Re: Stalls due to insufficient randomness in cloud images
On Mon, 2019-06-03 at 12:44 +, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 01:09:29PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote: > > d-i is using haveged now, and that's working well AFAICS. > > are you sure? #923675 is still open... I'm curious, what about #923675 concerns you? -Jim P.
Re: Debian, so ugly and unwieldy!
On Fri, 2019-06-07 at 17:24 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > This is about GUI appearance and ergonomy. > > I'll concentrate at XFCE, as I consider GNOME3's UI a lost cause Have you tried Cinnamon, it's quite nice and not ugly nor unwieldy. > * people tend to use computers with only limited lighting. Is there any data on that? My experience is different, and I expect it mirrors the experience of a vast number of office workers and students. I do think a healthy discussion is good for Debian UI efforts. -Jim P.
Re: scratch buildds
On June 15, 2019 9:34:19 PM UTC, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: > >afaik the CI runners use k8s to schedule their work, so I think using >the default CI stuff from gitlab requires an architecture supported by >k8s. arm64 is supported and I know that some people cross-compiled k8s >for mips(el?), but I doubt its widely supported. > >Am I missing something? > Gitlab CI uses docker containers. At least that's been my experience with it. -Jim P.
Re: Please stop hating on sysvinit (was Re: do packages depend on lexical order or {daily,weekly,monthly} cron jobs?)
On Thu, 2019-08-08 at 13:47 +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote: > So, just to clarify… so, it’s ok to hate systemd, but it’s > not ok to hate sysvinit (spaghetti of shell scripts)? > One has a spaghetti of shell scripts, the other has a kimchi of log commands and hidden config files. I think "out of sight, out of mind" comes into play here. -Jim P.
Re: [OT] /etc/machine-id "must not be exposed in untrusted environments"
On Thu, 2019-08-08 at 15:20 -0400, Marvin Renich wrote: > This is related to the thread Generating new IDs for cloning, but is > probably OT for this list. I guess this is really a question for > systemd maintainers? Should I file a bug? > > The man page for machine-id says: > > This ID uniquely identifies the host. It should be considered > "confidential", and must not be exposed in untrusted environments, in > particular on the network. > > Why is the file mode 0666? Does it need to be non-root readable? Mine is 0444, so that Chrome can read it. /s -Jim P.
Re: should Debian add itself to https://python3statement.org ?
On Thu, 2019-09-12 at 16:01 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Drew Parsons writes ("should Debian add itself to
> https://python3statement.org ?"):
> > https://python3statement.org/ is a site documenting the projects which
> > are supporting the policy of dropping Python2 to keep Python3 only.
>
> That statement is a *pledge* to drop support for python2 by the end of
> 2020.
FWIW, that proposed ending date is 2020-01-01, ~110 days from now.
-Jim P.
Re: should Debian add itself to https://python3statement.org ?
On Thu, 2019-09-12 at 16:14 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Jim Popovitch writes ("Re: should Debian add itself to
> https://python3statement.org ?"):
> > On Thu, 2019-09-12 at 16:01 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > > Drew Parsons writes ("should Debian add itself to
> > > https://python3statement.org ?"):
> > > > https://python3statement.org/ is a site documenting the projects which
> > > > are supporting the policy of dropping Python2 to keep Python3 only.
> > >
> > > That statement is a *pledge* to drop support for python2 by the end of
> > > 2020.
> >
> > FWIW, that proposed ending date is 2020-01-01, ~110 days from now.
>
> It says
>
> | the following projects have pledged to drop support for Python 2.7
> | no later than 2020, coinciding with the Python development team's
> | timeline for dropping support for Python 2.7.
>
> which is rather ambiguous.
I agree, that site seems, by-design, to avoid the obvious issue that the
Python Developers have stated (in lots of places) that they will stop
supporting Python 2x on 2020-01-10 (search for "python2 eol")
> If we do interpret it to mean 2020-01-01, I doubt there is any
> realistic chance of us making that, even if we decide we want to.
I agree, it's a time waster to even try. The issue really comes down
to: will DDs support python2 security releases through bullseye's eol.
-Jim P.
Re: proposal: dhcpcd-base as standard DHCP client starting with Trixie
On Thu, 2023-06-22 at 20:51 +0200, Philipp Kern wrote: > On 22.06.23 16:03, Marco d'Itri wrote: > > > TBH time is too short to manually provision IP addresses on servers. > IP addresses are just one of many things that can be instantiated by /etc/network/interfaces, /etc/network/interfaces.d/, and /etc/netplan/whatever.yaml. Will dhcpcd-base provision an IP address for a one interface and not interfere with any existing interfaces or routes (e.g. bridged interfaces, static VPN routes, containers, etc.) -Jim P.
Re: Running "mobius actioncam/dashcam" on debian "officially" - Creation of a necessary official debian-package?
On Thu, 2018-08-23 at 13:50 +0200, Andreas Jakowidis wrote: > Running "mobius actioncam/dashcam" on debian "officially" - Creation > of a necessary official debian-package? Hello! The mobius cam is great, excellent quality for the price! I have one and it's so small and easy to use that I often forget it's there recording my driving. There is no way to configured it (change audio, video formats, flip video, etc) under Linux, HOWEVER, once you do make config chagnes you can connect it to Debian as a media device and download the files. Tbh, the only config change that I had to make to mine was to flip the video because my cam mounts from the top, behind the center mirror. -Jim P.
