Re: systemd - some more considerations

[Thorsten Glaser]

Chow Loong Jin  debian.org> writes:

> For the record, there's CONFIG_BINFMT_SCRIPT, which when disabled, causes
all
> #! scripts to be run under /bin/sh unconditionally.
> 
> *everything* runs under /bin/sh, including Perl, Python, and Bash scripts.

Yes, and /bin/sh is supposed to parse the shebang and call out to
the interpreter. AFAICT, mksh does. That the kernel can also do it
is just a shortcut.

bye,
//mirabilos


-- 
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/loom.20140404t102614-...@post.gmane.org

Re: systemd - some more considerations

[Chow Loong Jin]

On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 08:27:01AM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Chow Loong Jin  debian.org> writes:
> 
> > For the record, there's CONFIG_BINFMT_SCRIPT, which when disabled, causes
> all
> > #! scripts to be run under /bin/sh unconditionally.
> > 
> > *everything* runs under /bin/sh, including Perl, Python, and Bash scripts.
> 
> Yes, and /bin/sh is supposed to parse the shebang and call out to
> the interpreter. AFAICT, mksh does. That the kernel can also do it
> is just a shortcut.

Are you sure about this? AFAICT this seems to be the exception rather than the
rule. Running my Python scripts (with appropriate #!s) through zsh, bash, and
dash don't seem to automagically redirect them to Python.

Some references would be helpful. I can't seem to find anything on this through
some cursory googling.

-- 
Kind regards,
Loong Jin


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Chris Bannister]

On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 08:18:41AM +1100, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Apr 2014 14:16:15 Undefined User wrote:
> > The problem is that right now Debian project is changing its default
> > desktop environment, and I think that this is not a good move. Of course,
> > it all depends on where the project is aiming at, specially on which users.
> > But, for normal users, Gnome 3 is a way better experience than Xfce.
> 
> I think Xfce is much better *default* desktop environment (DE) than Gnome.
> 
> As KDE fan I do not like Gnome. Those who forget to choose DE in installer 
> (just like I did more than once) and end up with Xfce will have a lot less to 

Yeah, forgetting to press space instead of enter can lead to disaster!
:)

-- 
"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: https://lists.debian.org/20140404094052.GI26381@tal

Re: systemd - some more considerations

[Andrey Rahmatullin]

On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 08:27:01AM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> > For the record, there's CONFIG_BINFMT_SCRIPT, which when disabled, causes
> all
> > #! scripts to be run under /bin/sh unconditionally.
> > 
> > *everything* runs under /bin/sh, including Perl, Python, and Bash scripts.
> 
> Yes, and /bin/sh is supposed to parse the shebang and call out to
> the interpreter. 
Supposed by whom?

-- 
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/20140404095034.gb24...@belkar.wrar.name

Re: systemd - some more considerations

[Christoph Biedl]

Chow Loong Jin wrote...

> Some references would be helpful. I can't seem to find anything on this 
> through
> some cursory googling.

Perl scripts, when installed by ExtUtils::MakeMaker or similar, do
have

| eval 'exec /usr/bin/perl  -S $0 ${1+"$@"}'
| if 0; # not running under some shell

in the very first lines. Yes, it works. However I wasn't aware there
still was a need for that.

Christoph


-- 
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/1396605...@msgid.manchmal.in-ulm.de

Re: systemd - some more considerations

[Rens Houben]

In other news for Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 05:24:50PM +0800, Chow Loong Jin has 
been seen typing:
> On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 08:27:01AM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> > Chow Loong Jin  debian.org> writes:

> > Yes, and /bin/sh is supposed to parse the shebang and call out to
> > the interpreter. AFAICT, mksh does. That the kernel can also do it
> > is just a shortcut.
 
> Are you sure about this? AFAICT this seems to be the exception rather than the
> rule. Running my Python scripts (with appropriate #!s) through zsh, bash, and
> dash don't seem to automagically redirect them to Python.

For myself, I'd *prefer* the latter behavior -- if I explicitly tell
bash to parse a script, I want it to assume I have a good reason, and 
not silently follow a shebang line to execute a different parser
altogether.

-- 
Rens Houben   |opinions are mine
Resident linux guru and sysadmin  | if my employers have one
Systemec Internet Services.   |they'll tell you themselves
PGP key at http://proteus.systemec.nl/~shadur/shadur.key.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/20140404100415.ga4...@proteus.systemec.nl

shebang (was Re: systemd - some more considerations)

[Thorsten Glaser]

On Fri, 4 Apr 2014, Chow Loong Jin wrote:

> Are you sure about this?

Yes.

> Some references would be helpful. I can't seem to find anything on this 
> through

Sure. I’ve patched mksh to use “#?” ipv “#!” as shebang, to
simulate a kernel not supporting the shebang:

Index: exec.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/bin/mksh/exec.c,v
retrieving revision 1.129
diff -u -p -u -p -r1.129 exec.c
--- exec.c  11 Jan 2014 16:26:27 -  1.129
+++ exec.c  4 Apr 2014 09:34:58 -
@@ -893,7 +893,7 @@ scriptexec(struct op *tp, const char **a
/* restore begin of shebang position (buf+0 or buf+3) */
cp = (unsigned char *)(buf + fd);
/* bail out if read error (above) or no shebang */
-   if ((cp[0] != '#') || (cp[1] != '!'))
+   if ((cp[0] != '#') || (cp[1] != '?'))
goto noshebang;
 
cp += 2;

(Some comment on the side: “buf+0 or buf+3” is because mksh additionally
strips an UTF-8 BOM before the shebang. This is beyond standard.)

Then I run this:

tglase@tglase:~ $ cat x
#?/usr/bin/python
import sys
print sys.version
tglase@tglase:~ $ ls -l x
-rwxr-xr-x 1 tglase tglase 47 Apr  4 12:54 x
tglase@tglase:~ $ ./x
import.im6: unable to grab mouse ': Resource temporarily unavailable @ 
error/xwindow.c/XSelectWindow/9047.
sys.version
tglase@tglase:~ $ b/mksh
tglase@tglase:~ $ ./x
2.7.6 (default, Mar 22 2014, 17:40:27) 
[GCC 4.8.2]

(This is Debian sid/i386 (still waiting for x32, that’s why i386).)

> some cursory googling.

Try duckduckgoïng instead ☻ or searching POSIX, or something.

Also, “man mksh” look for EXECSHELL (which is the interpreter the
shell uses if the script doesn’t even have a shebang).

bye,
//mirabilos
-- 
Sometimes they [people] care too much: pretty printers [and syntax highligh-
ting, d.A.] mechanically produce pretty output that accentuates irrelevant
detail in the program, which is as sensible as putting all the prepositions
in English text in bold font.   -- Rob Pike in "Notes on Programming in C"


--
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/alpine.deb.2.10.1404041254520.25...@tglase.lan.tarent.de

Re: shebang (was Re: systemd - some more considerations)

[Andrey Rahmatullin]

On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 12:58:23PM +0200, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> > Are you sure about this?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > Some references would be helpful. I can't seem to find anything on this 
> > through
> 
> Sure. I’ve patched mksh 
mksh doesn't count as a reference.

> > some cursory googling.
> Try duckduckgoïng instead ☻ or searching POSIX, or something.
That's quite helpful.

-- 
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/20140404113812.ga27...@belkar.wrar.name

Re: shebang (was Re: systemd - some more considerations)

[Ansgar Burchardt]

Hi,

Thorsten Glaser  writes:
> On Fri, 4 Apr 2014, Chow Loong Jin wrote:
>
>> Are you sure about this?
>
> Yes.
>
>> Some references would be helpful. I can't seem to find anything on this 
>> through
>
> Sure. I’ve patched mksh to use “#?” ipv “#!” as shebang, to
> simulate a kernel not supporting the shebang:
[...]
> Try duckduckgoïng instead ☻ or searching POSIX, or something.

I tried and found that POSIX says the shell shall try execve(), and if
that fails 'the shell shall execute a command equivalent to having a
shell invoked with the pathname resulting from the search as its first
operand, with any remaining arguments passed to the new shell, except
that the value of "$0" in the new shell may be set to the command
name.'[1] No #! involved.

  [1] 


Furthermore Wikipedia says "For this reason and because POSIX does not
standardize path names, POSIX does not standardize the feature."[2].

  [2] 

I'm interested where POSIX says what you are sure it says (that the
shell is responsible for evaluating #!).

> Also, “man mksh” look for EXECSHELL (which is the interpreter the
> shell uses if the script doesn’t even have a shebang).

I don't think the manual for a not commonly used shell is a good
reference...

Ansgar


--
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/87ha69xqyj@deep-thought.43-1.org

Re: shebang

[Thorsten Glaser]

On Fri, 4 Apr 2014, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:

> I'm interested where POSIX says what you are sure it says (that the
> shell is responsible for evaluating #!).

I said the shell is supposed to, and suggested to search POSIX, but
I wasn’t sure that it was POSIX standardised, and never said so. As
you cited, it’s probably not. Doesn’t mean the shell doesn’t or
shouldn’t.

> > Also, “man mksh” look for EXECSHELL (which is the interpreter the
> > shell uses if the script doesn’t even have a shebang).
>
> I don't think the manual for a not commonly used shell is a good
> reference...

Uhm, excuse me?

“Larry Page: 1.5 million Android devices activated every day”
“Android device activations set to hit 1 billion soon”
‣ 
http://www.androidcentral.com/larry-page-15-million-android-devices-activated-every-day
That was on 2013-07-18; by that time, every new device activation
meant one new mksh user.

“Google announced that in Q3 2011, the total number of Android
activations had surpassed 190 million, which was a significant increase
from 135 million the previous quarter. The increase was boosted by sales
of Android smartphones at lower prices from Chinese and Indian
manufacturers.[2] As of 3 September 2013, there have been 1 billion
Android devices activated.[3]”
‣ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Android_devices
Every 4.x device, and many others, run mksh as system shell
(/system/bin/sh, Android’s equivalent of our /bin/sh).

According to the graphics at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Android_historical_version_distribution_-_vector.svg
that’s over ¾ of all devices (although the graphics is unclear as to
whether that is the total number of all activations, or (as seems to
be common with statistics from Google) the number of currently “live”
devices). Add to that the amount of devices running AOSP or another
non-phone-home firmware (Replicant, maybe SiMKo3, Cyanogen… well it
does phone home…).

There are also hundreds of Debian (or derivates) systems running
with mksh as /bin/sh (I should know, I set up a good part of them).

All FreeWRT, MidnightBSD, MirBSD, and recent OpenADK systems run
with mksh as system shell (/bin/sh); sta.li will do that too.

There’s also a lot of systems that c̲a̲n̲ run with mksh as system shell
at the administrator’s choice. Debian, all BSDs (NetBSD® only from
version 1.6 onwards, 1.5 has ashisms in the init scripts), Crux,
FreeMiNT, Deli Linux, etc. at least.

And only then add the sheer amount of systems where mksh is used
but not as system shell…

I honestly doubt that any other Unix shell is currently used as
widespread as mksh.

bye,
//mirabilos
-- 
«MyISAM tables -will- get corrupted eventually. This is a fact of life. »
“mysql is about as much database as ms access” – “MSSQL at least descends
from a database” “it's a rebranded SyBase” “MySQL however was born from a
flatfile and went downhill from there” – “at least jetDB doesn’t claim to
be a database”  ‣‣‣ Please, http://deb.li/mysql and MariaDB, finally die!


--
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/alpine.deb.2.10.1404041350070.25...@tglase.lan.tarent.de

Re: shebang (was Re: systemd - some more considerations)

[Jakub Wilk]

* Thorsten Glaser , 2014-04-04, 12:58:

Try duckduckgoïng instead ☻ or searching POSIX, or something.


SUSv4 “helpfully” says:

If the first line of a file of shell commands starts with the characters 
"#!", the results are unspecified.


--
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/20140404114816.ga3...@jwilk.net

Re: shebang (was Re: systemd - some more considerations)

[Salvo Tomaselli]

In data venerdì 04 aprile 2014 17.38.12, Andrey Rahmatullin ha scritto:
> > Sure. I’ve patched mksh 
> 
> mksh doesn't count as a reference.
Did you even read before replying? He patched it to use #? Instead of #! that 
was using.
He was sure about it being there because he had patched it to behave 
differently.

-- 

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/2629335.D8GMTTWuuY@vulcano

Re: shebang

[Andrey Rahmatullin]

On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 02:00:46PM +0200, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> > I'm interested where POSIX says what you are sure it says (that the
> > shell is responsible for evaluating #!).
> 
> I said the shell is supposed to, and suggested to search POSIX, but
> I wasn’t sure that it was POSIX standardised, and never said so. As
> you cited, it’s probably not. Doesn’t mean the shell doesn’t or
> shouldn’t.
Can you please refrain from asking to "search something" when you are not
sure something even exists?

> > > Also, “man mksh” look for EXECSHELL (which is the interpreter the
> > > shell uses if the script doesn’t even have a shebang).
> >
> > I don't think the manual for a not commonly used shell is a good
> > reference...
> 
> Uhm, excuse me?
> 
> “Larry Page: 1.5 million Android devices activated every day”
> “Android device activations set to hit 1 billion soon”
> ‣ 
> http://www.androidcentral.com/larry-page-15-million-android-devices-activated-every-day
> That was on 2013-07-18; by that time, every new device activation
> meant one new mksh user.
> 
> “Google announced that in Q3 2011, the total number of Android
> activations had surpassed 190 million, which was a significant increase
> from 135 million the previous quarter. The increase was boosted by sales
> of Android smartphones at lower prices from Chinese and Indian
> manufacturers.[2] As of 3 September 2013, there have been 1 billion
> Android devices activated.[3]”
> ‣ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Android_devices
> Every 4.x device, and many others, run mksh as system shell
> (/system/bin/sh, Android’s equivalent of our /bin/sh).
> 
> According to the graphics at
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Android_historical_version_distribution_-_vector.svg
> that’s over ¾ of all devices (although the graphics is unclear as to
> whether that is the total number of all activations, or (as seems to
> be common with statistics from Google) the number of currently “live”
> devices). Add to that the amount of devices running AOSP or another
> non-phone-home firmware (Replicant, maybe SiMKo3, Cyanogen… well it
> does phone home…).
> 
> There are also hundreds of Debian (or derivates) systems running
> with mksh as /bin/sh (I should know, I set up a good part of them).
> 
> All FreeWRT, MidnightBSD, MirBSD, and recent OpenADK systems run
> with mksh as system shell (/bin/sh); sta.li will do that too.
> 
> There’s also a lot of systems that c̲a̲n̲ run with mksh as system shell
> at the administrator’s choice. Debian, all BSDs (NetBSD® only from
> version 1.6 onwards, 1.5 has ashisms in the init scripts), Crux,
> FreeMiNT, Deli Linux, etc. at least.
> 
> And only then add the sheer amount of systems where mksh is used
> but not as system shell…
> 
> I honestly doubt that any other Unix shell is currently used as
> widespread as mksh.
Doesn't make it more authoritative or something.

-- 
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/20140404122318.ga29...@belkar.wrar.name

Re: shebang (was Re: systemd - some more considerations)

[Andrey Rahmatullin]

On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 02:04:32PM +0200, Salvo Tomaselli wrote:
> > > Sure. I’ve patched mksh 
> > 
> > mksh doesn't count as a reference.
> Did you even read before replying? He patched it to use #? Instead of #! that 
> was using.
> He was sure about it being there because he had patched it to behave 
> differently.
And all of that was to prove mksh does something, which cannot be used as
an argument about general or standardized behavior, or something.

-- 
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/20140404122721.ga29...@belkar.wrar.name

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Undefined User]

Well, it's almost impossible to avoid personal judgments on this matter.
This involves personal taste. But when talking about "new users" or
"not-that-advanced users", I'm really suggesting Gnome 3 to be the choice
of the project.

I know that its size is bigger than Xfce and it takes more resources, but
it represents the evolution of a great desktop environment. And it is (and
looks like) "today".

As I said before, we can't deny that a lot of people hate changes. But it's
part of the process. Each product, when getting big changes, faces it.
Windows 8 is a good example.

I'm saying something that the market is showing us: people don't want to
perform magic to make things work these days. They want to press an icon
and get that program to work. Furthermore, they're asking developers to
narrow differences between platforms.

It's not about Gnome, Xfce or whatever desktop environment being focused
only on touchscreen devices or identical to a mobile platform (that would
be terrible for everyone), but at least something that doesn't make people
think that Debian looks like from last decade and don't support new
technologies (although, we all know, none of these being true -- but we
have to show it).


2014-04-04 6:40 GMT-03:00 Chris Bannister :

> On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 08:18:41AM +1100, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> > On Thu, 3 Apr 2014 14:16:15 Undefined User wrote:
> > > The problem is that right now Debian project is changing its default
> > > desktop environment, and I think that this is not a good move. Of
> course,
> > > it all depends on where the project is aiming at, specially on which
> users.
> > > But, for normal users, Gnome 3 is a way better experience than Xfce.
> >
> > I think Xfce is much better *default* desktop environment (DE) than
> Gnome.
> >
> > As KDE fan I do not like Gnome. Those who forget to choose DE in
> installer
> > (just like I did more than once) and end up with Xfce will have a lot
> less to
>
> Yeah, forgetting to press space instead of enter can lead to disaster!
> :)
>
> --
> "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: https://lists.debian.org/20140404094052.GI26381@tal
>
>

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Kevin Chadwick]

previously on this list Undefined User contributed:

> It's not about Gnome, Xfce or whatever desktop environment being focused
> only on touchscreen devices or identical to a mobile platform (that would
> be terrible for everyone), but at least something that doesn't make people
> think that Debian looks like from last decade and don't support new
> technologies (although, we all know, none of these being true -- but we
> have to show it).

I'm not sure I agree or that many care so much. In just the last few
weeks I have had one 80 year old and one 30 year old both say they
wanted the Windows XP interface back over Windows 7/Vista repectively.

Which bit exactly do you think looks like win 98? xfce4-panel;
gnome-panel runs in xfce.

It should take very little to improve the look of xfce and with very
little memory usage increase.

-- 
___

'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)

In Other Words - Don't design like polkit or systemd
___

I have no idea why RTFM is used so aggressively on LINUX mailing lists
because whilst 'apropos' is traditionally the most powerful command on
Unix-like systems it's 'modern' replacement 'apropos' on Linux is a tool
to help psychopaths learn to control their anger.

(Kevin Chadwick)

___


-- 
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/237840.89367...@smtp101.mail.ir2.yahoo.com

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Stephan Seitz]

On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 10:03:46AM -0300, Undefined User wrote:

This involves personal taste. But when talking about "new users" or
"not-that-advanced users", I'm really suggesting Gnome 3 to be the choice
of the project.


But what are your definitions of „new users”? Someone who has never used 
Linux before (but maybe Windows and wants to change from his old XP, 
I don’t think he will like Gnome3)? Or really a new user?


As far as I understand Gnome3 needs more resources than XFCE and modern 
hardware. The default desktop should be moderate. If you want more eye 
candy and bells and whistles you can install bigger desktop environments.


As far as I know the installer can’t do a hardware check and switch 
desktop environemnts fitting to the system.


I know that its size is bigger than Xfce and it takes more resources, 
but it represents the evolution of a great desktop environment. And it 
is (and looks like) "today".


No, it’s terrible and keeps you from getting your work done (at least in 
my case).


As I said before, we can't deny that a lot of people hate changes. But 
it's part of the process. Each product, when getting big changes, faces 
it. Windows 8 is a good example.


Yes, Win8 is horrible. But you don’t have to go that far. I know people 
who refused a new system with Windows 7 because it didn’t work the same 
way as Windows XP. So they kept the old hardware and the old system.


My mother is using Debian 6 with Gnome 2. I don’t know if I will ever 
update this system. Gnome 3 is not a solution, and I’m not interested in 
teaching XFCE.


Shade and sweet water!

Stephan

--
| Stephan Seitz  E-Mail: s...@fsing.rootsland.net |
| Public Keys: http://fsing.rootsland.net/~stse/keys.html |


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Chris Bannister]

[Please don't top post on this mailing list.]

On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 10:03:46AM -0300, Undefined User wrote:
> Well, it's almost impossible to avoid personal judgments on this matter.
> This involves personal taste. But when talking about "new users" or
> "not-that-advanced users", I'm really suggesting Gnome 3 to be the choice
> of the project.

Having a sensible default is not about "new users" or "not-that-advanced
users"; there are derivatives which cater for that sort of thing.

-- 
"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: https://lists.debian.org/20140404132543.GB1288@tal

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Jonathan Dowland]

We go over the same ground over and over. I'm increasingly in favour of *no*
default. You must pick one from a list on install. Randomize the list if
necessary.


-- 
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/20140404135241.gb14...@bryant.redmars.org

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Undefined User]

Perfect solution.

Debian installer should provide you information about desktop environments
and let the user choose it.


2014-04-04 10:52 GMT-03:00 Jonathan Dowland :

> We go over the same ground over and over. I'm increasingly in favour of
> *no*
> default. You must pick one from a list on install. Randomize the list if
> necessary.
>
>
> --
> 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/20140404135241.gb14...@bryant.redmars.org
>
>

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Undefined User]

Sorry for not deleting the reply text over my last e-mail.

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[The Wanderer]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

On 04/04/2014 09:57 AM, Undefined User wrote:

> Sorry for not deleting the reply text over my last e-mail.

Actually, for all that top-posting is a sin, failing to quote at all
when replying is AFAIK generally considered even worse...

(Depending on context, of course; in a Web forum where the message being
replied to is probably still visible when reading the reply, quoting
would be inapproriate. But we're talking about E-mail here.)

- --
   The Wanderer

Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny.

A government exists to serve its citizens, not to control them.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
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=KxWs
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
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/533ebbf5.2090...@fastmail.fm

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Josselin Mouette]

Le vendredi 04 avril 2014 à 15:25 +0200, Stephan Seitz a écrit : 
> As far as I understand Gnome3 needs more resources than XFCE 

This is mostly irrelevant. The resources consumed by the desktop are
negligible compared to applications. As soon as you start a browser with
a few tabs on non-trivial websites, 1 GiB of memory is barely enough.
Regardless of the desktop environment.

> and modern hardware. 

This is no longer a requirement in jessie, at least on x86 where
llvmpipe is now accepted as a GL engine.

> The default desktop should be moderate. If you want more eye 
> candy and bells and whistles you can install bigger desktop environments.

The default desktop should be functional and easy to use. I don’t call
features that go in this direction “eye candy” or “bells and whistles”.
Please don’t compare GNOME to Compiz just because it has OpenGL
requirements.

> My mother is using Debian 6 with Gnome 2. I don’t know if I will ever 
> update this system. Gnome 3 is not a solution, and I’m not interested in 
> teaching XFCE.

Looks like you are deciding in place of your mother what is good for
her. And I don’t think you should in this case. GNOME 3 is very popular
among less experienced users, for good reason.

-- 
 .''`.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/1396620807.5200.180.camel@dsp0698014

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Stephan Seitz]

On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 04:13:27PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:

Le vendredi 04 avril 2014 à 15:25 +0200, Stephan Seitz a écrit :

and modern hardware.

This is no longer a requirement in jessie, at least on x86 where
llvmpipe is now accepted as a GL engine.


Ah, thank you.


The default desktop should be moderate. If you want more eye
candy and bells and whistles you can install bigger desktop environments.

The default desktop should be functional and easy to use. I don’t call


Yes, and what means „functional”? XFCE is of course functional, heck, 
even fvwm is functional, and I know people who still use it because they 
only have one config file to copy to a new machine and their desktop is 
ready.



My mother is using Debian 6 with Gnome 2. I don’t know if I will ever
update this system. Gnome 3 is not a solution, and I’m not interested in
teaching XFCE.

Looks like you are deciding in place of your mother what is good for
her. And I don’t think you should in this case. GNOME 3 is very popular


Of course I do because she will ask me what she has to do now. She 
doesn’t try and she doesn’t experiment.


Shade and sweet water!

Stephan

--
| Stephan Seitz  E-Mail: s...@fsing.rootsland.net |
| Public Keys: http://fsing.rootsland.net/~stse/keys.html |


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Stefano Zacchiroli]

On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 02:52:41PM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> We go over the same ground over and over. I'm increasingly in favour of *no*
> default. You must pick one from a list on install. Randomize the list if
> necessary.

And can I pass my granddad's phone call on to you when he is stuck
choosing among names that are absolutely obscure to him like "GNOME",
"Xfce", and "KDE"?

We are software integrators, making default choices is what we do.

We can't pass the bucket down to our users.

-- 
Stefano Zacchiroli  . . . . . . .  z...@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o
Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o
Former Debian Project Leader  . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o .
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Undefined User]

2014-04-04 11:42 GMT-03:00 Stefano Zacchiroli :

> And can I pass my granddad's phone call on to you when he is stuck
> choosing among names that are absolutely obscure to him like "GNOME",
> "Xfce", and "KDE"?
>

Not giving the user a taste of the options, well... Yes, I agree, it's
pretty hard to solve it this way.

In addition to that, it's very important for us to understand that an
average user (someone that just surfs the internet ou work with text
editors) don't separate/discriminate the OS from the desktop environment.
On Wheezy, for example, they would think that Debian "is" Gnome 3, because
it is included in the whole default installation package.


2014-04-04 11:42 GMT-03:00 Stefano Zacchiroli :

> On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 02:52:41PM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> > We go over the same ground over and over. I'm increasingly in favour of
> *no*
> > default. You must pick one from a list on install. Randomize the list if
> > necessary.
>
> And can I pass my granddad's phone call on to you when he is stuck
> choosing among names that are absolutely obscure to him like "GNOME",
> "Xfce", and "KDE"?
>
> We are software integrators, making default choices is what we do.
>
> We can't pass the bucket down to our users.
>
> --
> Stefano Zacchiroli  . . . . . . .  z...@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o
> Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o
> Former Debian Project Leader  . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o .
> « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
>

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Undefined User]

2014-04-04 11:04 GMT-03:00 The Wanderer :

> Actually, for all that top-posting is a sin, failing to quote at all
> when replying is AFAIK generally considered even worse...
>
> (Depending on context, of course; in a Web forum where the message being
> replied to is probably still visible when reading the reply, quoting
> would be inapproriate. But we're talking about E-mail here.)
>


Duly noted. I will be more careful when replying.

getting rid of md5 hashes

[Holger Levsen]

Hi,

as I've just been affected by "#700266  fetchmail: --sslfingerprint uses MD5" 
I wonder if someone is tracking all the bugs related to using md5 hashes kind 
of like how we track bugs in software not supporting ipv6.

User debian-secur...@lists.debian.org
Usertag 700266 md5 

maybe?


cheers,
Holger


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Sune Vuorela]

On 2014-04-03, Dmitry Smirnov  wrote:
> As KDE fan I do not like Gnome. Those who forget to choose DE in instal=
> ler=20

Part of me wants to have KDE Plasma Desktop as the default workspace,
because it is completely awesome.

Other parts of me is happy that it is not the default because then we
don't have all sorts of weird wishes about "oh noes. networkmanager" or
"Please use this non-integrated piece of messaging software because it
does something that no one uses".

/Sune


-- 
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/lhmi0f$b12$1...@ger.gmane.org

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Hashem Nasarat]

On 04/04/2014 10:36 AM, Stephan Seitz wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 04:13:27PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
>> Le vendredi 04 avril 2014 à 15:25 +0200, Stephan Seitz a écrit :
>>> and modern hardware.
>> This is no longer a requirement in jessie, at least on x86 where
>> llvmpipe is now accepted as a GL engine.
> 
> Ah, thank you.
> 
>>> The default desktop should be moderate. If you want more eye
>>> candy and bells and whistles you can install bigger desktop
>>> environments.
>> The default desktop should be functional and easy to use. I don’t call
> 
> Yes, and what means „functional”? XFCE is of course functional, heck,
> even fvwm is functional, and I know people who still use it because they
> only have one config file to copy to a new machine and their desktop is
> ready.

XFCE (at least the version in Debian 8) doesn't automatically handle
external monitors, which is a pretty significant use-case for all kinds
of users.

I do not think it's fair to expect a new user to be configure xrandr or
find & install a 3rd party xrandr GUI.

On the other hand, experienced users are familiar enough to install
whichever environment they wish. Perhaps a compromise is to have GNOME
the default and then XFCE as a bare-bones GUI or something.


-- 
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/533ecc8d.7050...@gmail.com

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Jonathan Dowland]

On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 04:42:19PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> And can I pass my granddad's phone call on to you when he is stuck
> choosing among names that are absolutely obscure to him like "GNOME",
> "Xfce", and "KDE"?

No, just say pick a random one. Surely they'll all be entirely appropriate
for your grandad by the time we release jessie ;)


-- 
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/20140404151957.ga16...@bryant.redmars.org

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Stephan Heidinger]

On 04.04.2014 17:15, Hashem Nasarat wrote:
> On the other hand, experienced users are familiar enough to install
> whichever environment they wish. Perhaps a compromise is to have GNOME
> the default and then XFCE as a bare-bones GUI or something.

Why then install an alternative at all. Experienced users install what
they want anyways. The DEs working best for "unexperienced" users would
be the DEs that do much work themselves, that is multi display,
network(-manager), easy (GUI) ways to change stuff like time, date,
language, sound, (themes), … Therefore the default should probably be
looked around the bigger ones like Gnome, KDE, (Cinnamon when its included).

Stephan
-- 
Stephan Heidinger
PGP-Key: 6853A18E
http://www.jedipedia.net



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Kevin Chadwick]

previously on this list people contributed:

>> Why then install an alternative at all. Experienced users install what
>> they want anyways. The DEs working best for "unexperienced" users would
>> be the DEs that do much work themselves,

Xfce allows more options and choice by default on a cd and
unexperienced users have a better chance of loading synaptic and a web
browser on xfce than heavier desktops and is meant to be more stable.

Hasn't Gnome or just GTK3? just removed cue tips shortcuts too affecting
mouse/touchless systems.

> XFCE (at least the version in Debian 8) doesn't automatically handle
> external monitors, which is a pretty significant use-case for all kinds
> of users.
> 

I don't want to reboot right now but xfce4-display-settings in debian 7
does atleast after you have run xrandr and I would guess if plugged in
during boot up as my second screen comes up by itself with it's own
panels when it is.

> I do not think it's fair to expect a new user to be configure xrandr or
> find & install a 3rd party xrandr GUI.

You could add lxrandr to the default and the DE would still be smaller
than gnome. How modular is Gnome, you could even use their display
management tools until newer versions of xfce hit debian stable,
atleast you should be able to? 

I know xfce 4.11 might take some time to hit stable and has some extra
tweaks such as for having screens above and below each other. Perhaps
having an xfce backports choice during install is another idea but I
guess that couldn't be supported.

-- 
___

'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)

In Other Words - Don't design like polkit or systemd
___

I have no idea why RTFM is used so aggressively on LINUX mailing lists
because whilst 'apropos' is traditionally the most powerful command on
Unix-like systems it's 'modern' replacement 'apropos' on Linux is a tool
to help psychopaths learn to control their anger.

(Kevin Chadwick)

___


-- 
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/615301.77533...@smtp118.mail.ir2.yahoo.com

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Russ Allbery]

Sune Vuorela  writes:

> Part of me wants to have KDE Plasma Desktop as the default workspace,
> because it is completely awesome.

> Other parts of me is happy that it is not the default because then we
> don't have all sorts of weird wishes about "oh noes. networkmanager" or
> "Please use this non-integrated piece of messaging software because it
> does something that no one uses".

We should change the default desktop environment with each release so that
each maintenance team gets to share in the fun!  It's like a giant hazing
ritual.  :)

-- 
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)   


-- 
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/87y4zl80n9@windlord.stanford.edu

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Amy Rice]

Is it a bad idea in the end not to include a desktop at all,
and the user can install one at their own discretion?

On 4/4/2014 8:55 AM, Undefined User wrote:
> Perfect solution.
>
> Debian installer should provide you information about desktop
> environments and let the user choose it.
>
>
> 2014-04-04 10:52 GMT-03:00 Jonathan Dowland  >:
>
> We go over the same ground over and over. I'm increasingly in
> favour of *no*
> default. You must pick one from a list on install. Randomize the
> list if
> necessary.
>
>
> --
> 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/20140404135241.gb14...@bryant.redmars.org
>
>

-- 
Cheers,
Amy

"ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI"

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Undefined User]

2014-04-04 14:46 GMT-03:00 Amy Rice :

> Is it a bad idea in the end not to include a desktop at all,
> and the user can install one at their own discretion?


The Debian Installer lets you choose if you want to install a desktop
environment or not. By default it comes checked (so it will be installed).
I don't think that we have to change that. We only have to discuss about
what desktop environment will be the default.

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Holger Levsen]

Hi,

On Freitag, 4. April 2014, Russ Allbery wrote:
> We should change the default desktop environment with each release so that
> each maintenance team gets to share in the fun!  It's like a giant hazing
> ritual.  :)

wow, the quality of debian-devel has really degraded. Russ starts trolling... 
at least it's still funny :-)


cheers,
Holger



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Fernando Toledo]

El 03/04/14 22:15, Norbert Preining escribió:
> On Thu, 03 Apr 2014, Stephen Allen wrote:
>> Like the OP - I didn't like Gnome-Shell at first, but after giving it a
>> month I really started enjoying it. It's also mature and being worked on
>> extensively. Not something one can say about Xfce4 at this point.
>>
>> I think you're probably the exception to the rule.
> 
> No: I tried G3 for nearly a year - and finally have purged my laptop
> of all traces if it. 
> 
> I don't go to rants about user interface design blocking me to do 
> things I want to do etc etc etc.
> 
> XFCE is *by*far* superior to G3, IMNSHO
> 
> Norbert
> 

i vote for Mate
=)

-- 
Fernando Toledo
Dock Sud BBS
http://bbs.docksud.com.ar
telnet://bbs.docksud.com.ar


-- 
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/533f0175.5030...@docksud.com.ar

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Marc Haber]

On Fri, 04 Apr 2014 10:28:26 -0700, Russ Allbery 
wrote:
>Sune Vuorela  writes:
>
>> Part of me wants to have KDE Plasma Desktop as the default workspace,
>> because it is completely awesome.
>
>> Other parts of me is happy that it is not the default because then we
>> don't have all sorts of weird wishes about "oh noes. networkmanager" or
>> "Please use this non-integrated piece of messaging software because it
>> does something that no one uses".
>
>We should change the default desktop environment with each release so that
>each maintenance team gets to share in the fun!  It's like a giant hazing
>ritual.  :)

Please do the same for the default MTA.

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: https://lists.debian.org/e1ww9wl-0001zy...@swivel.zugschlus.de

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Marc Haber]

On Fri, 04 Apr 2014 10:04:37 -0400, The Wanderer
 wrote:
>(Depending on context, of course; in a Web forum where the message being
>replied to is probably still visible when reading the reply, quoting
>would be inapproriate. But we're talking about E-mail here.)

And e-mail threading wasn't invented somewhat 25 years ago?

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: https://lists.debian.org/e1ww9xu-0001zi...@swivel.zugschlus.de

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[The Wanderer]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

On 04/04/2014 03:39 PM, Marc Haber wrote:

> On Fri, 04 Apr 2014 10:04:37 -0400, The Wanderer 
>  wrote:
> 
>> (Depending on context, of course; in a Web forum where the message
>> being replied to is probably still visible when reading the reply,
>> quoting would be inapproriate. But we're talking about E-mail
>> here.)
> 
> And e-mail threading wasn't invented somewhat 25 years ago?

I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean by this question.

Of course E-mail threading is a thing. But when you're viewing the body
of one message, the body of another message is not visible - unless
you've taken special measures, such as opening one of the two messages
in a separate window. Threading makes it (relatively) fast and easy to
move between a reply message and its parent message, but it doesn't
cause both messages to be displayed at once.

As such, I'm not sure what E-mail threading has to do with the issue.

- --
   The Wanderer

Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny.

A government exists to serve its citizens, not to control them.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
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=IzYR
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
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/533f0c83.9090...@fastmail.fm

Re: Bug#743656: ITP: memoizable -- A gem that offers Memoization is an optimization that saves the return value of a method so it doesn't need to be re-computed every time that method is called.

[Andrei POPESCU]

Control: reassign -1 wnpp

On Vi, 04 apr 14, 23:25:42, Danial Jose wrote:
> package: memoizable
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: 'Danial José' 
> 
> *Package Name : memoizable
>  Version : 0.3.2
>  Upstream Author : Dan Kubb, Erik Michaels-Ober (Author name/s of the Gem).
> *URL :  https://github.com/dkubb/memoizable‎ (Link to the git repo of the
> Gem)
> *License : Expat
> *Description :  Memoization is an optimization that saves the return value
> of a method so it doesn't need to be re-computed every time that method is
> called.
> 
> 
> I am packaging devise as it is a dependency of debian-diaspora
> (#691181)  which is a dependency of diaspora (#597093)

-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic
http://nuvreauspam.ro/gpg-transition.txt


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Deprecating/removing racoon/ipsec-tools from Debian GNU/Linux and racoon from Debian/kfreebsd

[Noah Meyerhans]

On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 12:59:35PM +1300, Matt Grant wrote:
> Systemd package support is the thing that pushed me over the edge about
> this.  There are no systemd unit files at all for ipsec-tools/racoon
> that I know of. Please advise me otherwise, and I will look at putting
> them in the current package.

I've recently worked out unit files for other packages, and am happy to
help come up with a suitable unit file for racoon as well.

> The issues are:
> 
> 1) Security.  The racoon daemon has to run as root, with a lot of the
> default GCC security flags turned off. 

Running as root without build-time hardening is bad, but...

> 4) racoon/setkey are native IPSEC implementations across FreeBSD,
> NetBSD, Mac OSX, and Linux, and thus having it available give a 'just
> works' IPSEC option. 

...

> My main concern as maintainer are the security issues, with an old code
> base running as root.

The code base may be old, but it's pretty widely used and thus should
have many eyes watching it. (I'm being optimistic, I know). The
ipsec-tools mailing lists don't see a lot of activity, but they're by no
means dead.  And there was just an upstream 0.8.2 release in February.

> I am willing to co-maintain this package with other developers and
> maintainers.  My belief is that there is likely a Debian kFreeBSD
> developer/maintainer out there who would like to do this, and do a lot
> of the work :-)

I'm happy to help maintain ipsec-tools, as I make regular use of it and
have done so for several years. I'd also be supportive of removing it
for jessie+1 based on your arguments for doing so. If that's the path
taken, it'd be really good if we could document (and at least partially
automate?) the migration path from racoon to the preferred alternatives.

noah



signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Wolodja Wentland]

On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 16:19 +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 04:42:19PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > And can I pass my granddad's phone call on to you when he is stuck
> > choosing among names that are absolutely obscure to him like "GNOME",
> > "Xfce", and "KDE"?
> 
> No, just say pick a random one. Surely they'll all be entirely appropriate
> for your grandad by the time we release jessie ;)

Well, one might argue that DEs are either a suitable pick for our users or
they are not and that the actual choice from the "suitable" set is therefore
irrelevant.

I would like to see the "No default" scheme implemented in such a way that
users are shown a picture of the desktop + one/two sentences about the DEs.
That way the user would be actually more likely to pick a DE (s)he likes.

But then I also believe that Gnome 3 is, like XFCE, a perfectly reasonable
choice and would be perfectly happy with Gnome 3.

One thing I dislike about switching the default DE is that it puts a lot of
people active in support in a position in which they might not actually be as
familiar with the DE they will end up supporting most frequently simply by
having learned a different "default" one a few generations back. The
information flow from experienced users to new users is thereby slightly
hampered.
-- 
Wolodja 

4096R/CAF14EFC
081C B7CD FF04 2BA9 94EA  36B2 8B7F 7D30 CAF1 4EFC


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Philip Hands]

Wolodja Wentland  writes:
...
> One thing I dislike about switching the default DE is that it puts a lot of
> people active in support in a position in which they might not actually be as
> familiar with the DE they will end up supporting most frequently simply by
> having learned a different "default" one a few generations back. The
> information flow from experienced users to new users is thereby slightly
> hampered.

Yes, because all that Gnome 2 experience is going to be so helpful when the
poor sod at the other end of the phone is looking at a Gnome 3 desktop.

Anyway, to return to the main point, I do wonder why nobody has bothered
to mention that the reason for the switch was that Gnome no longer fits
on CD#1.

Rather than a totally pointless discussion about choosing a default that
will render our minimal install media worthless, how about persuading
people that nobody needs CD images any more, or that it's OK to have a
useless CD#1.

Actually, no, instead why don't you all check out the various threads on
debian-boot where those arguments have failed to be persuasive, and then
go and do something productive instead.

Cheers, Phil.
-- 
|)|  Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560]http://www.hands.com/
|-|  HANDS.COM Ltd.http://ftp.uk.debian.org/
|(|  10 Onslow Gardens, South Woodford, London  E18 1NE  ENGLAND


pgpjsaPCJVg89.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Undefined User]

2014-04-04 19:52 GMT-03:00 Philip Hands :

> pointless discussion


First of all, great attitude, my friend. It seems like you are a very
reasonable person. Second, pointless discussion? So all these people here
are just wasting time? Well... What can I say? That's your point of view
and I have to respect it.

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Emilio Pozuelo Monfort]

On 05/04/14 00:52, Philip Hands wrote:
> Anyway, to return to the main point, I do wonder why nobody has bothered
> to mention that the reason for the switch was that Gnome no longer fits
> on CD#1.

If that were true, we could surely fix it. If it were true.

Emilio


-- 
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/533f3af7.4080...@debian.org

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Emilio Pozuelo Monfort]

On 04/04/14 21:38, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Apr 2014 10:28:26 -0700, Russ Allbery 
> wrote:
>> Sune Vuorela  writes:
>>
>>> Part of me wants to have KDE Plasma Desktop as the default workspace,
>>> because it is completely awesome.
>>
>>> Other parts of me is happy that it is not the default because then we
>>> don't have all sorts of weird wishes about "oh noes. networkmanager" or
>>> "Please use this non-integrated piece of messaging software because it
>>> does something that no one uses".
>>
>> We should change the default desktop environment with each release so that
>> each maintenance team gets to share in the fun!  It's like a giant hazing
>> ritual.  :)
> 
> Please do the same for the default MTA.

Don't forget the kernel and the init system.

/me runs


-- 
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/533f3a49.20...@gmail.com

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[John Holland]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

How about something completely different: Enlinghtenment?

No, I'm not kidding
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTPz/PAAoJEPCIPbSVUc8t+JMH/j+XBHlroA4pXgEFtzWl2FuI
Ah18G6h5kbdqNQgEabwX/sQDCY15ThxM/WuhBfdPVrwwuUKf1NmdXX4MEPU+ZyL/
S7h7xasPRI1fqeWZ2btCl+c71ssX7rZhDPKdpZ1WkbZz0iNP2ec8gpZ2aJcLIEUV
3Uw3ixsCnkrenaz+ARLWRDtuCP8iJmvZzio2IXWp7jsH9yV+7pGhnL8Yzvh7JmuE
Lw0wsMIIxzksmyt+CstaYyQsInZKMrKoG0BSCo8KHEslTZXZOGtu7B6wi7fU6lWI
VfgsKAswSHlfkYgZOTeNSQkAURgQqISCGIDAQA0EorRbJFoHNg4DdXrK4GTbLQE=
=AX+r
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Philip Hands]

Undefined User  writes:

> 2014-04-04 19:52 GMT-03:00 Philip Hands :
>
>> pointless discussion
>
> First of all, great attitude, my friend. It seems like you are a very
> reasonable person. Second, pointless discussion? So all these people here
> are just wasting time? Well... What can I say? That's your point of view
> and I have to respect it.

Well, I should probably have worded the conditional clause in that
sentence to make my point more clearly -- i.e.:

  Given that the options other than XFCE that people are advocating here
  (Gnome and KDE) don't actually fit on CD#1, there is very little point
  trying to decide which of them you might want, since you cannot have
  either of them.

If you're wondering where the idea that they will no longer fit on CD#1
came from, it's been a repeating theme on debian-boot, as the packages
and dependencies have grown over time -- this thread seems to cover the
subject pretty well, if you read all of it (there's quite a lot of it
though):

  https://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2013/05/msg00684.html

As for my grumpy tone, I apologise for that -- it probably comes from
the several voluminous threads on debian-devel recently spouting drivel
about systemd which I may have unfairly associated with this thread.

Cheers, Phil.
-- 
|)|  Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560]http://www.hands.com/
|-|  HANDS.COM Ltd.http://ftp.uk.debian.org/
|(|  10 Onslow Gardens, South Woodford, London  E18 1NE  ENGLAND


pgp8X34YAUSC_.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Undefined User]

2014-04-04 20:36 GMT-03:00 Philip Hands :

> As for my grumpy tone, I apologise for that -- it probably comes from
> the several voluminous threads on debian-devel recently spouting drivel
> about systemd which I may have unfairly associated with this thread.
>

Philip, I would like to thank you for the reply and also apologize for the
email that I sent. I didn't want the discussion to be lost.

However, I believe we should all know that there are many developers here,
but also users - the latter being my case. So, I am not aware of the
technical limitations of the distribution, and I think that some developer
here could help us pointing them out, if any. Moreover, it would be
important to know whether these limitations can be overcome or not.

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Wolodja Wentland]

On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 23:52 +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> Wolodja Wentland  writes:
> ...
> > One thing I dislike about switching the default DE is that it puts a lot of
> > people active in support in a position in which they might not actually be 
> > as
> > familiar with the DE they will end up supporting most frequently simply by
> > having learned a different "default" one a few generations back. The
> > information flow from experienced users to new users is thereby slightly
> > hampered.
> Yes, because all that Gnome 2 experience is going to be so helpful when the
> poor sod at the other end of the phone is looking at a Gnome 3 desktop.

My knowledge of various GTK applications and their idioms actually helps in a
lot in this, but I simply wanted to make an argument against switching.

> Anyway, to return to the main point, I do wonder why nobody has bothered
> to mention that the reason for the switch was that Gnome no longer fits
> on CD#1.

[...]

> Actually, no, instead why don't you all check out the various threads on
> debian-boot where those arguments have failed to be persuasive, and then
> go and do something productive instead.

Exactly. Lets offer a netinstall with a sensible menu that allows the user =
to choose the DE (s)he wants plus the various CD1, [1GB, 2GB, 3GB] DVD1, BD1,
...  images for the different DEs as has been done for wheezy.

I am personally not convinced that having one unlabelled CD1 and a hard to
change preselection in the netinst is worth discussing the default DE every
other month and a very desirable goal in itself. And offering a choice does
not even prevent the expression of a preference or bias ("choose this if you
are unsure"). Neither do I think that being able to provide a single complete
CD image will be the most important factor in this discussion in the years to
come.

The interface somebody uses to interact with a computer is probably one of the
few examples in which a user actually wants to make a choice as preferences
are inherently subjective and far reaching. All I was arguing for is simply to
provide a little more information to enable the user to make this decision.
-- 
Wolodja 

4096R/CAF14EFC
081C B7CD FF04 2BA9 94EA  36B2 8B7F 7D30 CAF1 4EFC


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Roger Lynn]

On 04/04/14 00:50, Stephen Allen wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 08:18:41AM +1100, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
>> I think Xfce is much better *default* desktop environment (DE) than Gnome.
>> 
>> As KDE fan I do not like Gnome. Those who forget to choose DE in installer 
>> (just like I did more than once) and end up with Xfce will have a lot less 
>> to 
>> remove from their systems shall they choose to use a different DE.
>> 
>> Faster installation is another good reason to stick with Xfce by default.
> 
> Disagree - Gnome 3 I would think for MOST users would be preferable.
> Like the OP says Xfce4 is not desirable for most users coming from the
> dark side or heck perhaps for most users on Linux that want a modern
> desktop.

If you assume that most users have previously used MS Windows, then wouldn't
KDE be more appropriate? It might also avoid some of the more controversial
discussions we've seen here in recent years.

Roger


-- 
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/u1s31b-unl@silverstone.rilynn.me.uk

Re: shebang (was Re: systemd - some more considerations)

[Matthias Urlichs]

Hi,

Thorsten Glaser:
> tglase@tglase:~ $ cat x
> #?/usr/bin/python
> import sys
> print sys.version
> tglase@tglase:~ $ ls -l x
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 tglase tglase 47 Apr  4 12:54 x
> tglase@tglase:~ $ ./x
> import.im6: unable to grab mouse ': Resource temporarily unavailable @ 
> error/xwindow.c/XSelectWindow/9047.
> sys.version
> tglase@tglase:~ $ b/mksh
> tglase@tglase:~ $ ./x
> 2.7.6 (default, Mar 22 2014, 17:40:27) 
> [GCC 4.8.2]
> 
This just says that mksh handles #! scripts like no other shell.
Doesn't mean that it's a good (or bad) idea.

In fact, I wonder whether anything would break if we removed the ability
to run shebang-less scripts from our shells.

Currently, they do this:

* bash opens the script and interprets it
* ash dash immediately execve() /bin/sh with the script
* mksh obviously opens the file and tries to read the #! line, which
  seems pointless because the kernel already did this.

This gets interesting if you point the #! line to something which is not an
executable.

* ash bash dash obviously behave as if the #! line was not there and
  interpret the script.
* mksh reports the ENOEXEC. I actually like that.

-- 
-- Matthias Urlichs


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Stephen Allen]

On Sat, Apr 05, 2014 at 12:32:45AM +0100, Roger Lynn wrote:
> On 04/04/14 00:50, Stephen Allen wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 08:18:41AM +1100, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> >> I think Xfce is much better *default* desktop environment (DE) than Gnome.
> >> 
> >> As KDE fan I do not like Gnome. Those who forget to choose DE in installer 
> >> (just like I did more than once) and end up with Xfce will have a lot less 
> >> to 
> >> remove from their systems shall they choose to use a different DE.
> >> 
> >> Faster installation is another good reason to stick with Xfce by default.
> > 
> > Disagree - Gnome 3 I would think for MOST users would be preferable.
> > Like the OP says Xfce4 is not desirable for most users coming from the
> > dark side or heck perhaps for most users on Linux that want a modern
> > desktop.
> 
> If you assume that most users have previously used MS Windows, then wouldn't
> KDE be more appropriate? It might also avoid some of the more controversial
> discussions we've seen here in recent years.

Sure KDE is worthy of consideration as well, my personal favourite is
Gnome-Shell. The point is, it should be a modern Desktop Environment.
Anybody I've showed Gnome-Shell to, likes it. Of course these are folks
that were never exposed to CDE or other dinosaur window shells. :-/

Most folks are going to be using modern laptops and won't be happy with
something out of the 90s as their DE. I'm speaking as a retired person 
too. LOL


-- 
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/20140405022236.GC32650@Jessie

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Stephen Allen]

On Sat, Apr 05, 2014 at 12:36:30AM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> Undefined User  writes:
> 
> > 2014-04-04 19:52 GMT-03:00 Philip Hands :
> >
> >> pointless discussion
> >
> > First of all, great attitude, my friend. It seems like you are a very
> > reasonable person. Second, pointless discussion? So all these people here
> > are just wasting time? Well... What can I say? That's your point of view
> > and I have to respect it.
> 
> Well, I should probably have worded the conditional clause in that
> sentence to make my point more clearly -- i.e.:
> 
>   Given that the options other than XFCE that people are advocating here
>   (Gnome and KDE) don't actually fit on CD#1, there is very little point
>   trying to decide which of them you might want, since you cannot have
>   either of them.
> 
> If you're wondering where the idea that they will no longer fit on CD#1
> came from, it's been a repeating theme on debian-boot, as the packages
> and dependencies have grown over time -- this thread seems to cover the
> subject pretty well, if you read all of it (there's quite a lot of it
> though):
> 
>   https://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2013/05/msg00684.html
> 
> As for my grumpy tone, I apologise for that -- it probably comes from
> the several voluminous threads on debian-devel recently spouting drivel
> about systemd which I may have unfairly associated with this thread.

These days why bother with CDs at all - simply use DVDs? Too many
choices is hard on finite developer resources and really not needed.
IMHO YMMV


-- 
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/20140405022745.GD32650@Jessie

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Thomas Goirand]

On 04/04/2014 09:55 PM, Undefined User wrote:
> 2014-04-04 10:52 GMT-03:00 Jonathan Dowland  >:
> 
> We go over the same ground over and over. I'm increasingly in favour
> of *no*
> default. You must pick one from a list on install. Randomize the list if
> necessary.
> Perfect solution.
> 
> Debian installer should provide you information about desktop
> environments and let the user choose it.

There's only one problem with this approach: somebody has to actually
implement it... [1]

Thomas

[1] And it's been years we're (uselessly) discussing it.


-- 
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/533f8cc0.6010...@debian.org

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Thomas Goirand]

On 04/04/2014 10:42 PM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 02:52:41PM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
>> We go over the same ground over and over. I'm increasingly in favour of *no*
>> default. You must pick one from a list on install. Randomize the list if
>> necessary.
> 
> And can I pass my granddad's phone call on to you when he is stuck
> choosing among names that are absolutely obscure to him like "GNOME",
> "Xfce", and "KDE"?

If we are the universal OS, we shouldn't just focus on non-experts, we
shall try to satisfy everyone. If someone implements the choice thing
(after years we're talking about, I still have hope...), then it's
probably a good thing to keep it in the expert mode only. Which of
course leads to: we still have a default to decide, in the case of the
non-expert mode.

Then, maybe a GR for deciding which DE should be the default could be
considered. It's not like the init system: I think every DD has enough
knowledge to decide, especially because this is a very subjective choice
with tastes and habits involved (TWM anyone? :)). I'm not sure I would
like to take the burden of being the person proposing the GR and writing
the text though, and I would prefer to first discuss if it is a good
idea to do that (some may very dislike that idea).

Thomas Goirand (zigo)


-- 
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/533f8f6a.5000...@debian.org

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Gunnar Wolf]

John Holland dijo [Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 07:27:11PM -0400]:
> How about something completely different: Enlinghtenment?
> 
> No, I'm not kidding

If we are offering users something different, we should go for
technical excellence. And I have never seen a group where tiling
window managers are more favored than Debian. We have to teach our
users how to be more productive, and how to make themselves more
unique. So, I suggest we ship a desktop consisting of:

- Window manager: i3
- File browser: urxvt
- Photo viewer: caca-utils
- Web browser: lynx
- Mail client: mutt
- Instant messenger: irssi
- Productivity suite: emacs
- Music app: supercollider
- Media player: mplayer (on libcaca, of course)

(TBH, I am a regular user of most of those packages, and in fact most
of the time I'm using only that plus two "X-native" applictions)


-- 
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/20140405052232.gc86...@gwolf.org

Re: Debian default desktop environment

[Stephen Gran]

This one time, at band camp, Thomas Goirand said:
> Then, maybe a GR for deciding which DE should be the default could be
> considered. It's not like the init system: I think every DD has enough
> knowledge to decide, especially because this is a very subjective choice
> with tastes and habits involved (TWM anyone? :)). I'm not sure I would
> like to take the burden of being the person proposing the GR and writing
> the text though, and I would prefer to first discuss if it is a good
> idea to do that (some may very dislike that idea).

Every GR we've had has been divisive and exhausting.  Proposing one for
something as trivial as this makes me sad.

If you don't like something, get involved and fix it.  Legislating
something you are too busy or lazy to spend any time on is not the way
to fix things in Debian.  This is a very tractable problem, and it
should be solvable (and solved) within the team doing the work.

Cheers,
-- 
 -
|   ,''`.Stephen Gran |
|  : :' :sg...@debian.org |
|  `. `'Debian user, admin, and developer |
|`- http://www.debian.org |
 -


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature