev entered Gentoo stable (without a subsequent revert) in August and September 2013 (depending on the architecture).
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
(H_TeXMeX_H) I think that systemd is only a problem that appears along with GNOME. As Slackware has never included GNOME, I think it is safe for now. The increasing number of applications that require it are likely GNOME-only apps, which I have seen many of, and avoid instantly. If you don't know why I avoid them, try to install one, the dependencies are endless and hard to build in order and if you forget to compile something into one of the dependencies you have to go back and do it again.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
Yes, in some cases it is better to not to have portability. When there is a piece of free software that has no proprietary counterpart, or is by far technically superior to that technical counterpart, then it is usually better that it runs only on a fully free operating system so that is not portable. Oh, I see what you mean. I thought you meant that there was situations where it wasn't good to have portability between fully free systems.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
Discussions are never solved, they just fade away unless pinned until someone posts bump into it and breathes new life to a thread just like that.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
Yeah but one can say that about everything, from SysVinit to IceCat to GNU Emacs to Vim to Linux-libre to GNU Hurd to Drupal to MS Office to iWork to OpenOffice.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
Compared to which American spying doesn't really pale, so..
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
Systemd as an init maybe not for the time being. But I meant to systemd as any of it's components (that can become a dependency), like logind or udev. I commented about system specific features and software in my first reply. I completely agree with the first sentence, GNU should always have freedom as the first priority. But GNU also has compatibly between *nix systems as a nice and desirable thing to have, although not a critical requirement of course. I don't agree with it is usually good to have. Why usually? Are there situations where portability isn't good to have? Yes, in some cases it is better to not to have portability. When there is a piece of free software that has no proprietary counterpart, or is by far technically superior to that technical counterpart, then it is usually better that it runs only on a fully free operating system so that is not portable. This adds a practical reason for people to use the free operating system. There is some rough similarity to the effect of Copyleft licenses. Copyleft licenses directly give an incentive to develop free software, while in this case, absence of portability just gives a reason to use free software, but as I explain next, this still results in a similar benefit to that of Copyleft. The benefit in this case is not in making people who don't care about freedom of computing use free software because it is more convenient, but in that this increased usage may result in the free OS be more widely used instead of proprietary OSs and in turn this reduces the founding and pressure of proprietary software and promotes development and further adoption of the free system, which benefits those who we support the free software philosophy and may lead more people to know about the problems of proprietary software and centralization, and adopt the free software philosophy. Many of us became aware of the free software philosophy through using GNU/Linux and initially not knowing about GNU or free software. However, it seems than more often, it is better that free software works on the popular proprietary operating systems to ease transition from those OSs to a fully free one, and also because it may reduce the usage of proprietary software in those proprietary OSs in favor of free software, with the benefits mentioned above.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
That's exactly what it was danieru. An ultimatum not just for Gentoo but for anyone not on board with systemd. Nice post by the way. Pottering's attitude is what has many dev.'s question the intention of his project, and the overall scope of his plans. Never seen anything like it before, at least not on this scale and level. Gentoo will continue to develop OpenRC and give its users the choice during install whether they want systemd or openRC or a combination of the two. Slackware, Crux, BSD's and others are against systemd, and have no plans to implement it. Slackware has gone so far as to drop any support for Gnome and its programs as a result of its stance against systemd and RedHat influence in general.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
I think that's an overly technical distinction, and not particularly relevant. The point is that dependencies on both of these cause programs to not work on some systems without specific efforts to make them work (a real-world example in the case of X is Mac OS X, which from my understanding has some sort of compatibility layer to cope with this), and both are a result of programmers deciding that's an acceptable loss given the API they gain access to.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
One more from Pat (Slackware founder) volkerdi Slackware Maintainer Well, the problem with using shell scripts in the boot process is that it goes through a lot of PIDs, and it would be less ugly to arrive at a usable machine state with a PID in the hundreds, or lower. If everything has to break in order to achieve that, it seems like a good trade. Eventually all the broken stuff will be fixed, right? I think that's the basic rationale. And maybe shave a few more seconds off boot time, but who boots much (or cares)? My servers and desktops remain on, and my laptops are usually on, suspended, or hibernated. I would prefer a reliable and well-understood boot system like the one we have. My primary concern is that the systemd cabal is going to be pushing it as a dependency wherever possible, but we'll deal with that if it happens. But if any major distributions do actually release using systemd, the world will be stuck with it forever. If that's the case, I hope it turns out to be a good idea...
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
ok last one from this bunch for now (anyway), but I think this is all very educational for many: (Alien Bob Slackware Contributor) I would not consider systemd for this reason only: it is being written specifically to work only on the Linux platform. I am very much an advocate of cross-platform development, UNIX is bigger than Linux alone. Systemd is expected to be used by userland programs like KDE and Gnome. However these are also used on BSD, Solaris, HP UNIX etcetera. It is as if Poettering expects that the userland programmers (KDE/Gnome and other desktop environments) and distributors of UNIXes should deal with the incompatibilities and patch their code to make it work on non-Linux OS-es where systemd will be unavailable. Code that shows this amount of contempt for anything that is not Linux, should be buried without ceremony. Poettering also said his code is more efficient because he does not stick to POSIX compliant programming. The programming shortcuts he takes are non-portable. I think more efficient and cross-platform should not be mutually exclusive. Taking shortcuts to make your program do fancy stuff is an immature coding style and better suited for the demo scene. You can optimize code and still keep it cross-platform, there is a lot of software that proves this - look at the multimedia applications that use platform-specific assembler code to squeeze all the available performance out of a computer. Still those applications compile cleanly and can be used on Linux, UNIX, and on several hardware platforms. It takes effort to make software portable and you have to be willing to spend that time - you do it for the users of your software. Poettering defends his systemd with vigor, but his comments reflect his contempt for any other way of thinking. One of his typical statements is that all his critics are amazingly badly informed. You can not go into a dialogue with the guy, he just won't listen to your arguments. So, what are the advantages of systemd? Using error-prone shell code instead of systemd is bullshit - it's not as if we have to write new init scripts every week. Replaces consolekit? Poettering and Zeuthen are two Redhat employees who infest computers with half-assed software that they deprecate faster than distros can adopt it. Does it make your computer boot faster? Well wow... how many seconds of productive time do you gain per day?. It is not worth the hassle. Eric
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
I could go on, but it makes for a great read to follow the above link...there are many other links if you are interested in seeing both sides of the discussion and not just the pro systemd side.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
Pat in response to someone saying that systemd was fine because it made things simpler and easier: Not even close. This is the Unix philosophy: Write programs that do one thing and do it well. Write programs to work together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a universal interface. -- Doug McIlroy, the inventor of Unix pipes and one of the founders of the Unix tradition
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
(ReaperX7) From that video he seems to be thinking his software can directly mimic the speed, user-friendliness, zero-administration, and core functionality of Windows upon the Linux kernel. Sorry, but Linux and Windows are two different operating systems and systemd isn't about free choice and freedom of administration of the system. It's about controlled automation and a lack of core principles of system security. I'm beginning to think we'd be better off gathering up some independent developers, or developers from other Linux systems, grabbing the hal, udisks, upower, and udev sources we still have and redeveloping a cross-platform INIT system that can be not only invisible to the system, but completely modular with full control of the system if so desired, works on BSD, Linux, and various other UNIX and UNIX-like operating system kernels and distributions, before Red Hat and Lennart completely destroy Linux and the various OS distributions that use it, and turn it into something it's not and set back Linux yet again as a viable OS alternative to Windows.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
On May 31 22:45 2014, Lennart wrote: Also note that at that point we intend to move udev onto kdbus as transport, and get rid of the userspace-to-userspace netlink-based tranport udev used so far. Unless the systemd-haters prepare another kdbus userspace until then this will effectively also mean that we will not support non-systemd systems with udev anymore starting at that point. Gentoo folks, this is your wakeup call. http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2014-May/019657.html Unless the systemd-haters prepare another kdbus userspace[,] until then this will effectively also mean that we will not support non-systemd systems with udev anymore starting at that point. So according to Lennart anyone who wants udev without systemd is automatically a systemd-hater. So for example those GNU Hurd/BSD/Etc.. guys who want to port Wayland (which use udev) are also systemd-haters. Gentoo folks, this is your wakeup call. What's this? Some kind of ultimatum?
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
Some Gentoo developers, who happen to hate systemd I know, but even so Lennart isn't a lead developer of any project. Systemd aims to be the simple building blocks for all the GNU/Linux distributions as they want to unify many of the needless differences between the distributions, it is clear that systemd aims to be a very important piece of the system core components. So I would expect more professionalism and seriousness coming from someone like him, and not that kind of statement that you would expect from any random guy in the Internet defending systemd. And on top of that, Lennart is being paid while the vast majority (if not all) of the Gentoo developers are volunteers. So in summary: That kind of attitude is disappointing. forked udev in 2012, right after udev was merged into systemd. The fork is called eudev. Up to last year, systemd could still use the old-style udev. Just for the people that didn't knew of eudev: The reason why Gentoo fork udev into eudev was to keep udev separate of systemd and therefore software that depend on udev separate of systemd. As udev is one of the components that can't be Reimplementable Independently[1]. With the message you quote, Lennart Poettering announces that this support will stop. To follow their plans[,] the Gentoo developers either had to prepare another kdbus userspace or ship eudev. They chose the second option, by the way. Uhmm, or ship eudev? What do you mean by ship eudev? [1] http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/InterfacePortabilityAndStabilityChart/
[Trisquel-users] Re : Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
Slackware has gone so far as to drop any support for Gnome and its programs as a result of its stance against systemd and RedHat influence in general. That is one more lie. Slackware dropped GNOME's support between versions 10.1 and 10.2 in 2005, i.e., five years before systemd's initial release: http://distrowatch.com/slackware ftp://ftp.slackware.com/pub/slackware/slackware-10.2/ChangeLog.txt gives a precise date for the remotion of GNOME from Slackware, Sat Mar 26 23:04:41 PST 2005. Here is the relevant message in the CangeLog, where Patrick Volkerding asks to not incorrectly interpret any of this as a slight against GNOME (...) a decent desktop choice : gnome/*: Removed from -current, and turned over to community support and distribution. I'm not going to rehash all the reasons behind this, but it's been under consideration for more than four years. There are already good projects in place to provide Slackware GNOME for those who want it, and these are more complete than what Slackware has shipped in the past. So, if you're looking for GNOME for Slackware -current, I would recommend looking at these two projects for well-built packages that follow a policy of minimal interference with the base Slackware system: http://gsb.sf.net http://gware.sf.net There is also Dropline, of course, which is quite popular. However, due to their policy of adding PAM and replacing large system packages (like the entire X11 system) with their own versions, I can't give quite the same sort of nod to Dropline. Nevertheless, it remains another choice, and it's _your_ system, so I will also mention their project: http://www.dropline.net/gnome/ Please do not incorrectly interpret any of this as a slight against GNOME itself, which (although it does usually need to be fixed and polished beyond the way it ships from upstream more so than, say, KDE or XFce) is a decent desktop choice. So are a lot of others, but Slackware does not need to ship every choice. GNOME is and always has been a moving target (even the stable releases usually aren't quite ready yet) that really does demand a team to keep up on all the changes (many of which are not always well documented). I fully expect that this move will improve the quality of both Slackware itself, and the quality (and quantity) of the GNOME options available for it.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
In case you do not look it up here are a few snippets: (Alien Bob Slackware Contributor): Some things will probably be forced upon Slackware - PAM has been on the carefully circumventing but you never know list for a long time. PAM is not bad to have at all, but it is personal opinion of the Slackware boss which keeps it at bay. That is an architectural decision which we can live with as a team and as Slackware users. But systemd is essentially evil. It is invasive, extremely hostile to other environments, threatening to kill non-Linux ecosystems which have hal, udev, dbus, consolekit, polkit, udisks, upower and friends as dependencies. And every iteration of the software written by the Redhat employees who are responsible for hal, udev, consiolekit, polkit and now systemd are incompatible with previous releases, re-implementing their bad ideas with new bad ideas... basically proving that these Redhat employees must be declared unfit to work on the core of a Linux distro. However, the influence of their employer is so big that these products are forced upon the wider UNIX community and at some point it will be assimilate or die. I hope we (Slackware) will find a way where we do not have to assimilate but still manage to keep the distro working. I have high hopes for KDE which has no Redhat ties and so far, manages to stay clear of this mess, sticking to widely accepted standards. An example of impending doom: udev sources for recent releases are no longer in existence. They are now part of systemd source tarballs. And udisks? That has been deprecated in favour of the new udisks2. Read http://igurublog.wordpress.com/2012/...loss-for-linux and weep. Eric
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
But hey, if you want to talk about non-portable dependencies, how about X? You know, the window system most commonly used for the last ~30 years. Seriously, it's exactly the same deal. The X library is not any more portable than systemd: it only works with X. Most of the time, when “portability” is mentioned in the context of informatics, it means the property of a software that runs on several operating systems. The X Windows System is portable: it runs in several operating systems, so depending on X doesn't makes a program unportable. SystemD is not portable, it only runs on operating systems that use Linux as the kernel, so it is not comparable in this redgard. The X library only works with the X Windows System because it is a component of the X Windows System and the X Windows System is portable between operating systems, which is the topic of this thread and not portability in general (which is vaguely defined anyway).
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
If it has been provided by the NSA, and it licensed under GPL... it should have been changed a while ago. What do you mean by that?
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
I was talking about programs being dependent on software which is not portable. The X library is not any more portable than systemd: it only works with X Uhmm, I'm confused, portability in this context means portability between *nix systems. I'm I correct? And the X Window System is for Unix-like systems (it works on Linux, GNU Hurd, BSD, Minix, Solaris, etc...). So, why do you say that X isn't portable?
Re: [Trisquel-users] Libre alternative to skype
Ekiga does it for me.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
I think Magic Banana's trying to talk in that particular post about how apps that depend on X don't simply run on other display servers. Then again I'm not particularly competent in this matter which is why I haven't posted my own position yet.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
oops, my bad. For some reason I read won't as wouldn't until now I realized there wasn't any uld in there. I guess is finally time to accept it and use reading glasses. neutral opinions like yours and not-yet-made ones like mine doesn't seem to be what is supposed to be discussed here assuming the premise of this thread is to be a continuation of the Systemd discussions in the MATE thread It wasn't meant to be an opinion, but fine with me if you found it neutral at least. I made this thread with two purposes, the first one is to address the concern on systemd being Linux only while aiming to be simple building, etc, etc you know a system core component(s). The second was to give a space where the people from the MATE thread could keep debating without messing t3g's thread.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
I get why you're worry with just seeing NSA, but I can't understand what's the concern with the GPL license. Nice desktop by the way.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
And why is it on Trisquel? http://packages.trisquel.info/uk/taranis/libselinux1 GOSH!
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
You mean that I did? No but neutral opinions like yours and not-yet-made ones like mine doesn't seem to be what is supposed to be discussed here assuming the premise of this thread being a continuation of the Systemd discussions in the MATE thread, and so since my post didn't give an opinion I simply decided to explicitly say that it doesn't so as to prevent people thinking I was trying to offer one.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
Wikipedia it's a Linux kernel security module, not a kernel. And what do you mean by no one has stopped them from re-licensing it?? What relicensing?
Re: [Trisquel-users] Could systemd be an inconvenient on portability?
Argumentation is define here as: the act or process of forming reasons and of drawing conclusions and applying them to a case in discussion(1) So how can argumentation not be considered civil? And how can arguing be considered not to be civil when it's a sinonym of discussing(2)? What's your mother tongue (mine's not English but I posted citations)? 1. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/argumentation 2. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/argue
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
Well, I mean. If it has been provided by the NSA, and it licensed under GPL... it should have been changed a while ago. Is there anyway to disable or change it? I know, it's free software, nonetheless, I'm not a programmer, so I cannot look into the source code myself and check if there is any backdoor. (I don't intend being paranoid) I just want to avoid it, you know... :(
Re: [Trisquel-users] Security Enhanced Linux Kernel? Eh? What's going on here? O.o!
It's by the NSA but it's free software and I expect kernel developers and/or the FSF to have checked if it's dangerous. In all fairness we can'tbe 100% sure, but
