Yes, it has to point to something the client knows. Android uses a
gstatic.com link.
The key is that the client knows to expect a
particular response, but the captive middlebox does not. Thereby the
client can find out whether there is a captive middlebox or not, by
seeing whether it gets the
Hi Arnt,
On 12/10/2016 01:00 PM, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote:
Those are detectable: Openhttp://wlanhelper.devuan.org/.html in
the background when joining any open WLAN, and if that returns anything but
404, then either open a browser if exactly one user is logged in and has an
X console, or else ifd
Hendrik Boom writes:
Worst is probably the connections that seem to be wide open, but
aren't. The ones where you have to open a browser and look for a page
and get an interception page instead asking for your credentials.
Those are detectable: Open http://wlanhelper.devuan.org/.html in
the b
On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 07:44:28PM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
>
> Well, it's pretty likely things are quantized at or around Planck's length,
> that makes everything integers, and thus the state of the Universe can be
> represented in a finite number of bits (although the Planck's length is
> sma
On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 02:44:50PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
>
> The most common cases involve WPA2 or (especially at hotels) wide open.
> Those are easily accommodated at the script level. If anybody's using
> WEP anymore, they deserve to be diverted to wicd.
Worst is probably the connections tha
Le 08/12/2016 19:44, Adam Borowski a écrit :
Well, it's pretty likely things are quantized at or around Planck's length,
that makes everything integers, and thus the state of the Universe can be
represented in a finite number of bits (although the Planck's length is
smaller compared to atom diame
On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 02:44:50PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
[cut]
>
> OK. Fair enough.
>
> Perhaps do a script for the common cases, and if that fails, tell the
> user:
>
> Failed to get a network. Would you like to try using conman and wicd?
> Y/N=>
>
There is already such a "script" in the
On Wed, 7 Dec 2016 18:19:46 +
KatolaZ wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 12:23:06PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
>
> [cut]
>
> >
> > * Because most wifi software sucks, I suggest Devuan roll its own
> > CLI software, for the installation, that iwlist wlan0 scanning
> > lists the access points, t
On Wed, 7 Dec 2016 12:13:57 -0600
Patrick Meade wrote:
> On 12/07/2016 11:23 AM, Steve Litt wrote:
> > * Because most wifi software sucks, I suggest Devuan roll its own
> > CLI software, for the installation, that iwlist wlan0 scanning
> > lists the access points, takes the ssid and password, and
On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 02:07:54AM -0800, Rick Moen wrote:
> Quoting Dr. Nikolaus Klepp (dr.kl...@gmx.at):
>
> > Am Donnerstag, 8. Dezember 2016 schrieb Rick Moen:
> > > So, banning software patents is difficult, because of the ease of
> > > instantiating software in hardware.
> >
> > On the cont
On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 11:03:45AM +0100, Dr. Nikolaus Klepp wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 8. Dezember 2016 schrieb KatolaZ:
> > On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 10:38:52AM +0100, Dr. Nikolaus Klepp wrote:
> > > Am Donnerstag, 8. Dezember 2016 schrieb Rick Moen:
> > > > So, banning software patents is difficult,
Quoting Dr. Nikolaus Klepp (dr.kl...@gmx.at):
> Am Donnerstag, 8. Dezember 2016 schrieb Rick Moen:
> > So, banning software patents is difficult, because of the ease of
> > instantiating software in hardware.
>
> On the contrary, it's quite easy: what ever can be implemented using a
> turing mach
Am Donnerstag, 8. Dezember 2016 schrieb KatolaZ:
> On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 10:38:52AM +0100, Dr. Nikolaus Klepp wrote:
> > Am Donnerstag, 8. Dezember 2016 schrieb Rick Moen:
> > > So, banning software patents is difficult, because of the ease of
> > > instantiating software in hardware.
> >
> > On
On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 10:38:52AM +0100, Dr. Nikolaus Klepp wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 8. Dezember 2016 schrieb Rick Moen:
> > So, banning software patents is difficult, because of the ease of
> > instantiating software in hardware.
>
> On the contrary, it's quite easy: what ever can be implemented
Am Donnerstag, 8. Dezember 2016 schrieb Rick Moen:
> So, banning software patents is difficult, because of the ease of
> instantiating software in hardware.
On the contrary, it's quite easy: what ever can be implemented using a turing
machine is not patentable.
--
Please do not email me anythi
Quoting Clarke Sideroad (clarke.sider...@gmail.com):
> I believe software should not be patent-able although could/should be
> protected under a shortened copyright term at worst.
It used to be the case that software was not patentable. The
consequence was that, e.g., the patent on Diffie-Hellma
patents into the mix asserted that I had falsely
> diagnosed the OP's problem.
You surely did:
https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/message/20161206.220637.24cd7edb.en.html
|Author: Robert Storey
|Date: 2016-12-06 23:06 +100
|To: dng
|Subject: Re: [DNG] Networking on installation: was Devuan GNU
On Mon, 5 Dec 2016 13:55:44 -0500
Steve Litt wrote:
> Wifi is always problematic. Always. NetworkManager, Wicd, and even the
> wpa_* all seem to fail at just the wrong time. If I were Devuan, I'd
> create a wifi module that:
>
> 1) Displays the wifi signals in signal strength order
>
> 2) Asks
On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 12:23:06PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
[cut]
>
> * Because most wifi software sucks, I suggest Devuan roll its own CLI
> software, for the installation, that iwlist wlan0 scanning lists the
> access points, takes the ssid and password, and then appends the
> result of
On 12/07/2016 11:23 AM, Steve Litt wrote:
* Because most wifi software sucks, I suggest Devuan roll its own CLI
software, for the installation, that iwlist wlan0 scanning lists the
access points, takes the ssid and password, and then appends the
result of wpa_passphrase to the bottom
of
On Wed, 7 Dec 2016 12:11:10 +
Simon Hobson wrote:
> Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI wrote:
> But then, this is all getting well off-topic for the list and the
> thread. The point remains - neither patents nor DMCA are relevant.
Indeed we are getting well offtopic. In fact, patents weren't part of
the
Clarke Sideroad wrote:
> I believe software should not be patent-able ...
And this is part of the "system is broken" - especially in the USA.
A novel business process which happens to use computers/software should (IMO)
be patentable under the same rules of prior art/obviousness as any physica
I believe software should not be patent-able although could/should be
protected under a shortened copyright term at worst.
Software when you get right down to it is a presentation of an idea
using math, ideas are free, math is free, so why a patent?
Clarke
__
KatolaZ wrote:
> All very good points, indeed, which unfortunately become automatically
> nonsense in the case of software. 17 or 25 years are the blink of an
> eye for hardcore 19th centrury industrial innovation, when the patent
> system was invesned, but correspond to several geological eras i
On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 12:11:10PM +, Simon Hobson wrote:
> Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI wrote:
>
> > No, they were introduced to guarantee the inventor the exclusivity of his
> > invention for a certain time, so he alone could profit from it during that
> > time.
> >
> > Introduced to make resear
Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI wrote:
> No, they were introduced to guarantee the inventor the exclusivity of his
> invention for a certain time, so he alone could profit from it during that
> time.
>
> Introduced to make research economically viable.
And the flip side is that to get a patent, you have
Am Mittwoch, 7. Dezember 2016 schrieb Renaud OLGIATI:
> On Wed, 7 Dec 2016 11:45:32 +0100
> Adam Borowski wrote:
>
> > The reason patents were introduced for was getting more money for the king.
>
> No, they were introduced to guarantee the inventor the exclusivity of his
> invention for a ce
On Wed, 7 Dec 2016 11:45:32 +0100
Adam Borowski wrote:
> The reason patents were introduced for was getting more money for the king.
No, they were introduced to guarantee the inventor the exclusivity of his
invention for a certain time, so he alone could profit from it during that time.
Intro
On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 08:10:35AM +, Simon Hobson wrote:
> The first bit is correct - most proprietary software is encumbered by
> patents, DMCA restrictions, and all that stuff - I almost said "all that
> carp" but that would be wrong since both patents and (to a much lesser
> extent) DMCA do
Alessandro Selli wrote:
>> That's a non sequitur
>> The ONLY, and I mean ONLY bit that's relevant is the one about licence terms
>> - and that's *relatively* easy to deal with one way or another as the
>> licence terms are there to be read (either there are terms that allow you to
>> redistrib
On 06/12/2016 at 23:18, Simon Hobson wrote:
> Alessandro Selli wrote:
>
>>> OK fine, just have this yes or no question early in the install:
>>>
>>> =
>>> Are you willing to have the install try non-free drivers and firmware
>>> for your
Quoting Renaud OLGIATI (ren...@olgiati-in-paraguay.org):
> On the other hand, by making it impossible to install without having
> to go and hunt firmwares under the excuse that they are not open
> source, open-source talibans are doing exactly what they condemn in
> the systemd talibans: both take
Alessandro Selli wrote:
>> OK fine, just have this yes or no question early in the install:
>>
>> =
>> Are you willing to have the install try non-free drivers and firmware
>> for your network, video, keyboard and mouse if free drivers
Alessandro Selli said:
> I'd like to point out that including proprietary drivers does
> not address any of the issues Robert Storey described:
>
> 1) no WiFi support in the install program;
> 2) no DHCP autoconfiguration using a wired Ethernet connection;
> 3) Wicd missing after installation.
>
>
On Tue, 6 Dec 2016 11:28:13 -0500
Steve Litt wrote:
> OK fine, just have this yes or no question early in the install:
>
> =
> Are you willing to have the install try non-free drivers and firmware
> for your network, video, keyboard and
On Tue, 6 Dec 2016 at 11:28:13 -0500 Steve Litt
wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Dec 2016 15:27:33 +0100
> Alessandro Selli wrote:
>
> > Il giorno Tue, 6 Dec 2016 11:12:34 -0300
> > Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI ha scritto:
[...]
> > > On the other hand, by making it impossible to install without
> > > having to g
On Tue, 6 Dec 2016 15:27:33 +0100
Alessandro Selli wrote:
> Il giorno Tue, 6 Dec 2016 11:12:34 -0300
> Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI ha scritto:
>
> > On Tue, 6 Dec 2016 14:30:58 +0100
> > Alessandro Selli wrote:
> >
> > > Devuan was born with the intention of removing the artificial
> > > limits
Il giorno Tue, 6 Dec 2016 11:12:34 -0300
Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI ha scritto:
> On Tue, 6 Dec 2016 14:30:58 +0100
> Alessandro Selli wrote:
>
> > Devuan was born with the intention of removing the artificial limits
> > systemd is imposing users. Proprietary software is even worse in
> > restrict
On Tue, 6 Dec 2016 at 13:54:30 + Dave Turner
wrote:
> Robert has a very valid point.
Robert Storey does have a vlid point. In my opinion Steve Litt does not.
Robert Storey laments the lack of WiFi connectivity support in "the
installation program for Devuan Beta2", not the lack of propriet
On Tue, 6 Dec 2016 14:30:58 +0100
Alessandro Selli wrote:
> Devuan was born with the intention of removing the artificial limits
> systemd is imposing users. Proprietary software is even worse in restricting
> people's choice. If your vision of Devuan is something like Ubuntu, with
> every ki
On 06/12/16 13:30, Alessandro Selli wrote:
Il giorno Mon, 5 Dec 2016 13:55:44 -0500
Steve Litt ha scritto:
On Mon, 5 Dec 2016 09:05:11 +0800
Robert Storey wrote:
It pains me to say this, but the installation program for Devuan
Beta2 is seriously broken. And I say this not as some kind of tr
Il giorno Mon, 5 Dec 2016 13:55:44 -0500
Steve Litt ha scritto:
> On Mon, 5 Dec 2016 09:05:11 +0800
> Robert Storey wrote:
>
> > It pains me to say this, but the installation program for Devuan
> > Beta2 is seriously broken. And I say this not as some kind of troll,
> > but rather as a Devuan en
On Mon, 5 Dec 2016 09:05:11 +0800
Robert Storey wrote:
> It pains me to say this, but the installation program for Devuan
> Beta2 is seriously broken. And I say this not as some kind of troll,
> but rather as a Devuan enthusiast who has already been running Devuan
> as my main system for six mont
43 matches
Mail list logo
