Re: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev
Hello Kevin, On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 09:51:22PM -0600, Kevin Toppins wrote: > Just because something is very old, does not necessarily make it > wrong, obsolete, or require that it be changed. Correct. But on the other hand, just because something is 40 years old, doesn't mean we're not allowed to rethink the idea and start from scratch. A fresh breeze is always needed from time to time. > The unix model stemmed from when computers were mainframes and single > user systems had not been conceived. Thank you for your lesson, but I think I already know that. > Unix's design of minimal permissions was/is a good idea. Since not > everything running reflects the mindset of just one person, it makes > sense to isolate users from messing with one another. Or, to allow for > some relative sanctuary while using the system with others logged in. And this has to do with replacing sysvinit with a modern alternative how? We still have user separation. In fact, we have even more possibilities by being able to control what ressources single users can use (cgroups) which is very important if you have a big cluster with dozens of concurrent users. > It worked well to keep the peace. Again, that doesn't mean we're not allowed to rethink the idea. CRT television sets, analogue broadcasting, steam engines, mechanic typewriters, analogue photography, audio and video cassettes also worked well for decades. Still, people have upgraded to newer technologies when they became available. > Computer viruses (really) emerged when microsoft threw that notion to > the wind and made their os a single user system with unlimited power > and no layers of permissions to protect the integrity of the system. Well, no. You can have a single user operating system and still be perfectly free of virusses. On the other hand, you can even have virusses on Linux machines. An important factor of a successful virus infection is social engineering. Even Windows can be safe when taking the proper precautions and even without a virus scanner. > It's like if the pentagon upgraded every united states government > employee with the highest security clearance. Sure the spec ops guy > has clearance. So does the janitor and the delivery guy as well. It's > defcon 1 24/7. Again, how is this related to systemd vs sysvinit? As I mentioned already, systemd has even more features to ensure resource control and security (fine-grained permissions for journalctl, for example). > That is why viruses are so prevalent. That is the real reason. No, virusses are prevalent because people open every file without extra precautions. Even advanced users and administrators sometimes happen to do that. > So unix stayed with the idea of minimal permissions for 40 years. They > still stay with it. So does linux. It's getting tiresome. I suggest you just read up on systemd a bit before you start your discussion. systemd is actually a huge improvement over sysvinit regarding reliability and security. It's designed with these considerations in mind. > Just about every os I can think of that has some resistance to malware > uses a security model somehow based on separation of permissions. Well, Windows NT uses separation of permissions. Yet there is malware. Same applies for MacOS X. > If something makes sense, has a sound foundation, is concrete in its > logic.. and does not involve some specific point in time in some > way. > > .. then the passage of time does not invalidate that idea. > > That idea should be succeeded by a better idea. > > That idea should not be obsoleted simply because it's 30 years old. sysvinit is not being replaced because it's 30 years old. It is being replaced because it lacks features we need nowadays and it's simply not reliable enough. For example, sysvinit cannot prevent a process from forking away. Once sysvinit has started a daemon, the daemon can pretty much do whatever it wants provided it has enough permissions. On systemd, there are means to prevent that. Another thing is making sure that a daemon is actually running. systemd always knows the state of a daemon and can restart it, if necessary. I probably don't need to explain you why this is important. You cannot do that with sysvinit. As an example, we're using autofs5 here at the department and we constantly are having trouble when the machine is rebooting and autofs was already started before NIS was ready even after sysvinit has started it. The result is that none of the autofs mounts work until autofs has been manually restarted. On systemd, this won't happen, because systemd is aware of the fact that NIS and rpcbind need to be up and running before autofs can do anything sensible. And thirdly, if you have very large file systems (we have a 30TB hardware raid here, for example), filesystem checks can take forever. If you reboot such a server and it needs to do an fs check, it will be unavailable until the check has finished. With systemd, you can just declar
Re: Bug#693637: ITP: q3map2 -- a quake 3 map compiler
On 18/11/12 20:17, David Bate wrote: > * Package name: q3map2 > Version : xonotic-v0.6.0 > * URL : http://git.xonotic.org/?p=xonotic/netradiant.git Are there other projects that call themselves q3map2? Would netradiant-q3map2 be a better name? Is the source package going to contain netradiant (which is a GUI level editor, right?) or just q3map2 itself? If there's any possibility that the netradiant GUI will be built from the same source later, it might be better for the source package to be called netradiant from the start. Relatedly, is Xonotic the "main" upstream for netradiant, or are you going to be packaging a Xonotic fork of netradiant? If the latter, xonotic-netradiant, xonotic-q3map2 might be better names. S -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/50aa0b6c.3040...@debian.org
Re: Bits from the release team - Freeze update
Am Freitag, den 09.11.2012, 10:12 + schrieb Neil McGovern: > On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 06:54:23AM +0100, Christian PERRIER wrote: > > Quoting Benjamin Drung (bdr...@debian.org): > > > Am Donnerstag, den 08.11.2012, 20:35 + schrieb Jon Dowland: > > > > On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 08:29:02PM +0100, Benjamin Drung wrote: > > > > > Hm, I filed two unblock requests after that deadline, but before > > > > > reading > > > > > the announce mail about it. > > > > > > > > You don't state whether the decision impacts them or not, but so it > > > > goes… > > > > > > The requested updates (for vlc and devscripts) fix bugs, but not release > > > critical bugs. I am unsure whether these updates get unblocked even > > > after the reduced acceptance criteria. > > > > > > Well, I bet that our estimated colleagues in the Release Team are not > > robots, so discussing with them might be possible..:-) > > > > Additionally, the mails didn't make it to the list due to the size of > the attached diff. You may want to consider that an indication of our > willingness to review the provided diff. The version in testing has a known security vulnerability, which was fixed by upstream in their newer upstream release. I sent a more stripped debdiff to make the review easier. Removing Windows/MacOS changes and auto-generated autotools file changes reduces the diff size by factor 2.4. -- Benjamin Drung Debian & Ubuntu Developer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1353325062.23011.11.camel@deep-thought
Re: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev
Also, the people who write udev and systemd really know what they are doing, and especially systemd is documented perfectly well - everyone who does not feel comfortable with systemd should read at least the basic docs. (and then think again, and then probably dislike it on a basis of facts) Also, systemd hasn't anything to do with udev, there is no systemd dependency in udev. If you have some time for entertainment, you might want to read this thread on G+: https://plus.google.com/111049168280159033135/posts/R387kQb1zxc (GKH, Lennart, Kay and several others falsify every reason for a full udev fork (vs. just maintaining a small patch)) Cheers, Matthias 2012/11/19 John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : > Hello Kevin, > > On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 09:51:22PM -0600, Kevin Toppins wrote: >> Just because something is very old, does not necessarily make it >> wrong, obsolete, or require that it be changed. > > Correct. But on the other hand, just because something is 40 years > old, doesn't mean we're not allowed to rethink the idea and start from > scratch. A fresh breeze is always needed from time to time. > >> The unix model stemmed from when computers were mainframes and single >> user systems had not been conceived. > > Thank you for your lesson, but I think I already know that. > >> Unix's design of minimal permissions was/is a good idea. Since not >> everything running reflects the mindset of just one person, it makes >> sense to isolate users from messing with one another. Or, to allow for >> some relative sanctuary while using the system with others logged in. > > And this has to do with replacing sysvinit with a modern alternative > how? We still have user separation. In fact, we have even more > possibilities by being able to control what ressources single users > can use (cgroups) which is very important if you have a big cluster > with dozens of concurrent users. > >> It worked well to keep the peace. > > Again, that doesn't mean we're not allowed to rethink the idea. CRT > television sets, analogue broadcasting, steam engines, mechanic > typewriters, analogue photography, audio and video cassettes also > worked well for decades. Still, people have upgraded to newer > technologies when they became available. > >> Computer viruses (really) emerged when microsoft threw that notion to >> the wind and made their os a single user system with unlimited power >> and no layers of permissions to protect the integrity of the system. > > Well, no. You can have a single user operating system and still be > perfectly free of virusses. On the other hand, you can even have > virusses on Linux machines. An important factor of a successful virus > infection is social engineering. Even Windows can be safe when taking > the proper precautions and even without a virus scanner. > >> It's like if the pentagon upgraded every united states government >> employee with the highest security clearance. Sure the spec ops guy >> has clearance. So does the janitor and the delivery guy as well. It's >> defcon 1 24/7. > > Again, how is this related to systemd vs sysvinit? As I mentioned > already, systemd has even more features to ensure resource control and > security (fine-grained permissions for journalctl, for example). > >> That is why viruses are so prevalent. That is the real reason. > > No, virusses are prevalent because people open every file without > extra precautions. Even advanced users and administrators sometimes > happen to do that. > >> So unix stayed with the idea of minimal permissions for 40 years. They >> still stay with it. So does linux. > > It's getting tiresome. I suggest you just read up on systemd a bit > before you start your discussion. systemd is actually a huge > improvement over sysvinit regarding reliability and security. It's > designed with these considerations in mind. > >> Just about every os I can think of that has some resistance to malware >> uses a security model somehow based on separation of permissions. > > Well, Windows NT uses separation of permissions. Yet there is > malware. Same applies for MacOS X. > >> If something makes sense, has a sound foundation, is concrete in its >> logic.. and does not involve some specific point in time in some >> way. >> >> .. then the passage of time does not invalidate that idea. >> >> That idea should be succeeded by a better idea. >> >> That idea should not be obsoleted simply because it's 30 years old. > > sysvinit is not being replaced because it's 30 years old. It is being > replaced because it lacks features we need nowadays and it's simply > not reliable enough. > > For example, sysvinit cannot prevent a process from forking away. Once > sysvinit has started a daemon, the daemon can pretty much do whatever > it wants provided it has enough permissions. On systemd, there are > means to prevent that. > > Another thing is making sure that a daemon is actually > running. systemd always knows the state of a daemon and can restart > it, if necessa
Re: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 12:42:24PM +0100, Matthias Klumpp wrote: > Also, the people who write udev and systemd really know what they are > doing, and especially systemd is documented perfectly well - everyone > who does not feel comfortable with systemd should read at least the > basic docs. (and then think again, and then probably dislike it on a > basis of facts) This is what I am constantly saying all the time. I always have the feeling that everyone who is dismissing systemd simply didn't read the documentation first. > Also, systemd hasn't anything to do with udev, there is no systemd > dependency in udev. Correct. You can build udev completely without systemd [1]. > If you have some time for entertainment, you might want to read this > thread on G+: > https://plus.google.com/111049168280159033135/posts/R387kQb1zxc > (GKH, Lennart, Kay and several others falsify every reason for a full > udev fork (vs. just maintaining a small patch)) It should be mentioned in this context that GKH is actually one of the original authors of udev [2] *and* he is actually a Gentoo developer himself [3]. Yet he is dismissing the idea of a fork. Even the claims of the Gentoo people about the separate /usr partition are unjustified [4]. Cheers, Adrian > [1] http://wiki.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/MinimalBuilds > [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Udev > [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_Kroah-Hartman > [4] http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/separate-usr-is-broken -- .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org `. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121119114824.gb7...@physik.fu-berlin.de
Bug#693695: general: "error while loading shared libraries" on system upgrade
Package: general Severity: important While upgrading squeeze -> wheezy: Preparing to replace libvlc5 1.1.3-1squeeze6 (using .../libvlc5_2.0.3-3_i386.deb) ... Unpacking replacement libvlc5 ... Processing triggers for man-db ... Processing triggers for vlc-nox ... /usr/lib/vlc/vlc-cache-gen: error while loading shared libraries: libvlccore.so.5: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory dpkg: error processing vlc-nox (--unpack): subprocess installed post-installation script returned error exit status 127 configured to not write apport reports Errors were encountered while processing: vlc-nox E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) -- System Information: Debian Release: 6.0.6 APT prefers testing-updates APT policy: (500, 'testing-updates'), (500, 'testing') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-5-686 (SMP w/8 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121119123000.5937.35803.reportbug@victor.local
Bug#693695: general: "error while loading shared libraries" on system upgrade
forcemerge 685243 693695 thanks Victor Porton writes: > /usr/lib/vlc/vlc-cache-gen: error while loading shared libraries: > libvlccore.so.5: cannot open shared object file: No such file or > directory I did a google search with "libvlccore.so.5: cannot open shared object file" you found this has already been reported: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=685243 Merging. -Timo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/84mwyd69sw@sauna.l.org
Processed (with 1 errors): Re: Bug#693695: general: "error while loading shared libraries" on system upgrade
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> forcemerge 685243 693695
Bug #685243 [vlc-nox] breaks squeeze-wheezy upgrade into very bad state
Unable to merge bugs because:
package of #693695 is 'general' not 'vlc-nox'
Failed to forcibly merge 685243: Did not alter merged bugs
Debbugs::Control::set_merged('transcript', 'GLOB(0x227c8c0)',
'requester', 'Timo Juhani Lindfors ', 'request_addr',
'cont...@bugs.debian.org', 'request_msgid', '<84mwyd69sw@sauna.l.org>',
'request_subject', ...) called at
/usr/local/lib/site_perl/Debbugs/Control/Service.pm line 551
eval {...} called at
/usr/local/lib/site_perl/Debbugs/Control/Service.pm line 550
Debbugs::Control::Service::control_line('line', undef, 'clonebugs',
'HASH(0x21f7bf8)', 'limit', 'HASH(0x21f75e0)', 'common_control_options',
'ARRAY(0x21f7628)', 'errors', ...) called at /usr/lib/debbugs/service line 474
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
685243: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=685243
693695: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=693695
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/handler.s.c.135332912525830.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Processed (with 1 errors): Re: Processed (with 1 errors): Re: Bug#693695: general: "error while loading shared libraries" on system upgrade
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 693695 vlx-nox
Bug #693695 [general] general: "error while loading shared libraries" on system
upgrade
Bug reassigned from package 'general' to 'vlx-nox'.
Warning: Unknown package 'vlx-nox'
Warning: Unknown package 'vlx-nox'
Ignoring request to alter found versions of bug #693695 to the same values
previously set
Warning: Unknown package 'vlx-nox'
Warning: Unknown package 'vlx-nox'
Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #693695 to the same values
previously set
Warning: Unknown package 'vlx-nox'
> forcemerge 685243 693695
Bug #685243 [vlc-nox] breaks squeeze-wheezy upgrade into very bad state
Unable to merge bugs because:
package of #693695 is 'vlx-nox' not 'vlc-nox'
Failed to forcibly merge 685243: Did not alter merged bugs
Debbugs::Control::set_merged('transcript', 'GLOB(0x3564710)',
'requester', 'Timo Juhani Lindfors ', 'request_addr',
'cont...@bugs.debian.org', 'request_msgid', '<84ip9169fu@sauna.l.org>',
'request_subject', ...) called at
/usr/local/lib/site_perl/Debbugs/Control/Service.pm line 551
eval {...} called at
/usr/local/lib/site_perl/Debbugs/Control/Service.pm line 550
Debbugs::Control::Service::control_line('line', 'forcemerge 685243
693695', 'clonebugs', 'HASH(0x34dfbf8)', 'limit', 'HASH(0x34df5e0)',
'common_control_options', 'ARRAY(0x34df628)', 'errors', ...) called at
/usr/lib/debbugs/service line 474
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
685243: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=685243
693695: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=693695
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/handler.s.c.135332959230049.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Re: Bits from the release team - Freeze update
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 12:37:42PM +0100, Benjamin Drung wrote: > The version in testing has a known security vulnerability, which was > fixed by upstream in their newer upstream release. I sent a more > stripped debdiff to make the review easier. Removing Windows/MacOS > changes and auto-generated autotools file changes reduces the diff size > by factor 2.4. > At this point, we prefer a targetted fix rather than a new upstream release. Please backport the security fix and produce a debdiff against the version in testing, via a bug against release.debian.org Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#693637: ITP: q3map2 -- a quake 3 map compiler
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 10:35:24AM +, Simon McVittie wrote: > Are there other projects that call themselves q3map2? Would > netradiant-q3map2 be a better name? Yes there are, in fact quite a few. Thank you for the suggestion, I will change the package name. > Is the source package going to contain netradiant (which is a GUI level > editor, right?) or just q3map2 itself? Yes, netradiant is the level editor. Upstream ships the source of netradiant and q3map2 in the same package and I was concerned about what to do so that the package will be future proof regarding the possibility of packaging netradiant. Based upon your comment I will keep the entire upstream source package and, in particular, call it netradiant. > is Xonotic the "main" upstream for netradiant Yes, as far as I know. It appears that Rudolf Polzer (a Xonotic developer) continued developing/maintaining netradiant after Nexuiz. The other main flavour of radiant that is actively developed is GtkRadiant, lead by Tim Besset. Netradiant merges many patches from Gtkradiant but it does not officially support Darkplaces. Thank you for your comments! David -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121119173316.GB4925@bourbaki
Re: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 12:48:24PM +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 12:42:24PM +0100, Matthias Klumpp wrote: > > Also, the people who write udev and systemd really know what they are > > doing, and especially systemd is documented perfectly well - everyone > > who does not feel comfortable with systemd should read at least the > > basic docs. (and then think again, and then probably dislike it on a > > basis of facts) > This is what I am constantly saying all the time. I always have the > feeling that everyone who is dismissing systemd simply didn't read the > documentation first. > > Also, systemd hasn't anything to do with udev, there is no systemd > > dependency in udev. > Correct. You can build udev completely without systemd [1]. > [1] http://wiki.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/MinimalBuilds "The core components are always built (which includes systemd itself, as well as udevd and journald). For some uses the configure switches do not provide sufficient modularity. For example, they cannot be used to build only the man pages, or to build only the tmpfiles tool or udevd." I always have the feeling that everyone who is zealously advocating systemd simply didn't read the documentation first. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev
I do not want to fight with you. I do not want to silence you. I do not want to _force_ you to think a certain way. But I would be pleased if you would be willing to try a different way of thinking. I do not want to detract from the focus of the original post of this thread. Meaning I would just like to offer a perspective, but if you don't think it helpful, it will be ok to leave it alone. I will not badger you, because I don't like being badgered, even when I'm completely wrong, I still don't like being badgered. When you read my email, please, just take it as someone trying to help you see something from a perspective you might not have considered. Please don't consider it hostile, because that is not what I was going for. I tried to help explain with example the unintended consequences of changing stuff just to change stuff sometimes is kinda bad. It wasn't about sysv, nor systemd, nor microsoft, nor GPS. It was [it's 30 years old, and outdated, we need to move forward] given as a reason. But you are totally right, I would rather have my freedom to try something else, than be forced to accept that there is only one way. -> However, I sometimes forget that others might have tried different things too, and some lessons might have been learned from it, hence it's not that there is only one way to do this, but it is best to do it this way for reasons . There have been many times in my life where I have been worked up, and convinced I had given something more than enough thought -> and was pretty damn sure my way was the only way. Figuratively speaking -> about half of those times I was right. My way was superior. -> the other half -> only after I got worked up, said many things I was certain of, and then got so frustrated I broke away -> did I temporarily just let a few things go. When I did that -> let a few things go & a bit of time passed -> it occurred to me that there was an entirely different way of thinking about and I all of a sudden saw what others were trying to get me to see. -> I am not saying you are wrong. I don't know much about systemd. I am an aerospace engineering student. -> I've learned (continue to learn) that I am smart, but I can still do some rather foolish things. -> Only by learning the hard way that my concrete reason is not always so concrete, I've recognized that smart is not the opposite of foolishness. Wisdom is. And I like how someone once said, wisdom is the union of knowledge and experience. -> Sometimes I know best because I have had a great deal of experience in what I am talking about. -> Sometimes I have learned that I am bad at judging the inexperience of others, and I am too dismissive of what they are saying. I usually end up finding out that I never had actually really listened to what they said the first time around. So, I don't want to fight. Fighting poisons my mind with emotions that lock me out of being able to see things from a different perspective. I am usually unable to see things from a different perspective until I've calmed down from getting worked up. I usually only calm down when I've decided that I am just going to leave this alone for a while. Do something else, like aerospace hw. Yays. Sorry for the ramble, ADD meds kicked in when I was just starting to type. But, I do think I have some good points, I also think sometimes people ignore the point unless you show them why it actually is a good point, hence, the explanation. : D Oh, some people have asked why the microsoft stuff is relevant. Here is an expanded rationale, hopefully it will make sense this time. Speaking of linux hasn't changed in 30 years, it's time to move forward... I tried to show that (I think) the reason it hasn't changed in 30 years is because a superior way to go has not yet been implemented. That does not mean you can't have a better or just as good idea, but it usually is a cautionary tale to at least see what other things have been tried and how did they turn out. That's where the microsoft / unix example came from. It was just to show that... it was an older idea, but it still works better. And when you think... -> 1960s : multiple people affecting the same computer : we need some restrictions to keep the peace (like police in real life) -> 1980s : microsoft - mainframes were a thing of the past, now everyone has a computer to themselves, we can leave that minimal permissions way of thinking in the past and move forward with.. -> 1990s : internet - rapidly, all of the isolated single user computers started to interact with other systems. You could start to think of the internet as this giant system with multiple people using it at the same time : and if you abstract home directories into home computers, people could write programs to do malicious things and trick you into running them with deception. Since unix long ago learned that you should only use the admin account to do admin things, on unix, malware might print throu
Re: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev
Ehmm... --> If you want to reduce the build time dependencies (though only dbus and libcap are needed as build time deps) and you know the specific component you are interested in doesn't need it, then create a dummy .pc file for that dependency (i.e. basically empty), and configure systemd with PKG_CONFIG_PATH set to the path of these dummy .pc files. Then, build only the few bits you need with "make foobar", where foobar is the file you need. <-- Simply run "make udevd" and you're done. You can also simply package both systemd and udev and put all udev parts in a separate package and then install it, since there is no dependency on systemd and related components by udev. Also, quoting Lennart: -> Canonical's Martin Pitt is actually a commiter on the systemd git tree. He works on various things in the udev area. And since we value his work it would be stupid of us to break things for him anytime soon, so that Martin couldn't use systemd's udev anymore on Ubuntu. <- So, well, what did you say about reading documentation? ;-) You can also always ask Lennart or Kay, or anyone else if you have questions, they will happily answer it. Cheers, Matthias 2012/11/19 Steve Langasek : > On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 12:48:24PM +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 12:42:24PM +0100, Matthias Klumpp wrote: >> > Also, the people who write udev and systemd really know what they are >> > doing, and especially systemd is documented perfectly well - everyone >> > who does not feel comfortable with systemd should read at least the >> > basic docs. (and then think again, and then probably dislike it on a >> > basis of facts) > >> This is what I am constantly saying all the time. I always have the >> feeling that everyone who is dismissing systemd simply didn't read the >> documentation first. > >> > Also, systemd hasn't anything to do with udev, there is no systemd >> > dependency in udev. > >> Correct. You can build udev completely without systemd [1]. > >> [1] http://wiki.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/MinimalBuilds > > "The core components are always built (which includes systemd itself, as > well as udevd and journald). > > For some uses the configure switches do not provide sufficient modularity. > For example, they cannot be used to build only the man pages, or to build > only the tmpfiles tool or udevd." > > I always have the feeling that everyone who is zealously advocating systemd > simply didn't read the documentation first. > > -- > Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS > Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. > Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ > slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAKNHny83T3BWCAw010HTshz2SsCO4WUr=lslsvwuttthfic...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev
On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 15:04:35 +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: >One of the Arch developers actually made a couple of good points why >they switched to systemd as default [1]. How many non-Linux platforms does Arch Linux (sic!) support? I know of two non-Linux platforms that Debian prides itself in supporting, which is the major stopper of systemd in Debian at the moment. Greetings Marc -- -- !! No courtesy copies, please !! - Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " | http://www.zugschlus.de/ Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e1taxxy-0006no...@swivel.zugschlus.de
x32 port bootstrap is uploaded
I've finally finished the initial upload of my current x32 bootstrap archive, which is now available at http://87.98.215.228/debian/ . Assuming you're running an amd64 kernel with x32 support (3.4.0 or later with CONFIG_X86_X32=y, can download my build of 3.6.4 from http://87.98.215.228/debian/byhand/l/linux/ ), you should be able to debootstrap using something like wget http://87.98.215.228/debian/dists/archive.pub debootstrap --arch=x32 --components=main,byhand,partial \ --keyring=`pwd`/archive.pub \ sid /root/x32-chroot/ http://87.98.215.228/debian/ Later I'll try to document this a bit more on the wiki, create a stub root index.html redirecting to the wiki, and possibly create an x32.debian.net alias. Many thanks to Thomas Goirand and gplhost.com for hosting this archive. -- Daniel Schepler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CADf0C45pX_Zk3J5uUw_vZBkVOfL=Bk0AsArV1Ojg=zuz76o...@mail.gmail.com
Bug#693738: ITP: r-cran-readbrukerflexdata -- GNU R package to read Bruker Daltonics' *flex format files
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Sebastian Gibb Package name: r-cran-readbrukerflexdata Version : 1.5 Upstream Author : Sebastian Gibb URL : http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/readBrukerFlexData/index.html License : GPL Programming Lang: R, C Description : GNU R package to read Bruker Daltonics' *flex format files The readBrukerFlexData package reads data files acquired by MALDI-TOF MS on Bruker Daltonics machines of the *flex series.ruker Daltonics’ *flex series. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121119204029.4343.91334.reportbug@tp
Re: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 4:01 AM, Marc Haber wrote: > How many non-Linux platforms does Arch Linux (sic!) support? Looks like just Hurd: http://www.archhurd.org/ It seems that they are talking about Arch BSD too: http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=142679 > I know of two non-Linux platforms that Debian prides itself in > supporting, which is the major stopper of systemd in Debian at the > moment. There is no reason for kFreeBSD and Hurd to stop Debian's Linux ports from using systemd or upstart by default once wheezy is released. We can keep sysvinit/openrc/busybox init/etc for kFreeBSD, Hurd and users who need or prefer them. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/caktje6hd410uikb2wehz2+4l0bsmhsv7+5kuxa-+986aqx3...@mail.gmail.com
Re: x32 port bootstrap is uploaded
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 3:47 AM, Daniel Schepler wrote: > Later I'll try to document this a bit more on the wiki, create a stub > root index.html redirecting to the wiki, and possibly create an > x32.debian.net alias. Please do move it to debian-ports.org when you are able, I don't think we want even more buildd links on the PTS pages. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/caktje6h6dhfwqxkwkg4q8lrwnjbtkd4td5-sbufsom3ympd...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 01:20:42PM -0600, Kevin Toppins wrote: > I do not want to fight with you. > > I do not want to silence you. > > I do not want to _force_ you to think a certain way. But I would be > pleased if you would be willing to try a different way of thinking. Me too, please read: http://catb.org/jargon/html/T/top-post.html -- "If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing." --- Malcolm X -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121120040207.GD4413@tal
Re: x32 port bootstrap is uploaded
On 11/20/2012 10:15 AM, Paul Wise wrote: > On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 3:47 AM, Daniel Schepler wrote: > >> Later I'll try to document this a bit more on the wiki, create a stub >> root index.html redirecting to the wiki, and possibly create an >> x32.debian.net alias. > Please do move it to debian-ports.org when you are able, I don't think > we want even more buildd links on the PTS pages. > That is the plan! But since it was taking some time to have it there, I (and gplhost.com) just sponsored a VPS in the mean while, as a temporary solution until a more definitive one (and within the Debian infrastructure) can be found. Daniel wrote: > wget http://87.98.215.228/debian/dists/archive.pub > debootstrap --arch=x32 --components=main,byhand,partial \ > --keyring=`pwd`/archive.pub \ > sid /root/x32-chroot/ http://87.98.215.228/debian/ Can I also just add the above Debian repo, do --add-architecture, and start replacing some packages? How can I for example, replace perl, on a running server? Cheers, Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/50ab2ccc.3090...@debian.org
