Re: Please upgrade your build environment when you are affected by transition
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 02:24:01PM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote: > * Thorsten Glaser , 2014-02-26, 12:54: > >To add insult to injury, buildd/sbuild currently hardcode both > >--apt-update --no-apt-dist-upgrade > > My sbuild.conf contains this: > > # APT_DISTUPGRADE > # Type: BOOL > # APT distupgrade. 1 to enable running "apt-get dist-upgrade" at the start > # of each build, or 0 to disable. > $apt_distupgrade = 0; > > Admittedly, I've never tried enabling this option, and maybe > buildd's sbuild is different… It's not. This is all completely configurable. You can have it apt-get update/upgrade/dist-upgrade at the start of every build. update is enabled by default (needed to ensure build-deps can be installed and sources can be fetched), but dist-upgrade is not (historically out of concern things might break). Now we are using snapshotted chroots for all or most buildds, the risk is far less and if the worst does happen you can just restore an older snapshot or re-debootstrap, which takes all of 5 minutes. You could, for example, have the source chroot dist-upgraded using "sbuild-update -ud" via cron on a daily basis, and every build also do a dist-upgrade to ensure the build chroot is always completely up to date. Before we had snapshotted build chroots, and had to manually uninstall all build-deps, the chance of a dist-upgrade breaking a dirty chroot was non-negligable. But if the source chroot is a minimal debootstrap which is always kept clean (i.e. the buildd admin should never customise it in any way), it should always be safe to upgrade bar any major SNAFU on the part of a base package maintainer which breaks the base system. On the sbuild side, we could revisit the default for end users and buildds and enable dist-upgrade by default for one or both of these if there's consensus that this is desirable and safe to do. Regards, Roger -- .''`. Roger Leigh : :' : Debian GNU/Linuxhttp://people.debian.org/~rleigh/ `. `' schroot and sbuild http://alioth.debian.org/projects/buildd-tools `-GPG Public Key F33D 281D 470A B443 6756 147C 07B3 C8BC 4083 E800 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140228091438.gh11...@codelibre.net
contrib and nonfree distribs
Why the "nonfree" and "contrib" distributions aren't removed? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/db2f0f4e-6f63-4246-a1cd-7a509f378...@me.com
Re: contrib and nonfree distribs
Hello, On 28 February 2014 10:35, Solal Rastier wrote: > Why the "nonfree" and "contrib" distributions aren't removed? Could you please elaborate your question? -- Cheers, Andrew -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/cacujmdpoq-vdakswr07ds6xtoe+uynt-fxu_d-nf7a_t7uh...@mail.gmail.com
Re: contrib and nonfree distribs
Le vendredi 28 février 2014 à 10:35 +0100, Solal Rastier a écrit : > Why the "nonfree" and "contrib" distributions aren't removed? Maybe because of http://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=firmware-nonfree or http://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=flashplugin-nonfree Cheers, -- .''`.Josselin Mouette : :' : `. `' `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1393584238.21499.315.camel@dsp0698014
Re: contrib and nonfree distribs
* Solal Rastier , 2014-02-28, 10:35: Why the "nonfree" and "contrib" distributions aren't removed? https://www.debian.org/vote/2004/vote_002 -- Jakub Wilk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140228110811.ga6...@jwilk.net
Re: contrib and nonfree distribs
Op vrijdag 28 februari 2014 10:35:15 schreef Solal Rastier: > Why the "nonfree" and "contrib" distributions aren't removed? Because unfortunately the free software foundation believes documentation doesn't need to be free, and we can't put non-free documentation in main. -- This end should point toward the ground if you want to go to space. If it starts pointing toward space you are having a bad problem and you will not go to space today. -- http://xkcd.com/1133/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1694.my3zqxp...@grep.be
Re: contrib and nonfree distribs
Further proof that Debian is proprietary software... Le 28 févr. 2014 à 12:46, Wouter Verhelst a écrit : > Op vrijdag 28 februari 2014 12:42:39 schreef u: >> The FSF believe documentation need to be free, and that's true... > > It is true that it needs to be free, but their license just isn't free: > https://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_001 > > > -- > This end should point toward the ground if you want to go to space. > > If it starts pointing toward space you are having a bad problem and you > will not go to space today. > > -- http://xkcd.com/1133/ > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/4e9bee82-8ef2-4c11-80fc-9a7d55746...@me.com
[announce] Improving Tails... by working on Debian
Hi, we have documented how one can improve Tails by working on Debian: https://tails.boum.org/contribute/how/debian/ I'm posting this here in the hope it may be useful for other derivatives, for Debian, and for Tails. Feedback is welcome. Cheers, -- intrigeri | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/85eh2ncudg@boum.org
Re: contrib and nonfree distribs
Le 28/02/2014 12:56, Solal Rastier a écrit : > Further proof that Debian is proprietary software... I applause this almost inconspicuous troll attempt. Please don't top-post. http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html Regards. PS: full stop. > > Le 28 févr. 2014 à 12:46, Wouter Verhelst a écrit : > >> Op vrijdag 28 februari 2014 12:42:39 schreef u: >>> The FSF believe documentation need to be free, and that's true... >> >> It is true that it needs to be free, but their license just isn't free: >> https://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_001 >> >> >> -- >> This end should point toward the ground if you want to go to space. >> >> If it starts pointing toward space you are having a bad problem and you >> will not go to space today. >> >> -- http://xkcd.com/1133/ >> > > signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: contrib and nonfree distribs
In data venerdì 28 febbraio 2014 10.35.15, Solal Rastier ha scritto: > Why the "nonfree" and "contrib" distributions aren't removed? don't feed the troll please -- Salvo Tomaselli "Io non mi sento obbligato a credere che lo stesso Dio che ci ha dotato di senso, ragione ed intelletto intendesse che noi ne facessimo a meno." -- Galileo Galilei http://ltworf.github.io/ltworf/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1465047.sfXNKgKoSu@vulcano
Re: "contrib" and "nonfree" distribs
1. I'm not a troll 2. What is "top-post"? 3. Why I need stop? Le 28 févr. 2014 à 13:10, Thibaut Paumard a écrit : > Le 28/02/2014 12:56, Solal Rastier a écrit : >> Further proof that Debian is proprietary software... > > I applause this almost inconspicuous troll attempt. > > Please don't top-post. > http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html > > Regards. > PS: full stop. > >> >> Le 28 févr. 2014 à 12:46, Wouter Verhelst a écrit : >> >>> Op vrijdag 28 februari 2014 12:42:39 schreef u: The FSF believe documentation need to be free, and that's true... >>> >>> It is true that it needs to be free, but their license just isn't free: >>> https://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_001 >>> >>> >>> -- >>> This end should point toward the ground if you want to go to space. >>> >>> If it starts pointing toward space you are having a bad problem and you >>> will not go to space today. >>> >>> -- http://xkcd.com/1133/ >>> >> >> > > >
repacked source ball upgrade
Hello, for some of my packages, I would like to update the repacking of the upstream source ball: what is the versionning debian custom ? Let assume the following name: pi_3.14+ds.orig.tar.xz May I name the upgrade version something as pi_3.14+ds1.orig.tar.xz ? Thanks in advance, best regards, Jerome -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53108d75.3010...@rezozer.net
Re: repacked source ball upgrade
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 02:21:57PM +0100, Jerome BENOIT wrote: > Hello, > > for some of my packages, I would like to update the repacking > of the upstream source ball: > what is the versionning debian custom ? > > Let assume the following name: > pi_3.14+ds.orig.tar.xz > > May I name the upgrade version something as > pi_3.14+ds1.orig.tar.xz ? Yes. -- WBR, wRAR -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140228133629.ga8...@belkar.wrar.name
Re: [announce] Improving Tails... by working on Debian
Quoting intrigeri (2014-02-28 13:08:27) > we have documented how one can improve Tails by working on Debian: > > https://tails.boum.org/contribute/how/debian/ > > I'm posting this here in the hope it may be useful for other > derivatives, for Debian, and for Tails. Feedback is welcome. Really neat! A great inspiration for others to follow (myself included), - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: signature
Re: ITA: mumble -- Low latency VoIP client
Chris Knadle writes ("ITA: mumble -- Low latency VoIP client"):
> Ron -- I believe the BTS and PTS likely didn't notify you via email, so I
> wanted to let you know that I filed an ITA [1] on the mumble package
> yesterday.
>
> I'm open to discussing this if your or anyone wishes to.
Ah, good, thanks for that, Chris.
Ian.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
https://lists.debian.org/21264.46302.252191.403...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
Re: contrib and nonfree distribs
That's not an answer. For users, that doesn't change anything. Le 28 févr. 2014 à 15:20, Samuel Thibault a écrit : > Solal Rastier, le Fri 28 Feb 2014 12:56:00 +0100, a écrit : >> Further proof that Debian is proprietary software... > > contrib and non-free are not part of Debian releases. Really, read about > GR etc. > > Samuel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/aea50c09-f7b6-4bc3-821b-88ce3875e...@me.com
Re: "contrib" and "nonfree" distribs
I not compare Debian with Windows. The FSF publishes a GNU/Linux freedom indicator. Debian is proprietary, sorry. Le 28 févr. 2014 à 18:24, Octavio Alvarez a écrit : > On 02/28/2014 05:18 AM, Solal Rastier wrote: >> 1. I'm not a troll >> 2. What is "top-post"? >> 3. Why I need stop? > > Hi, Solal. I'm not a Debian Developer, just a user, but let me take an > attempt to explain what happened, and please don't take this the wrong > way. I'll address each part of the issue without sugar-coating anything. > Please don't take it the wrong way. > > Debian is not "proprietary" or "closed" software. There is a lot of > effort put by the whole Debian team in making sure licenses are not > violated while keeping software fully free, always. If you knew Debian > just a little bit you would know this. > > However, you said: > >> Further proof that Debian is proprietary software.. > > Where did that come from? Initially you asked why were not the other > areas removed, which is a valid question despite having no context at > all, and suddenly there is an accusation? Are you seriously comparing > Debian with Windows? > > You see, if you want to prove a point you get your facts straight first. > If you want to get answers you use questions, not accusations or false > statements. > > Just by this alone, you fit the "troll" profile: a person that just > comes in to raise useless discussion with no beneficial outcome, not > even for himself, even more if it's accusation-based. > > About top-posting: in the message from Thibaut you were given a link > regarding top-posting. You ignored it (proved by the fact that you are > now asking what it is instead of having it read). You may have not seen > it of found it too long, but you didn't even Google for it (you would > have found at least a Wikipedia article about this with a more friendly > explanation). You just don't care to do your part of the job. > > Now, to your question: > > "Packages in the other archive areas (contrib, non-free) are not > considered to be part of the Debian distribution..." [1]. First match in > Google for "debian main contrib non-free". > > "... we also provide packages in separate sections that cannot be > included in the main distribution due to either a restrictive license or > legal issues. They include: [explanation continues]..." [2]. Second > match in the same Google search. > > [1] https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html > [2] https://www.debian.org/distrib/packages > > This should *at least* make it clear that contrib *is* open and free, > what the sections are, and what they are for. Imagine a program that is > GPL but includes images that are redistributable but not modifiable, the > images go into non-free. There is not a license violation and it doesn't > make the program proprietary, much less the whole Debian. > > Now, my question to you is: how does the non-free and contrib areas make > the whole project proprietary, considering that those are not even part > of the Debian project? And how does that "prove" --using your words-- it? > > Finally, you just replied with: > >> That's not an answer. For users, that doesn't change anything. > > Again, trolling. Now you are *demanding* a good answer despite not > asking a good question. We are not mind readers. You should *really* > look for and read and take the time to ask. Explain what your doubt is > and provide the relevant context to your question. You'll get a reply as > useful as your question. A vague question will give you a vague answer > at best. An accusive question will get you an accusive answer at best. > > (Personally, I didn't even understand your reply: if "that" is not an > answer, and you were already given other answers, that *what* is an > answer for you? For *what* users, that doesn't change anything? *What* > do users want to have changed? I only perceive a defense for > who-knows-what in your reply.) > > Anyway, my two cents. All help and questions are welcome, but some are > useful than others. Just don't get defensive and do your part of the > job. Remember that people are volunteers and they work on Debian mostly > on their free time. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/544bef2c-c875-4ee5-87ed-948eb4d36...@me.com
Re: "contrib" and "nonfree" distribs
Le 28 févr. 2014 à 19:22, Octavio Alvarez a écrit : > On 02/28/2014 09:29 AM, Solal Rastier wrote: >> I not compare Debian with Windows. The FSF publishes a GNU/Linux freedom >> indicator. Debian is proprietary, sorry. > > Ah! The FSF website [1] says otherwise. The FSF website acknowledges > Debian as Free Software as in "conscientiously keeps nonfree software > out of the official Debian system", but it does not endorse it (by the > title of the Web page). > > [1] https://www.gnu.org/distros/common-distros.html > > See? Get your facts straight. It's not the same "not to endorse" than to > "it is proprietary". Also, "non-free" is not the same as "proprietary". > > Windows is not even in the list because it *is* proprietary, flat. By > stating Debian is proprietary you are, in fact, comparing Debian > licensing with Windows licensing. You are saying that Debian is as > proprietary as Windows. > > Again, get your facts straight or nobody will care. > > And please (and this has nothing to do with Free or Open-Source Software > at all), next time, if I reply off-list to have a private conversation, > please be respectful and keep my response off-list. > > Finally, you still top-posted. Do you even understand what that is, at > least? > > Do you accept now that you behaved like a troll? > My mail client top-posting automtically. I don't compare Windows and Debian. Windows is proprietariest than Debian, but Debian isn't 100% free. Now, think about the utility of "contrib" and "nonfree". We must create free replacements to proprietary, not put proprietary in Debian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/6e00bfce-0973-4a8b-ac63-6ff7a8cd6...@me.com
Re: "contrib" and "nonfree" distribs
Hi Solal, 2014-02-28 19:24 GMT+01:00 Solal Rastier : > Le 28 févr. 2014 à 19:22, Octavio Alvarez a écrit > : > >> On 02/28/2014 09:29 AM, Solal Rastier wrote: > My mail client top-posting automtically. I don't compare Windows and Debian. > Windows is proprietariest than Debian, but Debian isn't 100% free. Now, think > about the utility of "contrib" and "nonfree". We must create free > replacements to proprietary, not put proprietary in Debian. You are enthusiasm is welcome. Your help in improving free replacements would also be appreciated. There are pages for people who would like to start contributing to Debian, they may be interesting for you: https://www.debian.org/intro/help https://wiki.debian.org/how-can-i-help The more we improve Free Software, the sooner we can remove non-free(/contrib) parts of Debian. Cheers, Balint -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/cak0odpxj2e8qtmx8i1fbdjrmezd6y2qufffdgqh-on1xg9j...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Fwd: alioth back online, some ssh keys changed
Holger Levsen writes: > FTWwonder why alioth seems to be hacked now... ... > this mail forwarding is inspired by two different mails wondering why the > "alioth" ssh host keys have changed Holger, Thanks for forwarding this mail. I'm rather late to the game and only now discovered the change in ssh keys when "git clone" complained at me[1]. > -- Forwarded Message -- > Betreff: alioth back online > Datum: Donnerstag, 21. November 2013 > Von: Stephen Gran > An: Debian Infrastructure Announce annou...@lists.debian.org> ... > · Update your SSH known keys. You can find all debian.org ssh hostkeys >at [1] or on any debian.org system in /etc/ssh/ssh_known_hosts. Or >you could just use the fingerprints in DNS (secured by DNSSEC). ... > [1] https://db.debian.org/debian_known_hosts Stephen, I had a bit of a difficult time tracking down the fact that the new key was valid. What would have made this much easier for me would have been if the fingerprint of the new key had been included in a signed message sent to debian-devel-announce@. It looks like that's exactly what you did with a previous ssh-key change back in 2011[2]. An email like that would have been perfect since then, when ssh presented me with the new fingerprint, I could have simply searched my email, found your message advising of the key change, and been on my way. Without this, I did have to do a bit of poking around before someone pointed me to Holger's message in my personal email archive. Additionally, I'd like to have the added trust of our system of signed keys in addition to the SSL CA system (in which I have very little trust) and DNSSEC (which I don't even know how to use, nor if I should trust it any more than https:). I did try to verify the new key by checking the /etc/ssh/ssh_known_keys file on a machine for which I did have a valid key. But it looks like that file is stale on at least the machine I checked (wagner.debian.org). I'm filing a bug for that now. For the sake of anyone else that might ever search their email for the new fingerprint, here it is: moszumanska:~$ ssh-keygen -l -f /etc/ssh/ssh_known_hosts -F git.debian.org 2048 d7:0b:26:5c:7a:5d:56:40:a9:e0:5d:f4:e1:70:88:bf git.debian.org (RSA) Thanks for everything, -Carl -- carl.d.wo...@intel.com [1] Yes, I'm a bad Debian Developer and should be using Debian's services more often. [2] id:20110522102745.ga27...@varinia.lobefin.net https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2011/05/msg7.html see also: id:20110522105217.gb27...@varinia.lobefin.net https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2011/05/msg8.html pgp7F5_g1lo_c.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#740379: ITP: asciinema -- Record and share your terminal sessions,
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: "gustavo panizzo " * Package name: asciinema Version : 0.9.8 Upstream Author : Marcin Kulik * URL : https://asciinema.org * License : MIT/X Programming Lang: Python Description : Record and share your terminal sessions, the right way Forget screen recording apps and blurry video. Enjoy a lightweight, purely text based approach to terminal recording I intend to maintain this app, is the client side for https://asciinema.org. Server side is also free software but i don't intend to package it (at least for now). I will maintain it on colab-maint using a git based workflow. I'm not DD, but a DM, so i need an sponsored first upload. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140228204236.16489.20913.reportbug@io
Re: "contrib" and "nonfree" distribs
On Fri, 28 Feb 2014 20:21:13 +0100 Bálint Réczey wrote: > Hi Solal, > > 2014-02-28 19:24 GMT+01:00 Solal Rastier : > > Le 28 févr. 2014 à 19:22, Octavio Alvarez a > > écrit : > > > >> On 02/28/2014 09:29 AM, Solal Rastier wrote: > > > My mail client top-posting automtically. I don't compare Windows and > > Debian. Windows is proprietariest than Debian, but Debian isn't 100% free. > > Now, think about the utility of "contrib" and "nonfree". We must create > > free replacements to proprietary, not put proprietary in Debian. Additionally I would like to say that Debian is a software distribution, not a project for creating new software. So it seems like a little bit out of scope to write new software. So like Balint says when there are good replacements, they will be happily included. I want to note at this point that the FSF isn't the ultimate resource for deciding what Free Software is and what not. There are many (well, at least me) people who don't agree with the explanation why Debian isn't free software. You could even argue that it wouldn't be free NOT to include non-free software into the Debian archives. Because (so one could argue) it would take away your freedom (which is all the FSF is reasoning about) to install non-free software through apt-get. > You are enthusiasm is welcome. Your help in improving free > replacements would also be appreciated. > There are pages for people who would like to start contributing to > Debian, they may be interesting for you: > https://www.debian.org/intro/help > https://wiki.debian.org/how-can-i-help > > The more we improve Free Software, the sooner we can remove > non-free(/contrib) parts of Debian. > > Cheers, > Balint signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#740398: ITP: pangoterm -- GTK/Pango-based terminal emulator
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: James McCoy * Package name: pangoterm Version : 0~20140228 Upstream Author : Paul Evans * URL : http://www.leonerd.org.uk/code/pangoterm/ * License : MIT Programming Lang: C Description : GTK/Pango-based terminal emulator A minimal GTK/Pango-based terminal that uses libvterm to provide terminal emulation. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140301022311.21426.48429.report...@cerberus.jamessan.com
Bug#740400: ITP: libvterm -- abstract library implementation of a VT220/xterm/ECMA-48 terminal emulator
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: James McCoy * Package name: libvterm Version : 0~20140228 Upstream Author : Paul Evans * URL : http://www.leonerd.org.uk/code/libvterm/ * License : MIT Programming Lang: C Description : abstract library implementation of a VT220/xterm/ECMA-48 terminal emulator An abstract C99 library which implements a VT220 or xterm-like terminal emulator. It doesn't use any particular graphics toolkit or output system, instead it invokes callback function pointers that its embedding program should provide it to draw on its behalf. It avoids calling malloc() during normal running state, allowing it to be used in embedded kernel situations. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140301022604.1139.73303.report...@cerberus.jamessan.com
Re: Bug#740379: ITP: asciinema -- Record and share your terminal sessions,
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 05:42:36PM -0300, gustavo panizzo wrote: > * Package name: asciinema > * URL : https://asciinema.org > Description : Record and share your terminal sessions, the right > way > > Forget screen recording apps and blurry video. Enjoy a lightweight, > purely text based approach to terminal recording Are there any reasons to use this over ttyrec or termrec? It seems to me asciinema is strictly worse than: ttyrec tmpfile && POST http://asciinema's_url * you can't do things locally * there's only a recorder, without a player (you need to use a web service to replay) * it's slow: takes around 2 seconds at the start and end * can't be used from scripts (to eg, record everything) * can't be used to pipe the output, etc (for termcast) * can't edit the recording -- A tit a day keeps the vet away. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140301041000.ga23...@angband.pl
Re: Bug#740379: ITP: asciinema -- Record and share your terminal sessions,
On Sat, Mar 01, 2014 at 05:10:00AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: > Are there any reasons to use this over ttyrec or termrec? It seems to me > asciinema is strictly worse than: > ttyrec tmpfile && POST http://asciinema's_url Is it the same protocol? Nice of asciinema to support it. > * you can't do things locally > * there's only a recorder, without a player (you need to use a web service > to replay) That's a plus for me. I almost never want to watch this stuff locally, and I'm recording for others. > * it's slow: takes around 2 seconds at the start and end > * can't be used from scripts (to eg, record everything) > * can't be used to pipe the output, etc (for termcast) > * can't edit the recording Meh. I've been using it from inside a virtualenv. I might as well have a system-wide copy that I'm sure is pseudo-trusted and DFSG free. > -- > A tit a day keeps the vet away. Cheers, Paul -- .''`. Paul Tagliamonte | Proud Debian Developer : :' : 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87 `. `'` http://people.debian.org/~paultag `- http://people.debian.org/~paultag/conduct-statement.txt signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: contrib and nonfree distribs
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 4:49 PM, Solal Rastier wrote: > That's not an answer. For users, that doesn't change anything. > > Le 28 févr. 2014 à 15:20, Samuel Thibault a écrit : > >> Solal Rastier, le Fri 28 Feb 2014 12:56:00 +0100, a écrit : >>> Further proof that Debian is proprietary software... >> >> contrib and non-free are not part of Debian releases. Really, read about >> GR etc. >> >> Samuel > Wait a moment ... Are you trying to say that users don't need flashplayer? I tend to differ - unfortunately too many websites still need it, and gnash is not exactly a replacement (unless you mean being few times as slow as flashplayer is acceptable... even when performance of flashplayer itself is bad at best) [this is slightly better now with html5 slowly taking over places where flashplayer was used previously] Documentation from FSF is another thing. Some hardware also needs proprietary firmware and drivers - surely you are not going to say that users don't want their GPU to be able to render 3D?? or that they don't need wifi connections ??? And you are not going to say that users don't want steam, are you? Also being ABLE to install nonfree software doesn't mean that Debian itself is proprietary software... (also most (if not all) of distros marked as free by FSF are breaking DFSG guidelines so they are proprietary too) And I had to bite the catch and feed tusseladd ... ;( -- darkestkhan -- Feel free to CC me. jid: darkestk...@gmail.com May The Source be with You. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CACRpbMi8hjs1GW=ch_l42+yocm8wcjdzwh3cphrrmnfbpcw...@mail.gmail.com
