On Friday, April 28, 2023 4:40:24 A.M. AEST Alan Grimes wrote:
> I rebuilt my system on gcc 13.1. I think the compiler is good but it
> exposed some bugs in a handful of packages, these are:
>
> tortoise /var/tmp/portage # tree -L 2
> .
> ├── app-editors
> │ └── scite-5.3.5
> ├── media-libs
> │
David Rosenbaum wrote:
This seems to be an environment variable issue.
Do you have a value set for DBUS_SESSION_BUS_ADDRESS?
No.
I don't have the slightest clue as to anything whotsoever about dbus or
how to begin to fix it, or why I suddenly need to know how to fix it.
I know
jul...@jroy.ca wrote:
On Thu, 2023-04-27 at 14:40 -0400, Alan Grimes wrote:
atg@tortoise ~ $ chromium
[19039:19057:0427/143338.626886:ERROR:bus.cc(399)] Failed to connect
to
the bus: Could not parse server address: Unknown address type
(examples
of valid types are "tcp" and on UNIX "unix")
Dave
On Thu, Apr 27, 2023, 14:52 jul...@jroy.ca wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-04-27 at 14:40 -0400, Alan Grimes wrote:
> > atg@tortoise ~ $ chromium
> > [19039:19057:0427/143338.626886:ERROR:bus.cc(399)] Failed to connect
> > to
> > the bus: Could not parse server address: Unknown address type
> >
On Thu, 2023-04-27 at 14:40 -0400, Alan Grimes wrote:
> atg@tortoise ~ $ chromium
> [19039:19057:0427/143338.626886:ERROR:bus.cc(399)] Failed to connect
> to
> the bus: Could not parse server address: Unknown address type
> (examples
> of valid types are "tcp" and on UNIX "unix")
This seems to
I rebuilt my system on gcc 13.1. I think the compiler is good but it
exposed some bugs in a handful of packages, these are:
tortoise /var/tmp/portage # tree -L 2
.
├── app-editors
│ └── scite-5.3.5
├── media-libs
│ ├── liblo-0.31
│ └── nas-1.9.5
└── media-sound
└── audacity-3.2.5
8
Netfab,
On Friday, 2023-04-21 19:41:54 +0200, you wrote:
> ...
> You should open a bug to explain that ARCH variable is already defined
> in your shell environment. As a consequence the results on the following
> commands are different :
Hm, I'm not at all sure this would qualify as a bug. A
On 04/27/2023 02:23:01 PM, Philip Webb wrote:
I've built & tested the new machine I was planning in 2022
& am at the point of designing the partitions.
For many years, I've used Reiserfs, but it is now obsolescent,
so I need to choose an alternative. Reiserfs seemed appropriate
for a system
On 2023-04-27 16:52+0100 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Apr 2023 15:54:34 +0200, tastytea wrote:
>
> > btrfs and zfs have some useful features for normal use cases. the
> > transparent compression can save a lot of space and even increase
> > speed in some cases, the checksumming guarantees
On 27/04/2023 16:52, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Thu, 27 Apr 2023 15:54:34 +0200, tastytea wrote:
btrfs and zfs have some useful features for normal use cases. the
transparent compression can save a lot of space and even increase speed
in some cases, the checksumming guarantees that you will never
On Thu, 27 Apr 2023 15:54:34 +0200, tastytea wrote:
> btrfs and zfs have some useful features for normal use cases. the
> transparent compression can save a lot of space and even increase speed
> in some cases, the checksumming guarantees that you will never get a
> corrupt file
That's only true
On 2023-04-27 10:14-0400 Matt Connell wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-04-27 at 15:54 +0200, tastytea wrote:
> > btrfs and zfs have some useful features for normal use cases. the
> > transparent compression can save a lot of space and even increase
> > speed in some cases, the checksumming guarantees that
On Thu, 2023-04-27 at 15:54 +0200, tastytea wrote:
> btrfs and zfs have some useful features for normal use cases. the
> transparent compression can save a lot of space and even increase speed
> in some cases, the checksumming guarantees that you will never get a
> corrupt file and snapshots make
On 2023-04-27 09:34-0400 Matt Connell wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-04-27 at 08:23 -0400, Philip Webb wrote:
> > Ext4 seems to be used by well-known binary distros.
>
> There's a reason for this. It can fulfill all but the most niche or
> intensive roles, is robustly supported, well-tested both in
>
On Thu, 2023-04-27 at 08:23 -0400, Philip Webb wrote:
> Ext4 seems to be used by well-known binary distros.
There's a reason for this. It can fulfill all but the most niche or
intensive roles, is robustly supported, well-tested both in development
and through wide use in the field, and generally
On 2023-04-27, Philip Webb wrote:
> I've built & tested the new machine I was planning in 2022
> & am at the point of designing the partitions.
>
> For many years, I've used Reiserfs, but it is now obsolescent,
> so I need to choose an alternative. Reiserfs seemed appropriate
> for a system with
Philip Webb wrote:
> I've built & tested the new machine I was planning in 2022
> & am at the point of designing the partitions.
>
> For many years, I've used Reiserfs, but it is now obsolescent,
> so I need to choose an alternative. Reiserfs seemed appropriate
> for a system with a large number
I've built & tested the new machine I was planning in 2022
& am at the point of designing the partitions.
For many years, I've used Reiserfs, but it is now obsolescent,
so I need to choose an alternative. Reiserfs seemed appropriate
for a system with a large number of small files.
Ext4 seems to
On Wed, 26 Apr 2023 21:56:23 -0300, Jorge P. de Morais Neto wrote:
> > Do you have a separate filesystem for /home? If so, the simplest
> > option is to set umask in its mount options in fstab. This will
> > affect all users, except root, and it won't affect files you write
> > outside of $HOME.
19 matches
Mail list logo
