date:20141013

On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 02:48:55PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Oct 2014 19:02:08 +0100 Martin Read  wrote:
> > On 12/10/14 18:13, John Hasler wrote:
> > > You have no problem with an 1800 line function?
...
> > I have a problem with 1800 line functions in general; 
...
> I have no problem with an 1800 line function.
...

*What* 1800 line function? The commit URI that was shared was an 1894-line
*file* with a large function definition starting at line 638 and ending at
1890. That's a 1252-line function.

Not only that but you're looking at a commit dating from August last year. The
function doesn't even exist any more in current systemd[1]. There are no
functions of even a 100 lines length in that file now.

[1] http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/systemd/tree/src/core/dbus-manager.c

> What I *DO* have a problem with is the guy's welding pam onto his new init,
> and welding other critical and former separate OS functionalities onto his
> "toolset", preventing (either technically or by them being removed from the
> packages) former modules from being used.

Which guy is that? The commit that the URI referenced was written by Lennart
Poettering, so I guess you mean him; but that commit didn't touch the file that
was being complained about. Maybe you mean one of the other 17 people who have
contributed to that file?

> If I were to maintain his code, before reducing the 1800 line function, I'd
> do something about the function with 20 arguments, with each argument
> including a function call. I'd replace all of that with a struct pointer. 

I'd start with *reading the code* if I were you; something you guys clearly
aren't doing.

But if you get past that you'll be pleased to discover that such clean ups and
refactors are happening quite often. See e.g.
df2d202e6ed4001a21c6512c244acad5d4706c87 ("bus: let's simplify things by
getting rid of unnecessary bus parameters"). I'll leave you to guess the author
of that one.

-- 
Jonathan Dowland

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013071857.gc14...@chew.redmars.org

Re: alternative file systems

2014-10-13 Thread Reco

On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 03:33:15AM +0200, lee wrote:
> > A correct guess. A recommended minimum is kernel 3.14 - [2].
> 
> So this is a rather new feature.  How reliable and how well does it
> work?

I wouldn't trust my data to that feature :) It has 'experimental' and
'biohazard' labels strapped everywhere.
I prefer trusty mdadm for any RAID.

> > But, ZFS won't allow you to make a conventional RAID5 either :)
> 
> I know --- and I don't require RAID-5.  What I require is what RAID-5
> provides, i. e. redundancy without wasting as many disks as other RAID
> levels.  I also like the better performance of hardware RAID compared to
> software RAID.  IIRC, ZFS would provide efficient redundancy and be
> safer than a RAID controller because of it's checksumming.  I'd have to
> try it out to see what kind of performance degradation or gain it would
> bring about.

A real story. A recent one, a couple of weeks fresh.
One shop buys *very* expensive Sun SuperCluster T4 with Solaris 11 and,
of course, ZFS. Configures a couple of LDOMs on it. So far, so good.
And then - it happens. A simple oversight - they filled up to 100% one
of LDOMs' root zpool.
They say that is should not happen, yet I've seen it with my own eyes -
ZFS happily ate (i.e. they disappeared without a trace) a couple of
shared libraries, rendering some basic OS utilities unusable.
So, what good was those magical ZFS checksums did?

> >> They need to get these license issues fixed ...
> >
> > Back in the old days CDDL was chosen by Sun especially so that
> > this license issue would *never* be fixed.
> > Currently Oracle could re-license ZFS to anything they want, including
> > GPL-compatible license, but why would *they* do it?
> 
> Why don't they?

Simple - they sell servers based on Solaris as storage appliances (and
they nearly 10 years behind ZFS on Linux as far as ZFS is concerned). Who
will buy these servers if the same can be achieved with cheap Linux
server? Oracle is greedy.

REco

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013073908.ga25...@d1696.int.rdtex.ru

Re: Network fails on headless system. I'm stuck!

On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 02:42:52PM +0200, JPT wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I have an ARM hardware (ReadyNAS rn104) running debian jessie (testing).
> kernel is selfbuilt 3.16.3
> 
> Since a few days the system fails to boot. Serial console breaks at a
> point where it is fiddling with disks and network.
> Networking is not yet up. So I don't have any way to access the headless
> system.
> 
> I suspect an update in the networking scripts or systemd.
> Could you please add a warning if a basic system library gets replaced
> by a version that requires additional kernel features? The last time I
> ran into a problem is only a few months ago.

As you should know, testing is a work in progress. You are a brave man
running testing on a headless server! 

-- 
"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-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013074608.GM22545@tal

Re: [exim4] mixed up about terminology

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 11:24 AM, lee  wrote:
> Jerry Stuckle  writes:
>
>> Among other things, legitimate MTAs have MX records.  Anti-spam routines
>
> Who prevents a MUA from having an MX record and sending a HELO that
> matches the RDNS entry?  And what are these "other things" you're
> referring to?

MX record? Recorded in the domain name servers? When the sender is a
bot with an ephemeral MTA/MUA?

Hmm. Yeah, it can be done. Patient and careful use of free dynamic DNS
services, or DNS poisoning. Temporary and slow.

But the more you make the junkmailers work for their money, the more
they switch to legitimate work.

-- 
Joel Rees

Be careful when you see conspiracy.
Look first in your own heart,
and ask yourself if you are not your own worst enemy.
Arm yourself with knowledge of yourself.

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/caar43inryoejfasuzzp_wjxlhqch_wgsa+mgavga4ovdnxv...@mail.gmail.com

About chromium in Jessie - "API keys missing" and Clang

2014-10-13 Thread Florent Peterschmitt

Hello,

I'm curious about two thing in the chromium browser package in Debian
Jessie:

 - I (we?) get a message about Chromium API keys missing. Does that
avoid Chromium being able to speak with google for sync and so on? (If
yes, it's a good idea, for me)

 - In the changelog, I don't see anything about that, but I see "build
with clang instead of gcc". Does this augurs some packages being built
with clang in Debian, or it is just for Chromium?


Thanks

-- 
Florent Peterschmitt   | Please:
flor...@peterschmitt.fr|  * Avoid HTML/RTF in E-mail.
http://florent.peterschmitt.fr |  * Send PDF for documents.
Proudly powered by FLOSS   |  * Trim your quotations. Really.
   | Thank you :)



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)

2014-10-13 Thread Andrew McGlashan

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

On 13/10/2014 9:04 AM, lee wrote:
> Bas Wijnen  writes:
>>> Considering that the users are Debians' priority, couldn't this
>>> issue be a case in which significant concerns from/of the users
>>> about an issue might initiate a GR?
>> 
>> No. Debian is a very elitist organization.  The members decide
>> what to do, and nobody else does.  As a whole we rule over our
>> users with enlightened absolutism.  The main difference with
>> rulers of countries is that our users can go away more easily.
>> ;-)
>> 
>> Debian is extremely democratic for its members, but it is
>> utterly undemocratic for its users.  And there's nothing wrong
>> with that, IMO.
> 
> Then they shouldn't say in their social contract that the users
> and their needs are the priority.

Touche.

> There can be many reasons for why there hasn't been a GR.  Some of
> these may be that the devs/maintainers don't really care about the
> init system, or that they aren't aware of how far-reaching this
> issue is.

Absolutely, 2000+ posts since the decision... and that's just posts
with systemd in the subject line -- it's not 1000+

This is a much more far-reaching issue than many understand, it only
started as an init system replace.  The systemd people want to make a
"real operating system" out of this and the level of over reach is
amazing, their evil plan gets legs when DDs don't understand the scope
either as users, sysadmins or just as developers.  Unfortunately, it
seems that the DDs can't see the bigger picture or there is just far
too much apathy to deal with the problem that they've allowed to creep
in to place.

> I think I don't need to convince 6 people on this list because
> there are already enough people convinced.

If 6 or even 60 can't come forward now, that re-enforces the fact that
they aren't taking this issue seriously -- non DD users and sysadmins
don't count, not even those with a long history of supporting Debian
without being DDs.

A.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)

iF4EAREIAAYFAlQ7h9kACgkQqBZry7fv4vvHoQEAzBKeYOLkgZqiX6sbEL/UmxOe
29qiFA0iKsak2Cur0qoBAKa4rqnfL5ADjzlaDB/tMngtOdKMToV28zWEqIF8uswY
=tY8x
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/543b87db.7050...@affinityvision.com.au

Re: About chromium in Jessie - "API keys missing" and Clang

2014-10-13 Thread Martin Steigerwald

Hi Florent,

Am Montag, 13. Oktober 2014, 09:43:40 schrieb Florent Peterschmitt:
> Hello,
> 
> I'm curious about two thing in the chromium browser package in Debian
> Jessie:
> 
>  - I (we?) get a message about Chromium API keys missing. Does that
> avoid Chromium being able to speak with google for sync and so on? (If
> yes, it's a good idea, for me)

A quick search of "chromium google api key problem" in startpage turns up

https://bugs.debian.org/748867

And here is what works for me:

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=748867#117

So at least sometimes a search machine can help you to help yourself quickly.

Ciao,
-- 
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA  B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7

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

Re: MTAs denying messages (was: Re: Moderated posts?)

On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 10:24:28 +0900
Joel Rees  wrote:

> 
> I have an e-mail address my ISP gave me. Back almost twenty years ago,
> when the internet was still a bit safe for naive use, I put my
> isp-provided e-mail address in my home page. For the last fifteen
> years, I've had to periodically clear that mailbox of junkmail, a
> thousand in a week at the worst times, down to about a hundred a week
> now.

It does vary a bit. That address above has been my main one for fifteen
years, used widely on Usenet and elsewhere. About three spams a day (at
the moment) make it past my mail server, which is very aggressive,
with typically a few hundred rejections a day. My record was about ten
years ago, over 12,000 bogus attempts in 24 hours, the average in that
period was probably about 1,500/day. I have a script that counts various
rejection reasons...

> 
> I'd change the address, but a junkmail magnet is actually an
> interesting resource.

I *use* the address. Partly I was curious about whether all this
mucking about with posted email addresses was really necessary, and
whether publishing a real address was practical. I was prepared to
give it up and fall back to others if that was necessary. My conclusion
is that it is practical, but only if you run your own mail server.
Spamassassin and other content filtering just doesn't hack it, it's an
arms race out there and I got fed up constantly refining rules and still
dropping the odd real email.
> 
> Every now and then, I still get a spate of junkmail there, where the
> to: field has a long list of semi-random na...@isp.tld . I know those
> names are bogus because I know there are not that many users at this
> isp who have registered themselves with English names. Rather amusing.
> 
> What are the junkmailers doing? Shotgun mailing the isp with possible
> user names.
> 
> If the isp responds with a code that says my user-id is valid, the
> junk mailer knows he has a live address.
> 

I don't think so, I think it's all NDR spam. I don't see enough real
attempts at dictionary attacks. I see the same dozen names tried day
after day, even hour after hour, and most of the non-repeated names are
just random letter strings that could never be real email names. The
actual published address gets one to two dozen bogus connections a
day, none of the other genuine recipients get more than one or two a
week. The intention is that the spam emails be accepted by a catch-all
domain-wide mail server, then later bounced by the one that holds the
mailboxes and knows the addresses are invalid. If the authoritative
mail server for the domain knows the genuine recipients, it doesn't
work, and that's the biggest single anti-spam measure possible.

-- 
Joe

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013092145.31179...@jresid.jretrading.com

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)

Hi,

lee:
> I'm sure we could find quite a few supporters for having a GR amongst
> the users (here).

We don't do a GR among our users. We do that among Debian
members/maintainers/developers/take-your-pick.

Of those, most …
* are perfectly happy with the TC's decision
* can live with it
* are unhappy, but think that to continue discussing this is way worse
  than biting the bullet and getting on with actual work
  * you do know that we plan to release Jessie sometime this decade,
right?
* are disillusioned about it all and decided to stand aside

Judging by the last couple of months, the rest appears to number <6 people.

-- 
-- Matthias Urlichs


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [exim4] Testing and making sense of smtp output

On Sun 12 Oct 2014 at 15:42:49 -0400, Harry Putnam wrote:

> Jonathan Dowland  writes:
> 
> > On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 02:45:44PM -0400, Harry Putnam wrote:
> >> > And if so, is that not acquired from /etc/hosts?
> > snip
> >> Egad ...  I just noticed that was from a different machine... but the
> >> format is the same on all of mine.  So still should stand as something
> >> to critique/
> >
> > Debian's exim4 will take the contents of /etc/mailname over the dns name by
> > default. I'd recommend putting the fqdn that you want exim to use there.
> 
> OK that is very good tip to know about.

Please read about "System mail name" in exim's README.Debian.gz and look
at mailname(5). The HELO used has nothing to do with /etc/mailname.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/1310201411.2f97ddcd6...@desktop.copernicus.demon.co.uk

Re: Prolem with external monitor

2014-10-13 Thread Bret Busby

On 13/10/2014, Bret Busby  wrote:
> On 12/10/2014, Andrei POPESCU  wrote:
>> On Sb, 11 oct 14, 23:09:20, Bret Busby wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Definitely, I'm using my TV as external monitor sometimes. Could you
>>> > please attach your Xorg.0.log? Inlining works as well if you take care
>>> > not to break long lines.
>>>
>>> What is the path to that file?
>>
>> /var/log/Xorg.0.log
>>
>
>
> This is the first attemt to send that file as an attachment.
>
> If the file is not attached, then the attempt has failed.
>
>

And, from Ubuntu 14.04.1 LTS, which I have now installed (and found
difficult to use), in which I have managed to get all output to a
display, directed to only the external monitor, a copy of the file is
attached.

-- 
Bret Busby
Armadale
West Australia
..

"So once you do know what the question actually is,
 you'll know what the answer means."
- Deep Thought,
 Chapter 28 of Book 1 of
 "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy:
 A Trilogy In Four Parts",
 written by Douglas Adams,
 published by Pan Books, 1992


[33.338] 
X.Org X Server 1.15.1
Release Date: 2014-04-13
[33.338] X Protocol Version 11, Revision 0
[33.338] Build Operating System: Linux 3.2.0-61-generic x86_64 Ubuntu
[33.338] Current Operating System: Linux bret-Aspire-V3-772 3.13.0-37-generic #64-Ubuntu SMP Mon Sep 22 21:28:38 UTC 2014 x86_64
[33.338] Kernel command line: BOOT_IMAGE=/boot/vmlinuz-3.13.0-37-generic root=UUID=b96339a3-179e-4891-972e-658d35c454a6 ro quiet splash vt.handoff=7
[33.338] Build Date: 30 July 2014  12:21:54AM
[33.338] xorg-server 2:1.15.1-0ubuntu2.1 (For technical support please see http://www.ubuntu.com/support) 
[33.338] Current version of pixman: 0.30.2
[33.338] 	Before reporting problems, check http://wiki.x.org
	to make sure that you have the latest version.
[33.338] Markers: (--) probed, (**) from config file, (==) default setting,
	(++) from command line, (!!) notice, (II) informational,
	(WW) warning, (EE) error, (NI) not implemented, (??) unknown.
[33.338] (==) Log file: "/var/log/Xorg.0.log", Time: Mon Oct 13 16:46:58 2014
[33.369] (==) Using system config directory "/usr/share/X11/xorg.conf.d"
[33.370] (==) No Layout section.  Using the first Screen section.
[33.370] (==) No screen section available. Using defaults.
[33.370] (**) |-->Screen "Default Screen Section" (0)
[33.370] (**) |   |-->Monitor ""
[33.370] (==) No monitor specified for screen "Default Screen Section".
	Using a default monitor configuration.
[33.370] (==) Automatically adding devices
[33.370] (==) Automatically enabling devices
[33.370] (==) Automatically adding GPU devices
[33.370] (WW) The directory "/usr/share/fonts/X11/cyrillic" does not exist.
[33.370] 	Entry deleted from font path.
[33.370] (WW) The directory "/usr/share/fonts/X11/100dpi/" does not exist.
[33.370] 	Entry deleted from font path.
[33.370] (WW) The directory "/usr/share/fonts/X11/75dpi/" does not exist.
[33.370] 	Entry deleted from font path.
[33.370] (WW) The directory "/usr/share/fonts/X11/100dpi" does not exist.
[33.370] 	Entry deleted from font path.
[33.370] (WW) The directory "/usr/share/fonts/X11/75dpi" does not exist.
[33.370] 	Entry deleted from font path.
[33.370] (==) FontPath set to:
	/usr/share/fonts/X11/misc,
	/usr/share/fonts/X11/Type1,
	built-ins
[33.370] (==) ModulePath set to "/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/xorg/extra-modules,/usr/lib/xorg/extra-modules,/usr/lib/xorg/modules"
[33.370] (II) The server relies on udev to provide the list of input devices.
	If no devices become available, reconfigure udev or disable AutoAddDevices.
[33.370] (II) Loader magic: 0x7f42ed780d40
[33.370] (II) Module ABI versions:
[33.370] 	X.Org ANSI C Emulation: 0.4
[33.370] 	X.Org Video Driver: 15.0
[33.370] 	X.Org XInput driver : 20.0
[33.370] 	X.Org Server Extension : 8.0
[33.370] (II) xfree86: Adding drm device (/dev/dri/card1)
[33.370] (II) xfree86: Adding drm device (/dev/dri/card0)
[33.371] (--) PCI:*(0:0:2:0) 8086:0416:1025:0781 rev 6, Mem @ 0xd300/4194304, 0xc000/268435456, I/O @ 0x5000/64
[33.371] (--) PCI: (0:1:0:0) 10de:0fe4:1025:0781 rev 161, Mem @ 0xd200/16777216, 0xa000/268435456, 0xb000/33554432, I/O @ 0x4000/128, BIOS @ 0x/524288
[33.371] Initializing built-in extension Generic Event Extension
[33.371] Initializing built-in extension SHAPE
[33.371] Initializing built-in extension MIT-SHM
[33.371] Initializing built-in extension XInputExtension
[33.371] Initializing built-in extension XTEST
[33.371] Initializing built-in extension BIG-REQUESTS
[33.371] Initializing built-in extension SYNC
[33.371] Initializing built-in extension XKEYBOARD
[33.371] Initializing built-in extension XC-MISC
[33.371] Initializing built-in extension SECURITY
[33.371] Initializi

Re: Network fails on headless system. I'm stuck!

2014-10-13 Thread Lisi Reisz

On Sunday 12 October 2014 13:42:52 JPT wrote:
> any idea what the problem is, and how to solve?

Those with better heads than I will help you with this, but why on earth at 
this time are you running Jessie headless?  Surely, if you need to run 
headless, it would be more sensible to use Wheezy until things have settled 
down?

(And the 7077 of you who use Jessie, headless, satisfactorily, fine.  You like 
to live dangerously!  But Jan obviously doesn't.)

Lisi


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/201410131008.15145.lisi.re...@gmail.com

Re: Newbie friendly security and firewall docs (cookbook?)

On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 03:20:27PM +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> Quite.  It is ALL there.  I keep hoping that something will be the basics for 
> beginners (which is where we started on this thread).  Teaching notes for 
> college sounded great. 

Also have a read of this:
http://www.debian-administration.org/article/552/Are_firewalls_useful

-- 
"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-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013091129.GN22545@tal

Re: Problem with external monitor

2014-10-13 Thread Bret Busby

On 13/10/2014, Bret Busby  wrote:
> On 10/10/2014, Bret Busby  wrote:
>> This will probably show as a new thread, due to me correcting a
>> spelling error in the Subject field of the message.
>>
>> On 08/10/2014, Joe  wrote:
>>> On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 15:23:55 +0800
>>> Bret Busby  wrote:
>>>
 Hello.

 I have a 23" monitor, that I want to use with two of my laptop
 computers (not at the same time).

 I have a 15" laptop, with an i3 CPU, running Debian 6 LTS and GNOME2.

 With the external monitor connected and switched on, upon bootup, the
 external monitor is automatically operational, and, replaces the
 laptop display.

 That is good.

 The other laptop has a 17" display and an i7CPU, and is running Debian
 7.x and LXDE.

 With that laptop, with the external monitor connected and switched on,
 upon boot up and during a boot session, the external monitor does not
 work, and, is apparently not visible to the computer. The laptop
 display is operational, and no signal appears to be going from the
 laptop. Synaptic shows lxrandr to be installed, but the exernal
 monitor is not detected.

 In Preferences -> Monitors, only one monitor is shown; the laptop
 display.

 I also tried logging in to a GNOME Classic session, but got the same
 result.

 Both scenario's involve the use od a VGA cable and connection to the
 VGA socket on each of the respective laptops. That it is using the
 supplied VGA cable, and not aDVI or HDMI cable, is not a problem for
 me, as I find the resolution to be good enough for me.

 How do I get the external monitor to be detected, and, work, with the
 Debian7/LXDE system?

>>>
>>> Something I would suggest you try soon is a different model of external
>>> monitor. If you spend weeks fiddling about with drivers and then find
>>> the VGA socket on this laptop simply doesn't work, you will feel
>>> foolish, trust me on this.
>>>
>>> Something else to try would be booting up a live CD of a more
>>> commercial kind, such as Ubuntu or preferably Knoppix, to find out:
>>> a) if it works
>>> b) if so, what drivers it is using
>>>
>>> Is the external monitor going into standby, by the way? I have an old
>>> laptop and know of someone else's monitor which simply doesn't work
>>> with it. The laptop VGA circuits want to see an active monitor
>>> connected before they will power up, and the monitor wants to see a
>>> live signal before it will come out of standby, or avoid going into
>>> standby from switch-on... I haven't found any combination of switch-on
>>> time and plugging that will actually allow them to work together,
>>> though I presume there is a window of a few microseconds when they
>>> would find each other. The laptop is fine with other monitors, the
>>> monitor with other laptops.
>>>
>>
>> I have downloaded Ubuntu 14.04.1 LTS amd64 iso, and tried that.
>>
>> One interesting observation, is that, with the 15" laptop running
>> Debian 6 LTS, on bootup, all video output goes to the external monitor
>> (and to only that monitor), and, with the 17" laptop running Debian 7
>> (and then Ubuntu 14.04.1 LTS), the ACER spalsh screen and the BIOS
>> screen, go toonly the laptop monitor.
>>
>> That made me wonder whether either the BIOS or the graphics card,
>> could not deal with the external monitor.
>>
>> However, with Unbuntu 14.04.1 LTS, which took 10-15 minutes (on an i7
>> CPU with 32GM RAM) to boot, the output started to appear on the
>> external monitor, after the weird double icon with the equal sign at
>> the bottom of the screen, so I got the Ubuntu word, with the simulated
>> LED flashing things (a fake progree bar) appearing on both screens.
>>
>> At the end of the bootup, I have on the external monitor, a workspace
>> (?) with a panel/taskbar, and no icons on the desktop, and, on the
>> laptop display, I have a workspace with the dialogue box or window,
>> with the Welcome thing, with the options to select the languge, and to
>> select "Try Ubuntu" or "Install Ubuntu".
>>
>> In selecting "Try Ubuntu", I get a desktop on each of the two screens;
>> the one on the external monitor does not have the two icons "Examples"
>> and "Install Ubuntu 14.04.1 LTS", whereas the display on the laptop
>> does include those two icons.
>>
>> I can not find how to get the pointer off the laptop display and on to
>> the external monitor.
>>
>> In selecting (on the laptop display), the System Settings -> Displays,
>> I get both monitors displayed.
>>
>> When I select , for "Built In Display", "Off", the laptop display goes
>> off, for a short period, and all control goes to the external monitor,
>> and then the laptop display comes back on, with the pointer and the
>> "Launcher" (?)icons, all on the external monitor.
>>
>> After shuuting down the live session of Ubuntu 14.04.1.LTS and then
>> booting up Debian 7, to find whether the booting into Ubuntu, had

Re: [exim4] Testing and making sense of smtp output

On Mon 13 Oct 2014 at 04:06:27 +0200, lee wrote:

> Harry Putnam  writes:
> 
> > lee  writes:
> >
> > [...] 
> >
> > Thanks for the tips.
> >
> >>>   SMTP>> EHLO 2xd
> >
> >> That's an invalid helo string.
> >
> > Is a valid one made up of just the full fqdn?
> 
> See https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2821#section-4.1.1.1
> 
> It says to either use the fqdn or, if not possible, an IP
> literal. However, it's common practise to deny IP addresses in HELO
> greatings.

An address literal is not the same as an IP address. An MTA should not
be rejecting mail on the basis that the HELO is an address literal.

It's probably academic what the HELO is most of the time. Many ISPs
will accept any old rubbish for it.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/13102014102003.9a7a2cc70...@desktop.copernicus.demon.co.uk

Re: [exim4] Testing and making sense of smtp output

On Mon 13 Oct 2014 at 04:12:04 +0200, lee wrote:

> Jonathan Dowland  writes:
> 
> > On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 02:45:44PM -0400, Harry Putnam wrote:
> >> > And if so, is that not acquired from /etc/hosts?
> > snip
> >> Egad ...  I just noticed that was from a different machine... but the
> >> format is the same on all of mine.  So still should stand as something
> >> to critique/
> >
> > Debian's exim4 will take the contents of /etc/mailname over the dns name by
> > default. I'd recommend putting the fqdn that you want exim to use there.
> 
> You can also specify it in exims' configuration.  Unless you do have
> good reason to do so, I'd advise against it and let exim use the host
> name (which the automatic configuration which I don't exactly recommend
> hopefully lets exim use unless you tell it otherwise).

The HELO cannot be specified using dpkg-reconfigure. It is taken from
/etc/hosts.

/etc/mailname can be specified with dpkg-reconfigure. It is not the best
of ideas to leave it blank.

There is no connection between /etc/mailname and the HELO.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013092602.gd17...@copernicus.demon.co.uk

Re: react on power button press

2014-10-13 Thread Darac Marjal

On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 02:48:26PM +0200, JPT wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I just wrote to the list because of a problem with the network.
> The only way left to shutdown the system is pressing the power button.
> 
> But this doesn't work either:
> 
> Oct 11 13:24:24 NAS kernel: [ 5309.790075] evbug: Event. Dev: input0,
> Type: 1, Code: 116, Value: 1
> Oct 11 13:24:24 NAS kernel: [ 5309.790090] evbug: Event. Dev: input0,
> Type: 0, Code: 0, Value: 0
> Oct 11 13:24:24 NAS kernel: [ 5310.060077] evbug: Event. Dev: input0,
> Type: 1, Code: 116, Value: 0
> Oct 11 13:24:24 NAS kernel: [ 5310.060091] evbug: Event. Dev: input0,
> Type: 0, Code: 0, Value: 0
> 
> Currently I am using https://github.com/gandro/input-event-daemon

You shouldn't normally need that. Most PCs these days implement ACPI,
part of which is to emit an event on the press of a power button
(there's also events for sleep buttons, lid open/close etc, but that's
beside the point right now).

If you install acpi-support-base, you will get scripts installed that
react to the power button an initiate a shutdown. These scripts will
work regardless of how many people are logged on (if none, a shutdown
will happen. If one, they'll be asked if they want to shut down, reboot,
logout etc. I'm not sure what happens if several people are logged in).

> to react on these buttons. This usually works. But I believe it does not
> work if nobody is logged in. (which is difficult to achieve with a
> headless system where network and serial console fail)
> 
> Do you habe any idea how to solve this?
> 
> thanks,
> 
> Jan
> 
> 
> ps. I did not subscribe to the list. Please CC me.
> 
> 
> -- 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
> Archive: https://lists.debian.org/543a789a.2030...@gmx.net
> 

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [exim4] mixed up about terminology

On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 07:32:40 +0100
Jonathan Dowland  wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 09:05:14PM -0400, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> > Among other things, legitimate MTAs have MX records.
> 
> Not necessarily. In the absence of an MX record an A record is
> perfectly legitimate.
> 
> 

And as I've pointed out to Jerry, a lot of businesses outsource their
incoming email to commercial spam-cleaning services, as well as larger
businesses using separate send and receive servers, and some businesses
receiving email direct but sending via a smarthost. In each of these
cases, the MX would not necessarily have any connection with the
mail sending address. My IP address A-PTR record pair have no direct
connection with any of the email domains I use, with any MX, or any HELO
strings I send.

There's no one size fitting all with email. Heck, some people use
Yahoo...

-- 
Joe

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013104300.2f2ff...@jresid.jretrading.com

Re: [exim4] Testing and making sense of smtp output

On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 10:25:37 +0100
Brian  wrote:

> On Mon 13 Oct 2014 at 04:06:27 +0200, lee wrote:
> 
> > Harry Putnam  writes:
> > 
> > > lee  writes:
> > >
> > > [...] 
> > >
> > > Thanks for the tips.
> > >
> > >>>   SMTP>> EHLO 2xd
> > >
> > >> That's an invalid helo string.
> > >
> > > Is a valid one made up of just the full fqdn?
> > 
> > See https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2821#section-4.1.1.1
> > 
> > It says to either use the fqdn or, if not possible, an IP
> > literal. However, it's common practise to deny IP addresses in HELO
> > greatings.
> 
> An address literal is not the same as an IP address. An MTA should not
> be rejecting mail on the basis that the HELO is an address literal.
> 
> It's probably academic what the HELO is most of the time. Many ISPs
> will accept any old rubbish for it.
> 
> 

The routine exim4 HELO test is disabled by default, but simply checks
that it is a hostname which can be resolved in public DNS. I enable it,
and so do a lot of others. It is by default enabled in Exchange, which
is in widespread use, and I've seen an Exchange server reject an email
arriving from a BT server which had a '.local' TLD in its HELO.

-- 
Joe


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013105151.57364...@jresid.jretrading.com

Re: [exim4] Testing and making sense of smtp output

On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 10:26:02 +0100
Brian  wrote:

> On Mon 13 Oct 2014 at 04:12:04 +0200, lee wrote:
> 
> > Jonathan Dowland  writes:
> > 
> > > On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 02:45:44PM -0400, Harry Putnam wrote:
> > >> > And if so, is that not acquired from /etc/hosts?
> > > snip
> > >> Egad ...  I just noticed that was from a different machine...
> > >> but the format is the same on all of mine.  So still should
> > >> stand as something to critique/
> > >
> > > Debian's exim4 will take the contents of /etc/mailname over the
> > > dns name by default. I'd recommend putting the fqdn that you want
> > > exim to use there.
> > 
> > You can also specify it in exims' configuration.  Unless you do have
> > good reason to do so, I'd advise against it and let exim use the
> > host name (which the automatic configuration which I don't exactly
> > recommend hopefully lets exim use unless you tell it otherwise).
> 
> The HELO cannot be specified using dpkg-reconfigure. It is taken from
> /etc/hosts.
> 

Just to clarify slightly further, it can be *explicitly* specified by
editing exim4 config files, which then overrides any implied source,
and with suitable additional work, can be specified differently for
different 'mail from' domains.

-- 
Joe


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013105724.0d41f...@jresid.jretrading.com

Re: Newbie friendly security and firewall docs (cookbook?)

On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 22:11:29 +1300
Chris Bannister  wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 03:20:27PM +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > Quite.  It is ALL there.  I keep hoping that something will be the
> > basics for beginners (which is where we started on this thread).
> > Teaching notes for college sounded great. 
> 
> Also have a read of this:
> http://www.debian-administration.org/article/552/Are_firewalls_useful
> 

A point of view, but a network firewall does tend to do more than just
statefully filter packets. Any DSL router will do that.

There is a point of view that says that Linux laptops using public
wi-fi don't need any firewalling. I don't know enough about security to
say that with any authority, so I use one.

-- 
Joe

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013110512.5d313...@jresid.jretrading.com

Re: Synaptic slow when Caribou is running after Gnome-shell update

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 01:20:39AM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Am 13.10.2014 um 00:21 schrieb Michael Biebl:
> > Am 12.10.2014 um 19:01 schrieb Luca Perico:
> >> Hi
> >> After 3,14 gnome shell update (i use debian jessie) i have see synaptic
> >> p.m, very slow  to show the package list at startup and also when i change
> >> the package list (i.e "all" to "removable" even with a short package list).
> >> If i stop Caribou Synaptic work very good
> >> I have also noted this :
> >> 1) Caribou start even if disabled (i don't use it).
> > 
> > This looks like a bug. Please file a bug report against the caribou package.
> 
> Fwiw, I can reproduce the issue:
> 
> /etc/xdg/autostart/caribou-autostart.desktop contains
> 
> AutostartCondition=GSettings org.gnome.desktop.a11y.applications 
> screen-keyboard-enabled
> 
> 
> $ gsettings get org.gnome.desktop.a11y.applications screen-keyboard-enabled
> false
> 
> 
> Yet caribou is also started here.
> 
> Will investigate.
---end quoted text---

I too had experienced this, seems to be fixed as of yesterday. Thanks
Michael.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013100625.GA3541@Jessie

Re: HTML5 videos in Jessie

On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 07:14:19PM +0200, Proxy wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I just installed Jessie on one of my partitions. Most of the stuff works
> just fine, but I'm having problem playing HTML5 videos on Youtube in
> Iceweasel. I can't even watch webm videos from here:
> http://ftp.acc.umu.se/pub/debian-meetings/2014/debconf14/webm/
> 
> It looks like video is playing in fast forward mode. No such problems in
> Chromium and no problem in Wheezy on another partition. I installed all
> packages that were installed in Wheezy, so I guess that all needed
> codecs are installed. 
> 
> Page at youtube.com/html5 shows that HTMLVideoElement, H.264 and WebM
> VP8 are OK, but Media Source Extensions, MSE & H.264 and MSE & WebM VP9
> are with red exclamation mark.
> 
> Any idea what could be the problem?
> 
---end quoted text---

Yeah probably IceWeasel. ;-D I'd recommend using Google-Chrome, support
for HTML 5 video has been in that browser for some time and works well.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013100758.GB3541@Jessie

Re: About chromium in Jessie - "API keys missing" and Clang

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 09:43:40AM +0200, Florent Peterschmitt wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I'm curious about two thing in the chromium browser package in Debian
> Jessie:
> 
>  - I (we?) get a message about Chromium API keys missing. Does that
> avoid Chromium being able to speak with google for sync and so on? (If
> yes, it's a good idea, for me)
> 
>  - In the changelog, I don't see anything about that, but I see "build
> with clang instead of gcc". Does this augurs some packages being built
> with clang in Debian, or it is just for Chromium?
> 
> 
> Thanks

---end quoted text---

Yeah filed a bug about this a couple of days ago. Wonder why it would be
released in such a sorry state. 


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013101009.GC3541@Jessie

Re: Newbie friendly security and firewall docs (cookbook?)

2014-10-13 Thread Lisi Reisz

On Monday 13 October 2014 10:11:29 Chris Bannister wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 03:20:27PM +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > Quite.  It is ALL there.  I keep hoping that something will be the basics
> > for beginners (which is where we started on this thread).  Teaching notes
> > for college sounded great.
>
> Also have a read of this:
> http://www.debian-administration.org/article/552/Are_firewalls_useful

Thanks, Chris.  Am currently reading my way through the comments.

Lisi


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/201410131112.57041.lisi.re...@gmail.com

Re: How to do this ?

2014-10-13 Thread Darac Marjal

On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 07:51:50PM +0200, Erwan David wrote:
> I want to have a system which boots, and starts a subset of daemons.
> 
> Then afterward I ssh to it, do something which 1) mount an encrypted
> disk, 2) start other daemons (which depends on the encrypted disk).

Personally, I'd look at using libpam-mount to mount the encrypted disk
upon login (it's typically used to do this for /home/$USER, but there's
no reason it shouldn't work for an arbitrary mount point) and then use
your shell's login scripting (.profile or similar) to launch the
daemons.

> 
> I know how to do this with policy-rc.d, how can I do this with systemd ?
> 
> I know this list may not be the best place to ask, feel free to point me
> to another way to get help.
> 
> 
> -- 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
> Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54381cb6.4090...@rail.eu.org
> 


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: About chromium in Jessie - "API keys missing" and Clang

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 10:06:23AM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Hi Florent,
> 
> Am Montag, 13. Oktober 2014, 09:43:40 schrieb Florent Peterschmitt:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > I'm curious about two thing in the chromium browser package in Debian
> > Jessie:
> > 
> >  - I (we?) get a message about Chromium API keys missing. Does that
> > avoid Chromium being able to speak with google for sync and so on? (If
> > yes, it's a good idea, for me)
> 
> A quick search of "chromium google api key problem" in startpage turns up
> 
> https://bugs.debian.org/748867
> 
> And here is what works for me:
> 
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=748867#117
> 
> So at least sometimes a search machine can help you to help yourself quickly.

---end quoted text---

Happy it works for you, doesn't here, unfortunately.

cat /etc/chromium.d/googleapikeys 
cat: /etc/chromium.d/googleapikeys: No such file or directory


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013101342.GD3541@Jessie

Re: implicit linkage

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Jonathan Dowland  wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 02:48:55PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
>> On Sun, 12 Oct 2014 19:02:08 +0100 Martin Read  wrote:
>> > On 12/10/14 18:13, John Hasler wrote:
>> > > You have no problem with an 1800 line function?
> ...
>> > I have a problem with 1800 line functions in general;
> ...
>> I have no problem with an 1800 line function.
> ...
>
> *What* 1800 line function? The commit URI that was shared was an 1894-line
> *file* with a large function definition starting at line 638 and ending at
> 1890. That's a 1252-line function.

mmm? 1800 vs. 1252 ?

30 years ago, when we still read printouts, 60 lines was considered
the ideal max because that's what would fit on a page.

Nowadays, we use a screen, but 60 lines is hard on the eyes (9 pt or
so), so 40 lines is a good screen-full. But it turns out, with being
about to scroll quickly, that 60 lines is still not hard to reach.
Moreover, 60 lines seems to be a pretty good average for what an
experienced coder can keep in his head.

1800/60 vs. 1252/60 ? 30 times the ideal max vs. 21 times? (Ignoring,
for the sake of your argument, those macros.)

Well, maybe we can look at things from the perspective of new
functionality. New functionality sometimes breaks rules just because
you need to get things in there and going before you can start
figuring out where and how to cut things.

Okay, that repository only goes back to April 2012:

http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/systemd/log/src/core?ofs=1350

at the time of this post. (Give it a month or two, and that link won't
go all the way back anymore.)

The function in question at that point began at line 545 and ended at line 1540.

http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/systemd/tree/src/core/dbus-manager.c?id=b30e2f4c18ad81b04e4314fd191a5d458553773c#n545

That's 996 lines, including the closing brace. Plus-minus one, it's
not going to change much. 16.67 times the ideal max, and, for more
than a year, it just got bigger until some time after a year ago
August. We might assume that non-project people critiquing his code
lit a fire under him.

> Not only that but you're looking at a commit dating from August last year. The
> function doesn't even exist any more in current systemd[1]. There are no
> functions of even a 100 lines length in that file now.
>
> [1] http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/systemd/tree/src/core/dbus-manager.c

A quick scan shows a few over the ideal, but the ideal really is an
ideal target. So it would actually be reasonable now, in terms of
length. If it were not pid 1 code.

At least those macros seem to have been replaced with something less fragile.

>> What I *DO* have a problem with is the guy's welding pam onto his new init,
>> and welding other critical and former separate OS functionalities onto his
>> "toolset", preventing (either technically or by them being removed from the
>> packages) former modules from being used.
>
> Which guy is that? The commit that the URI referenced was written by Lennart
> Poettering, so I guess you mean him; but that commit didn't touch the file 
> that
> was being complained about. Maybe you mean one of the other 17 people who have
> contributed to that file?

You do understand that Steve is simply refusing to keep focused on one
file? (I don't blame him. That one file is not the sum and end of the
problems.)

>> If I were to maintain his code, before reducing the 1800 line function, I'd
>> do something about the function with 20 arguments, with each argument
>> including a function call. I'd replace all of that with a struct pointer.
>
> I'd start with *reading the code* if I were you; something you guys clearly
> aren't doing.

How did he know about that 20 parameter function? And don't forget,
the file in question was in the source, substantially as it was, for
more than a year. How much more, I'll have to find a repository that
goes farther back to find out, but I'm not interested. You want to
look for it for me?

> But if you get past that you'll be pleased to discover that such clean ups and
> refactors are happening quite often.

Now, at any rate.

> See e.g.
> df2d202e6ed4001a21c6512c244acad5d4706c87 ("bus: let's simplify things by
> getting rid of unnecessary bus parameters"). I'll leave you to guess the 
> author
> of that one.

Well, I've done a little mousing around in the repository (current, as
well as historical) and it looks like that particular file is part of
the pid 1 code. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Even conceptually, pid 1 code should not be managing dbus. Too much
can go wrong, too many opportunities to get pid 1 chasing it's tail
trying to parse an error state. And the code in that file, much
improved as it is in current, looks like code that can get into
exactly that kind of trouble.

I'd have to dig way down deep to be positive, but I'm still extremely
unimpressed.

Get pid 1 down to 100 lines of C, no loops, no functions called, then
I'll be impressed.

Heh. No, that's talki

Re: How to do this ?

2014-10-13 Thread Erwan David

Le 13/10/2014 12:12, Darac Marjal a écrit :
> On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 07:51:50PM +0200, Erwan David wrote:
>> I want to have a system which boots, and starts a subset of daemons.
>>
>> Then afterward I ssh to it, do something which 1) mount an encrypted
>> disk, 2) start other daemons (which depends on the encrypted disk).
> Personally, I'd look at using libpam-mount to mount the encrypted disk
> upon login (it's typically used to do this for /home/$USER, but there's
> no reason it shouldn't work for an arbitrary mount point) and then use
> your shell's login scripting (.profile or similar) to launch the
> daemons.
>
>
That's a server, and the daemons & mount must survive logout.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: About chromium in Jessie - "API keys missing" and Clang

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 10:06:23AM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Hi Florent,
> 
> Am Montag, 13. Oktober 2014, 09:43:40 schrieb Florent Peterschmitt:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > I'm curious about two thing in the chromium browser package in Debian
> > Jessie:
> > 
> >  - I (we?) get a message about Chromium API keys missing. Does that
> > avoid Chromium being able to speak with google for sync and so on? (If
> > yes, it's a good idea, for me)
> 
> A quick search of "chromium google api key problem" in startpage turns up
> 
> https://bugs.debian.org/748867
> 
> And here is what works for me:
> 
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=748867#117
> 
> So at least sometimes a search machine can help you to help yourself quickly.
> 
---end quoted text---

OK disregard previous post, this did work for me in terms of the sync
issue. HOWEVER another issue.

chromium
[5545:5568:1013/061830:ERROR:nss_util.cc(821)] After loading Root Certs,
loaded==false: NSS error code: -8018
ATTENTION: default value of option force_s3tc_enable overridden by
environment.
[5545:5545:1013/061830:ERROR:desktop_window_tree_host_x11.cc(1547)] Not
implemented reached in void
views::DesktopWindowTreeHostX11::MapWindow(ui::WindowShowState)
[5545:5559:1013/061830:ERROR:video_capture_device_factory_linux.cc(174)]
Not implemented reached in virtual void
media::VideoCaptureDeviceFactoryLinux::GetDeviceSupportedFormats(const
VideoCaptureDevice::Name &, VideoCaptureFormats *)
[5545:5559:1013/061830:ERROR:video_capture_device_factory_linux.cc(174)]
Not implemented reached in virtual void
media::VideoCaptureDeviceFactoryLinux::GetDeviceSupportedFormats(const
VideoCaptureDevice::Name &, VideoCaptureFormats *)
[5545:5559:1013/061830:ERROR:video_capture_device_factory_linux.cc(174)]
Not implemented reached in virtual void
media::VideoCaptureDeviceFactoryLinux::GetDeviceSupportedFormats(const
VideoCaptureDevice::Name &, VideoCaptureFormats *)
[5545:5559:1013/061830:ERROR:video_capture_device_factory_linux.cc(174)]
Not implemented reached in virtual void
media::VideoCaptureDeviceFactoryLinux::GetDeviceSupportedFormats(const
VideoCaptureDevice::Name &, VideoCaptureFormats *)
[5545:5559:1013/061830:ERROR:video_capture_device_factory_linux.cc(174)]
Not implemented reached in virtual void
media::VideoCaptureDeviceFactoryLinux::GetDeviceSupportedFormats(const
VideoCaptureDevice::Name &, VideoCaptureFormats *)
[5545:5559:1013/061830:ERROR:video_capture_device_factory_linux.cc(174)]
Not implemented reached in virtual void
media::VideoCaptureDeviceFactoryLinux::GetDeviceSupportedFormats(const
VideoCaptureDevice::Name &, VideoCaptureFormats *)
[5545:5559:1013/061830:ERROR:video_capture_device_factory_linux.cc(174)]
Not implemented reached in virtual void
media::VideoCaptureDeviceFactoryLinux::GetDeviceSupportedFormats(const
VideoCaptureDevice::Name &, VideoCaptureFormats *)
[5545:5568:1013/061830:ERROR:cache_creator.cc(125)] Unable to create
cache
[5545:5568:1013/061830:ERROR:appcache_storage_impl.cc(1819)] Failed to
open the appcache diskcache.
[5545:5545:1013/061837:ERROR:CONSOLE(248)] "Uncaught TypeError:
undefined is not a function", source:
https://apis.google.com/_/scs/abc-static/_/js/k=gapi.gapi.en.2VNCBDQs37A.O/m=iframes,googleapis_client/rt=j/d=1/rs=AItRSTOlhbuorc8-HGwVGT4fcskZCcUb2A
(248)
[5545:5568:1013/061847:ERROR:channel.cc(316)] RawChannel read error
(connection broken)
[5545:5640:1013/062008:ERROR:get_updates_processor.cc(240)]
PostClientToServerMessage() failed during GetUpdates
[5545:5568:1013/062009:ERROR:channel.cc(316)] RawChannel read error
(connection broken)
[5545:5568:1013/062009:ERROR:channel.cc(316)] RawChannel read error
(connection broken)
[5545:5545:1013/062009:ERROR:data_type_manager_impl.cc(34)] Bookmarks
cryptographer error was encountered: 
[5545:5545:1013/062009:ERROR:data_type_manager_impl.cc(34)] Preferences
cryptographer error was encountered: 
[5545:5545:1013/062009:ERROR:data_type_manager_impl.cc(34)] Passwords
cryptographer error was encountered: 
[5545:5545:1013/062009:ERROR:data_type_manager_impl.cc(34)] Autofill
Profiles cryptographer error was encountered: 
[5545:5545:1013/062009:ERROR:data_type_manager_impl.cc(34)] Autofill
cryptographer error was encountered: 
[5545:5545:1013/062009:ERROR:data_type_manager_impl.cc(34)] Themes
cryptographer error was encountered: 
[5545:5545:1013/062009:ERROR:data_type_manager_impl.cc(34)] Typed URLs
cryptographer error was encountered: 
[5545:5545:1013/062009:ERROR:data_type_manager_impl.cc(34)] Extensions
cryptographer error was encountered: 
[5545:5545:1013/062009:ERROR:data_type_manager_impl.cc(34)] Search
Engines cryptographer error was encountered: 
[5545:5545:1013/062009:ERROR:data_type_manager_impl.cc(34)] Sessions
cryptographer error was encountered: 
[5545:5545:1013/062009:ERROR:data_type_manager_impl.cc(34)] Apps
cryptographer error was encountered: 
[5545:5545:1013/062009:ERROR:data_type_manager_impl.cc(34)] App settings
cryptographer error was encountered: 
[554

Re: implicit linkage

2014-10-13 Thread Ansgar Burchardt

Hi,

On 10/13/2014 12:14, Joel Rees wrote:
> Get pid 1 down to 100 lines of C, no loops, no functions called, then
> I'll be impressed.
[...]
> Setting aside initialization code, pid 1 should target less than 1000
> lines of C in the main loop. (If we were to use dash or other
> streamlined shells, we might set a target of 100 lines of code.) Loops
> and subroutines should be carefully metered for maximum execution
> paths, and proven to be deterministic, with a maximum execution path
> of less than 500 lines of C.

What's the point of this exercise? Linux's process scheduler alone has
significant more lines. And there runtime complexity actually matters...

I'm just counting lines in kernel/sched/*.[ch], I'm too lazy to filter
out comments. As an example:

$ wc kernel/sched/fair.c
  7867  26757 207986 kernel/sched/fair.c

Ansgar


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/543baaab.7050...@43-1.org

Re: Reality check.

Hi,

Thorsten Glaser:
> But Debian beings are not able to distinguish between disrespect
> for actions made by some person (while at the same time holding
> the person in, somewhat grudging, respect for the other things
> they so) and disrespect for that person, all because they focus
> on the language used nowadays.

So tell me: how else you would distinguish between the two, if not
by the language used?

This is text email. We don't have anything else here.
(Unless you resort to ASCII art.)

NOTE: I don't focus on specific words here, four-letter or otherwise.
The intent behind the words is what counts.

I've been chastised myself, on this list, for using mostly-nice words in
a decidedly-non-nice manner, and I'm trying to at least behave as if I had
accepted that and was trying to do better next time. ;-)

Also, even if "Debian beings" are currently unable to understand this
distinction, which in the general case I doubt is true – do you really
think this is an acceptable and/or $DEITY-ordained (and therefore
unchangeable) state of affairs?

> > > Is a proper language more useful than that "we"?
> 
> In Debian, these days, yes.

You can use language in a way which expresses that there _is_
(or at least might still be the possibility of) a "we" behind the
disagreement you're addressing.

… or not.

-- 
-- Matthias Urlichs


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: bash exorcism experiment ('bug' 762923 & 763012)

Hi,

Thorsten Glaser:
> Never put “tainted” input into ksh arithmetics, period.

The problem is that there's no option akin to perl's Taint mode which tells
the shell that some operations / variable contents are OK and some are not.

Sure it's a user error, ultimately, but the system doesn't help the user to
fix the bug. It doesn't fail safe, indeed it cannot.
That's the real failure, and it probably is not even fixable.

Of course, there's the flip side: scripts which are so complex that this
kind of error can creep in should not be written in Shell in the first
place …

-- 
-- Matthias Urlichs


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: HTML5 videos in Jessie

2014-10-13 Thread Proxy

On 2014-Oct-13 06:07, Stephen Allen wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 07:14:19PM +0200, Proxy wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > I just installed Jessie on one of my partitions. Most of the stuff works
> > just fine, but I'm having problem playing HTML5 videos on Youtube in
> > Iceweasel. I can't even watch webm videos from here:
> > http://ftp.acc.umu.se/pub/debian-meetings/2014/debconf14/webm/
> > 
> > It looks like video is playing in fast forward mode. No such problems in
> > Chromium and no problem in Wheezy on another partition. I installed all
> > packages that were installed in Wheezy, so I guess that all needed
> > codecs are installed. 
> > 
> > Page at youtube.com/html5 shows that HTMLVideoElement, H.264 and WebM
> > VP8 are OK, but Media Source Extensions, MSE & H.264 and MSE & WebM VP9
> > are with red exclamation mark.
> > 
> > Any idea what could be the problem?
> > 
> ---end quoted text---
> 
> Yeah probably IceWeasel. ;-D I'd recommend using Google-Chrome, support
> for HTML 5 video has been in that browser for some time and works well.
 
Could be, but not very likely as Iceweasel 24 or 32 on Wheezy don't have
this problem. Just 31 in Jessie. 

I use some addons in Iceweasel that don't exists in Chromium and just
couldn't switch.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013115001.ga1...@angelina.example.com

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)


Matthias Urlichs wrote:

Hi,

lee:

I'm sure we could find quite a few supporters for having a GR amongst
the users (here).

We don't do a GR among our users. We do that among Debian
members/maintainers/developers/take-your-pick.


Which does kind of lead back to the question of what's the point of a 
social contract that says users and their needs are the priority.



Of those, most …
* are perfectly happy with the TC's decision
* can live with it
* are unhappy, but think that to continue discussing this is way worse
   than biting the bullet and getting on with actual work
   * you do know that we plan to release Jessie sometime this decade,
 right?
* are disillusioned about it all and decided to stand aside

Judging by the last couple of months, the rest appears to number <6 people.



A lot more than that, by my count.

Also.. it occurs to me that another constituency, that is probably not 
well represented, are upstream developers.


Those who are most impacted are sys admins of servers, and upstream 
developers - the two communities most impacted, but that seem to have no 
say in the matter.


Miles Fidelman


--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.    Yogi Berra


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: https://lists.debian.org/543bbe9c.5030...@meetinghouse.net

Re: [exim4] mixed up about terminology

On 10/13/2014 2:32 AM, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 09:05:14PM -0400, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>> Among other things, legitimate MTAs have MX records.
> 
> Not necessarily. In the absence of an MX record an A record is perfectly
> legitimate.
> 
> 

Legitimate MTAs have MX records.  While an A record is perfectly
legitimate, an MUA won't have one of those, either.

But more and more companies are filtering out emails which don't have
matching MS records.

Jerry


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/543bc210.1020...@attglobal.net

Re: [exim4] mixed up about terminology

2014-10-13 Thread Erwan David

Le 13/10/2014 14:14, Jerry Stuckle a écrit :
> On 10/13/2014 2:32 AM, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 09:05:14PM -0400, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>> Among other things, legitimate MTAs have MX records.
>> Not necessarily. In the absence of an MX record an A record is perfectly
>> legitimate.
>>
>>
> Legitimate MTAs have MX records.  While an A record is perfectly
> legitimate, an MUA won't have one of those, either.
Inbound MTAs have MX records. Not outbound ones.
> But more and more companies are filtering out emails which don't have
> matching MS records.
>

That's an error and completely idiot : big service provider use
different MTAs for inbound (with MX records pointing to them) and
outbound email.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/543bc31c.1030...@rail.eu.org

Re: [exim4] mixed up about terminology

On 10/13/2014 5:43 AM, Joe wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 07:32:40 +0100
> Jonathan Dowland  wrote:
> 
>> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 09:05:14PM -0400, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>> Among other things, legitimate MTAs have MX records.
>>
>> Not necessarily. In the absence of an MX record an A record is
>> perfectly legitimate.
>>
>>
> 
> And as I've pointed out to Jerry, a lot of businesses outsource their
> incoming email to commercial spam-cleaning services, as well as larger
> businesses using separate send and receive servers, and some businesses
> receiving email direct but sending via a smarthost. In each of these
> cases, the MX would not necessarily have any connection with the
> mail sending address. My IP address A-PTR record pair have no direct
> connection with any of the email domains I use, with any MX, or any HELO
> strings I send.
> 
> There's no one size fitting all with email. Heck, some people use
> Yahoo...
> 

Yes, they outsource their anti-spam.  But they do NOT outsource the
servers themselves.  In many cases, they cannot do so for legal reasons;
for instance, in the U.S., many publicly traded companies must keep all
emails (even spam) for a specific length of time.  The same is true of
companies with certain Federal Government contracts.

And can you identify any legitimate business which has separate email
servers?  Just because you do it wrong does not mean the rest of the
world does.  I can think of a number of companies which will silently
drop emails from a configuration such as yours (or at least relegate
them to the company's spam folder and not deliver them).

Jerry

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/543bc359.4010...@attglobal.net

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)

2014-10-13 Thread Thorsten Glaser

On Mon, 13 Oct 2014, Miles Fidelman wrote:

> Those who are most impacted are sys admins of servers, and upstream developers

I’m both, and I joined Debian to try to make an impact…

> - the two communities most impacted, but that seem to have no say in the
> matter.

… but even then, am drowned by the masses.

(I did not have the chance to Second the GR proposal
because I was not even aware that there *was* one.)

bye,
//mirabilos
-- 
[16:04:33] bkix: "veni vidi violini"
[16:04:45] bkix: "ich kam, sah und vergeigte"...


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/alpine.deb.2.11.1410131420190.28...@tglase.lan.tarent.de

Re: [exim4] mixed up about terminology

On 10/13/2014 8:18 AM, Erwan David wrote:
> Le 13/10/2014 14:14, Jerry Stuckle a écrit :
>> On 10/13/2014 2:32 AM, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
>>> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 09:05:14PM -0400, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
 Among other things, legitimate MTAs have MX records.
>>> Not necessarily. In the absence of an MX record an A record is perfectly
>>> legitimate.
>>>
>>>
>> Legitimate MTAs have MX records.  While an A record is perfectly
>> legitimate, an MUA won't have one of those, either.
> Inbound MTAs have MX records. Not outbound ones.
>> But more and more companies are filtering out emails which don't have
>> matching MS records.
>>
> 
> That's an error and completely idiot : big service provider use
> different MTAs for inbound (with MX records pointing to them) and
> outbound email.
> 
> 

Which ones?  Specific names, please.

Jerry


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/543bc570.60...@attglobal.net

Re: [exim4] Testing and making sense of smtp output

On 10/13/2014 5:25 AM, Brian wrote:
> On Mon 13 Oct 2014 at 04:06:27 +0200, lee wrote:
> 
>> Harry Putnam  writes:
>>
>>> lee  writes:
>>>
>>> [...] 
>>>
>>> Thanks for the tips.
>>>
>   SMTP>> EHLO 2xd
>>>
 That's an invalid helo string.
>>>
>>> Is a valid one made up of just the full fqdn?
>>
>> See https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2821#section-4.1.1.1
>>
>> It says to either use the fqdn or, if not possible, an IP
>> literal. However, it's common practise to deny IP addresses in HELO
>> greatings.
> 
> An address literal is not the same as an IP address. An MTA should not
> be rejecting mail on the basis that the HELO is an address literal.
> 
> It's probably academic what the HELO is most of the time. Many ISPs
> will accept any old rubbish for it.
> 
> 

And more and more companies are rejecting invalid or incorrect
information in the HELO message.

Jerry


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/543bc62a.70...@attglobal.net

Re: [exim4] Testing and making sense of smtp output

On Mon 13 Oct 2014 at 10:51:51 +0100, Joe wrote:

> On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 10:25:37 +0100
> Brian  wrote:
> 
> > On Mon 13 Oct 2014 at 04:06:27 +0200, lee wrote:
> > 
> > > Harry Putnam  writes:
> > > 
> > > > lee  writes:
> > > >
> > > > [...] 
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the tips.
> > > >
> > > >>>   SMTP>> EHLO 2xd
> > > >
> > > >> That's an invalid helo string.
> > > >
> > > > Is a valid one made up of just the full fqdn?
> > > 
> > > See https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2821#section-4.1.1.1
> > > 
> > > It says to either use the fqdn or, if not possible, an IP
> > > literal. However, it's common practise to deny IP addresses in HELO
> > > greatings.
> > 
> > An address literal is not the same as an IP address. An MTA should not
> > be rejecting mail on the basis that the HELO is an address literal.
> > 
> > It's probably academic what the HELO is most of the time. Many ISPs
> > will accept any old rubbish for it.
> 
> The routine exim4 HELO test is disabled by default, but simply checks
> that it is a hostname which can be resolved in public DNS. I enable it,
> and so do a lot of others. It is by default enabled in Exchange, which
> is in widespread use, and I've seen an Exchange server reject an email
> arriving from a BT server which had a '.local' TLD in its HELO.

Four ISPs in the UK have over 90% of the market. None of the four
appears to be the least bit bothered about HELO as "AutumnLeaves".
On the basis that it is invalid a few of the smaller ones are but then
proceed when given "AutumnLeaves.com".

Not that I'm suggesting setting up exim to offer an invalid HELO; it
will lead to trouble sooner or later. However, as a reason for mail
being rejected or not arriving it doesn't come top of the list.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/13102014133206.6a22c0893...@desktop.copernicus.demon.co.uk

Re: [exim4] mixed up about terminology

On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 08:19:37 -0400
Jerry Stuckle  wrote:

> On 10/13/2014 5:43 AM, Joe wrote:
> > On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 07:32:40 +0100
> > Jonathan Dowland  wrote:
> > 
> >> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 09:05:14PM -0400, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> >>> Among other things, legitimate MTAs have MX records.
> >>
> >> Not necessarily. In the absence of an MX record an A record is
> >> perfectly legitimate.
> >>
> >>
> > 
> > And as I've pointed out to Jerry, a lot of businesses outsource
> > their incoming email to commercial spam-cleaning services, as well
> > as larger businesses using separate send and receive servers, and
> > some businesses receiving email direct but sending via a smarthost.
> > In each of these cases, the MX would not necessarily have any
> > connection with the mail sending address. My IP address A-PTR
> > record pair have no direct connection with any of the email domains
> > I use, with any MX, or any HELO strings I send.
> > 
> > There's no one size fitting all with email. Heck, some people use
> > Yahoo...
> > 
> 
> Yes, they outsource their anti-spam.  But they do NOT outsource the
> servers themselves.

So people come in every day with a mop and bucket to clean up the email?

Google 'anti-spam service'.

Look at GFI Mailessentials Online, to pick a well-known name out of the
list:

'Block spam and viruses before they reach your network'
'Ensure uninterrupted email even when disaster strikes'

How do they do that if they use the customer's mail server?

>  In many cases, they cannot do so for legal
> reasons; for instance, in the U.S., many publicly traded companies
> must keep all emails (even spam) for a specific length of time.  The
> same is true of companies with certain Federal Government contracts.
> 
Undoubtedly.

'Archive your important email communications'

How about Mailfoundry?

'How It Works

MailFoundry Hosted Anti-Spam works by routing your email (MX records)
to our network data centers where we clean your email and then pass it
on to your email server. It's really simple and easy to setup, and we
are available to assist you if needed. '

> And can you identify any legitimate business which has separate email
> servers?

My ISP, Demon. I'd be willing to bet that Microsoft does, and Google,
and...

Anyone whose email load is too great for one server to handle will use
more than one server. It's a no-brainer to separate incoming and
outgoing functions, as they require different processing. It's a
compromise to use one MTA for both. People dealing with lots of
email, using more than one server, will not connect them all using one
NAT bottleneck, they will use separate IP addresses, probably in a
single CIDR block, but not necessarily.

> Just because you do it wrong does not mean the rest of the
> world does.  I can think of a number of companies which will silently
> drop emails from a configuration such as yours (or at least relegate
> them to the company's spam folder and not deliver them).

That's OK, I don't do business with them. The pickiest mail hosting
company I have dealings with is AOL, who accept mail from me with no
problems. I've been doing this for fifteen years, Jerry.

-- 
Joe

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013135512.31071...@jresid.jretrading.com

Re: implicit linkage

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 7:34 PM, Ansgar Burchardt  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 10/13/2014 12:14, Joel Rees wrote:
>> Get pid 1 down to 100 lines of C, no loops, no functions called, then
>> I'll be impressed.
> [...]
>> Setting aside initialization code, pid 1 should target less than 1000
>> lines of C in the main loop. (If we were to use dash or other
>> streamlined shells, we might set a target of 100 lines of code.) Loops
>> and subroutines should be carefully metered for maximum execution
>> paths, and proven to be deterministic, with a maximum execution path
>> of less than 500 lines of C.
>
> What's the point of this exercise?

What exercise? I'm repeating rules of thumb, not revealing the ways I
derived them (estimates, based on the idea that you don't want
anything close to a millisecond consumed by a pass through the main
loop in pid 1), and admitting that the target I'm proposing is not
necessarily achievable.

systemd doesn't even consider such a target, near as I can tell. I
didn't do a full analysis, but from my casual scan I'm guessing there
are times a pass through the systemd main loop consumes more than a
hundred microseconds, which is too close to a millisecond.

> Linux's process scheduler alone has
> significant more lines. And there runtime complexity actually matters...

Does the scheduler run as pid 1?

Have you traced execution paths?

Did I say the kernel did not need some work? I don't remember saying
such a thing,. In fact, I distinctly remember implying that it did
need continued work.

> I'm just counting lines in kernel/sched/*.[ch], I'm too lazy to filter
> out comments.

Or do the execution path analysis.

Okay, I haven't shown the result of a path analysis for systemd,
either. But systemd runs as process 1. The scheduler does not.

> As an example:
>
> $ wc kernel/sched/fair.c
>   7867  26757 207986 kernel/sched/fair.c

You might want to ask on the kernel list for a pointer to the last
execution path analysis Linus did for the scheduler. You might be
surprised about what they tell you.

You might also want to ask how often the code in fair.c runs.

At any rate, whatever the kernel does is no excuse to introduce the
kind of code in systemd into pid 1.

pid 1 should always delegate any complex task to a child process. That
way, a failure in the complex task does not have to be dealt with
before pid 1 can do it's job the next time around.

-- 
Joel Rees

Be careful when you see conspiracy.
Look first in your own heart,
and ask yourself if you are not your own worst enemy.
Arm yourself with knowledge of yourself.

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/CAAr43iMCytQ12M23yZFNF=SVq3jbKJa-6AvW1L2dDy-V-T+C=w...@mail.gmail.com

Re: [exim4] mixed up about terminology

On 10/13/2014 8:55 AM, Joe wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 08:19:37 -0400
> Jerry Stuckle  wrote:
> 
>> On 10/13/2014 5:43 AM, Joe wrote:
>>> On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 07:32:40 +0100
>>> Jonathan Dowland  wrote:
>>>
 On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 09:05:14PM -0400, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> Among other things, legitimate MTAs have MX records.

 Not necessarily. In the absence of an MX record an A record is
 perfectly legitimate.


>>>
>>> And as I've pointed out to Jerry, a lot of businesses outsource
>>> their incoming email to commercial spam-cleaning services, as well
>>> as larger businesses using separate send and receive servers, and
>>> some businesses receiving email direct but sending via a smarthost.
>>> In each of these cases, the MX would not necessarily have any
>>> connection with the mail sending address. My IP address A-PTR
>>> record pair have no direct connection with any of the email domains
>>> I use, with any MX, or any HELO strings I send.
>>>
>>> There's no one size fitting all with email. Heck, some people use
>>> Yahoo...
>>>
>>
>> Yes, they outsource their anti-spam.  But they do NOT outsource the
>> servers themselves.
> 
> So people come in every day with a mop and bucket to clean up the email?
>

Nope.  All emails (including SPAM) are archived.  It is the law for many
companies.

> Google 'anti-spam service'.
> 

So?

> Look at GFI Mailessentials Online, to pick a well-known name out of the
> list:
> 
> 'Block spam and viruses before they reach your network'
> 'Ensure uninterrupted email even when disaster strikes'
> 
> How do they do that if they use the customer's mail server?
>

You need to learn how they work.

>>  In many cases, they cannot do so for legal
>> reasons; for instance, in the U.S., many publicly traded companies
>> must keep all emails (even spam) for a specific length of time.  The
>> same is true of companies with certain Federal Government contracts.
>>
> Undoubtedly.
> 
> 'Archive your important email communications'
> 
> How about Mailfoundry?
> 
> 'How It Works
> 
> MailFoundry Hosted Anti-Spam works by routing your email (MX records)
> to our network data centers where we clean your email and then pass it
> on to your email server. It's really simple and easy to setup, and we
> are available to assist you if needed. '
> 

And companies under legal obligations to log all emails can not and do
not use such services.  It would make them liable for actions of a third
party, with no recourse against that party.

> 
>> And can you identify any legitimate business which has separate email
>> servers?
> 
> My ISP, Demon. I'd be willing to bet that Microsoft does, and Google,
> and...
> 

No, Microsoft does not (I get mail from them regularly).  Same with Google.

Show some proof for your claims - instead of just wild conjecture.

> Anyone whose email load is too great for one server to handle will use
> more than one server. It's a no-brainer to separate incoming and
> outgoing functions, as they require different processing. It's a
> compromise to use one MTA for both. People dealing with lots of
> email, using more than one server, will not connect them all using one
> NAT bottleneck, they will use separate IP addresses, probably in a
> single CIDR block, but not necessarily.
>

Which is easily done via things like load balancing and routing - and
smarthosts.  Yet it still keeps the MX record pointing at the proper IP.

>> Just because you do it wrong does not mean the rest of the
>> world does.  I can think of a number of companies which will silently
>> drop emails from a configuration such as yours (or at least relegate
>> them to the company's spam folder and not deliver them).
> 
> That's OK, I don't do business with them. The pickiest mail hosting
> company I have dealings with is AOL, who accept mail from me with no
> problems. I've been doing this for fifteen years, Jerry.
> 

Only 15 years, Joe?  I've got over twice that (actually closer to three
times now).  I was on Arpanet before there was TCP/IP, back in the 70's.

Jerry


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/543bcf7c.3080...@attglobal.net

Re: implicit linkage (was: Re: Effectively criticizing decisions you disagree with in Debian)

2014-10-13 Thread Reco

On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 03:30:49PM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > > > > This is the same reason we are using shared libraries and the Debian 
> > > > > Security Team is doing it's best to track code copies.
> > > > 
> > > > Consider /etc/init.d/skeleton a library then. It's sources to
> > > > any /etc/init.d script anyway.
> > > 
> > > No, it doesn't. 
> > 
> > Again, simple 'no' is beautiful, but hardly contributes to the
> > discussion.
> 
> $ grep skeleton /etc/init.d/*
> /etc/init.d/dictd:# based on /etc/init.d/skeleton v1.7  05-May-1997  by 
> miqu...@cistron.nl
> /etc/init.d/README:# Provides:  skeleton
> /etc/init.d/skeleton:# Provides:  skeleton
> 
> It seems like you misunderstood the purpose of /etc/init.d/skeleton. 
> It's not a library, but something to use as a base to write your own 
> script.
> 
> As of Jessie most of 'skeleton' has been turned into 'init-d-script' 
> though.

It was my mistake indeed. Thanks for the correction.
Somehow I mistook /lib/lsb/init-functions for /etc/init.d/skeleton. 


> > > > > True, but sysv-rc still can't deal with them correctly.
> > > > 
> > > > It does not have to deal with the hardware, as it not its' job.
> > > 
> > > It has to mount filesystems.
> > 
> > No, it does not have to. In Debian, there's /etc/init.d/mountall.sh to
> > do this job, in case initrd didn't care for it already. init(8) does
> > not mount anything.
> 
> $ dpkg -S /etc/init.d/mountall.sh
> initscripts: /etc/init.d/mountall.sh
> 
> I never said init(8) would mount anything, but sysv-rc. By sysv-rc I 
> mean /etc/init.d/rc and all other scripts required to boot your system. 
> Apparently most of these are split out in the initscripts package.

Ok, correction taken.


> > And, to spice things up, [1]. Beautiful link telling everyone that it's
> > not the init job to mount /usr as there's initrd for that.
> 
> But sysv-rc still has to take care your / and /usr is remounted 
> according to your fstab and also for mounting everything else defined in 
> /etc/fstab and how this interacts with the rest of the boot / daemons.

No objections here.


> > Please enlighten me what exactly is systemd-specific here. Basically
> > they tell "yadda-yadda-yadda, fix your applications, and if you don't -
> > we have this 90-second hack for you".
>  
> Systemd makes it possible for me to adjust mpd's .service file to 
> *require* a specific mount. This is not possible with sysv-rc's own 
> mechanisms, I'd have to script it myself.

But that's filesystem dependency, not a network one.

Reco


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013132742.ga30...@d1696.int.rdtex.ru

Re: Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)

2014-10-13 Thread latincom

I am not "your" user, Mister Wijnen! "I" use Debian!

http://www.itwire.com/business-it-news/open-source/65684-debian-leader-says-users-can-continue-with-sysvinit

systemd-shim = Systemd!


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/930ecfd9efe7c71ef2563e6f0fd8cc70.squir...@mail.vcn.bc.ca

Re: Synaptic slow when Caribou is running after Gnome-shell update

2014-10-13 Thread Michael Biebl

Am 13.10.2014 um 12:06 schrieb Stephen Allen:
> I too had experienced this, seems to be fixed as of yesterday. Thanks
> Michael.

Unfortunately, this is not fixed yet.
Apparently the start is not triggered via the xdg autostart file, as I
had originally suspected, but rather via D-Bus activation, i.e. via
/usr/share/dbus-1/services/org.gnome.Caribou.Daemon.service.

Something tries to access org.gnome.Caribou.Daemon, which then triggers
the start of caribou. I suspect this to be gnome-shell, but need to
verify it.

Moving /usr/share/dbus-1/services/org.gnome.Caribou.Daemon.service away
should (temporarily) workaround the issue, but obviously is not a
permanent fix, as the file will be back on the next package update.


Michael

-- 
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: implicit linkage

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 07:14:29PM +0900, Joel Rees wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Jonathan Dowland  wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 02:48:55PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
> >> On Sun, 12 Oct 2014 19:02:08 +0100 Martin Read  wrote:
> >> > On 12/10/14 18:13, John Hasler wrote:
> >> > > You have no problem with an 1800 line function?
> > ...
> >> > I have a problem with 1800 line functions in general;
> > ...
> >> I have no problem with an 1800 line function.
> > ...
> >
> > *What* 1800 line function? The commit URI that was shared was an 1894-line
> > *file* with a large function definition starting at line 638 and ending at
> > 1890. That's a 1252-line function.
> 
> mmm? 1800 vs. 1252 ?
> 
> 30 years ago, when we still read printouts, 60 lines was considered
> the ideal max because that's what would fit on a page.
> 
> Nowadays, we use a screen, but 60 lines is hard on the eyes (9 pt or
> so), so 40 lines is a good screen-full. But it turns out, with being
> about to scroll quickly, that 60 lines is still not hard to reach.
> Moreover, 60 lines seems to be a pretty good average for what an
> experienced coder can keep in his head.

LOC is a silly way to measure anyway. You could put all the code on one
line --- PITA to read, but hey! it's only one line of code! :)

-- 
"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-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013134448.GB2362@tal

Way OT: Re. lines of code [was Re: implicit linkage]


Chris Bannister wrote:

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 07:14:29PM +0900, Joel Rees wrote:

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Jonathan Dowland  wrote:

On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 02:48:55PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:

On Sun, 12 Oct 2014 19:02:08 +0100 Martin Read  wrote:

On 12/10/14 18:13, John Hasler wrote:

You have no problem with an 1800 line function?

...

I have a problem with 1800 line functions in general;

...

I have no problem with an 1800 line function.

...

*What* 1800 line function? The commit URI that was shared was an 1894-line
*file* with a large function definition starting at line 638 and ending at
1890. That's a 1252-line function.

mmm? 1800 vs. 1252 ?

30 years ago, when we still read printouts, 60 lines was considered
the ideal max because that's what would fit on a page.

Nowadays, we use a screen, but 60 lines is hard on the eyes (9 pt or
so), so 40 lines is a good screen-full. But it turns out, with being
about to scroll quickly, that 60 lines is still not hard to reach.
Moreover, 60 lines seems to be a pretty good average for what an
experienced coder can keep in his head.

LOC is a silly way to measure anyway. You could put all the code on one
line --- PITA to read, but hey! it's only one line of code! :)



Go Perl.
Go APL.
:-)


--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.    Yogi Berra


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: https://lists.debian.org/543bd7e8.5050...@meetinghouse.net

Re: [exim4] mixed up about terminology

2014-10-13 Thread Mark Carroll

Jerry Stuckle  writes:

> On 10/13/2014 8:18 AM, Erwan David wrote:
(snip)
>> That's an error and completely idiot : big service provider use
>> different MTAs for inbound (with MX records pointing to them) and
>> outbound email.
>
> Which ones?  Specific names, please.

For instance, legitimate mail I received this morning was sent by
mail-ig0-f169.google.com [209.85.213.169] which has only an A record.

Incidentally, I tend to find that these providers tend to be those who
have a pool of outgoing MTA hosts such that a retry attempt for the same
message comes from a different IP.

-- Mark

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/87bnpgoz98@ixod.org

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)

2014-10-13 Thread Martin Read


On 12/10/14 23:04, lee wrote:

Bas Wijnen  writes:

Because for a GR, a member of Debian has to request it and it needs to
be seconded by at least 5 other members (constitution 4.2.1, 4.2.7).
This has not happened.


I know, and I'm suggesting to omit this requirement.


Technically, there *is* a way for a GR to be brought forward for 
discussion and voting without having six DDs supporting it: the Project 
Leader can personally propose it. The Project Leader has not done so, 
and the Debian Constitution does not place any obligation on the holder 
of the post of Project Leader to propose any particular General Resolution.


Any change to these constitutional arrangements would require the Debian 
Constitution to be amended, which (per the Constitution) requires a 
General Resolution validly proposed under the existing arrangements and 
then passed by a 3:1 supermajority in the ensuing vote.


I would argue in any event that it's probably inappropriate for the 
Project Leader to propose a General Resolution which has already been 
proposed by a DD and failed to receive the required number of sponsors.



Then they shouldn't say in their social contract that the users and
their needs are the priority.


It is precisely *because* decisions in Debian are not made by the 
users-at-large, but only by the Debian developers, that the social 
contract by which the developers are expected to abide when working on 
the Debian project must explicitly state that the interests and needs of 
the users are important.


This, of course, leads us to two interesting points:
1) the Debian Developers are themselves users of Debian
2) the Debian user community is not a monolithic entity whose 
constituent parts have uniform and identical interests and needs


Besides, I very much doubt a proposal to redraft the DSC in a way that 
removed the passages about the importance of the users would receive 
even a 1:1 majority, let alone the 3:1 majority required to supersede 
one of the constitutionally-designated Foundational Documents.



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: https://lists.debian.org/543bd8c7.7070...@zen.co.uk

Re: Bash usage: was implicit linkage

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 02:10:11PM +0900, Joel Rees wrote:
> >>
> >> Which is another way of saying that you want others to have already made
> >> the mistakes for you.
> >
> > No it isn't!  Ponder why most people take their car to a mechanic for
> > servicing.
> 
> And you snipped:
>
> >> As long as you recognize that somebody has to make the mistakes,
> >> and don't mind watching and learning while they do, that's not necessarily
> >> a bad thing, given courtesy and quid-pro-quo, of course.

Not on purpose. I didn't see it. It wasn't near that paragraph.

> Paying a mechanic is one kind of quid-pro-quo, wouldn't you say?

Don't know about you, but I don't know anyone who pays their mechanic to 
make mistakes. Au contraire in fact.

> Do I need to unpack that a bit more, talk about how testing is a
> substitute for making mistakes?

No thanks.

-- 
"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-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013135359.GC2362@tal

Re: [exim4] Testing and making sense of smtp output

On Mon 13 Oct 2014 at 08:31:38 -0400, Jerry Stuckle wrote:

> On 10/13/2014 5:25 AM, Brian wrote:
> > On Mon 13 Oct 2014 at 04:06:27 +0200, lee wrote:
> > 
> >> Harry Putnam  writes:
> >>
> >>> lee  writes:
> >>>
> >>> [...] 
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for the tips.
> >>>
> >   SMTP>> EHLO 2xd
> >>>
>  That's an invalid helo string.
> >>>
> >>> Is a valid one made up of just the full fqdn?
> >>
> >> See https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2821#section-4.1.1.1
> >>
> >> It says to either use the fqdn or, if not possible, an IP
> >> literal. However, it's common practise to deny IP addresses in HELO
> >> greatings.
> > 
> > An address literal is not the same as an IP address. An MTA should not
> > be rejecting mail on the basis that the HELO is an address literal.
> > 
> > It's probably academic what the HELO is most of the time. Many ISPs
> > will accept any old rubbish for it.
> 
> And more and more companies are rejecting invalid or incorrect
> information in the HELO message.

The HELO/EHLO must be a primary host name or an address literal so, if
it is not, they appear to have strong grounds for their action.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/13102014145945.91bec41d0...@desktop.copernicus.demon.co.uk

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 07:59:24AM -0400, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >lee:
> >>I'm sure we could find quite a few supporters for having a GR amongst
> >>the users (here).
> >We don't do a GR among our users. We do that among Debian
> >members/maintainers/developers/take-your-pick.
> 
> Which does kind of lead back to the question of what's the point of a social
> contract that says users and their needs are the priority.

Don't confuse "wants" with "needs". 
This has been raised before. You should post on debian-project, and get
the answer from the 'horses' mouth.

> >Of those, most …
> >* are perfectly happy with the TC's decision
> >* can live with it
> >* are unhappy, but think that to continue discussing this is way worse
> >   than biting the bullet and getting on with actual work
> >   * you do know that we plan to release Jessie sometime this decade,
> > right?
> >* are disillusioned about it all and decided to stand aside
> >
> >Judging by the last couple of months, the rest appears to number <6 people.
> >
> 
> A lot more than that, by my count.

Are you referring to DD's? I believe Matthias was.

-- 
"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-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013140819.GD2362@tal

Re: [exim4] mixed up about terminology

On 10/13/2014 9:49 AM, Mark Carroll wrote:
> Jerry Stuckle  writes:
> 
>> On 10/13/2014 8:18 AM, Erwan David wrote:
> (snip)
>>> That's an error and completely idiot : big service provider use
>>> different MTAs for inbound (with MX records pointing to them) and
>>> outbound email.
>>
>> Which ones?  Specific names, please.
> 
> For instance, legitimate mail I received this morning was sent by
> mail-ig0-f169.google.com [209.85.213.169] which has only an A record.
> 
> Incidentally, I tend to find that these providers tend to be those who
> have a pool of outgoing MTA hosts such that a retry attempt for the same
> message comes from a different IP.
> 
> -- Mark
> 
> 

Ok, I should have corrected myself.  They can have MX or A records.  But
legitimate users will have one or the other.

Jerry


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/543bdf2a.1090...@attglobal.net

Re: [exim4] mixed up about terminology

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 09:11:24AM -0400, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> On 10/13/2014 8:55 AM, Joe wrote:
> > I've been doing this for fifteen years, Jerry.
> 
> Only 15 years, Joe?  I've got over twice that (actually closer to three
> times now).  I was on Arpanet before there was TCP/IP, back in the 70's.

Can we please stick to technical discussion and not start waving CVs at each
other?


-- 
Jonathan Dowland


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013143526.ga24...@chew.redmars.org

Re: [exim4] mixed up about terminology

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 08:28:32AM -0400, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> Which ones?  Specific names, please.

Newcastle University, UK, at least when I worked in that section
last (a few years ago), for one.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013143628.gb24...@chew.redmars.org

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)


Chris Bannister wrote:

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 07:59:24AM -0400, Miles Fidelman wrote:

Matthias Urlichs wrote:

Hi,

lee:

I'm sure we could find quite a few supporters for having a GR amongst
the users (here).

We don't do a GR among our users. We do that among Debian
members/maintainers/developers/take-your-pick.

Which does kind of lead back to the question of what's the point of a social
contract that says users and their needs are the priority.

Don't confuse "wants" with "needs".
This has been raised before. You should post on debian-project, and get
the answer from the 'horses' mouth.


Somehow - stable system, minimal impact of an upgrade, backward 
compatibility are more than "wants."





Of those, most …
* are perfectly happy with the TC's decision
* can live with it
* are unhappy, but think that to continue discussing this is way worse
   than biting the bullet and getting on with actual work
   * you do know that we plan to release Jessie sometime this decade,
 right?
* are disillusioned about it all and decided to stand aside

Judging by the last couple of months, the rest appears to number <6 people.


A lot more than that, by my count.

Are you referring to DD's? I believe Matthias was.



Well... "more than that, by my count" seems to apply to debian-devel as 
well. I kind of think it's a matter of:

" * are disillusioned about it all and decided to stand aside"

And, as a couple of folks have now pointed out, a lot of developers did 
not know about the initial vote proposal.


Miles Fidelman

--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.    Yogi Berra


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: https://lists.debian.org/543be361.9080...@meetinghouse.net

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)

Hi,

Miles Fidelman:
> >Judging by the last couple of months, the rest appears to number <6 people.
> 
> A lot more than that, by my count.
> 
Then the question is why almost all of these "lot more" people did not
second the GR proposal.

> Those who are most impacted are sys admins of servers, and upstream
> developers - the two communities most impacted, but that seem to have no say
> in the matter.
> 
Correct. So? Debian consists of its members, i.e. people working (in
whatever capacity) on Debian itself. _Using_ a distribution does not
in itself constitute working on it. Neither does work on an Upstream package.

If you want to change that and include users and/or Upstream developers in
our constituency more directly, you're free to go ahead and draft/discuss
a GR for that. (I might even support it.)

But please don't just do this in the context of yet another attempt to
express dissatisfaction with the fact that our TC chose systemd:
if you do, I do not think you'll achieve anything except more annoyance
about the fact that we're discussing this *again*, and further regression
to a discussion climate where each&every mention of systemd automatically
raises hackles on both "sides".

Which will do any number of things, but not improve Debian.
And that's, ostensibly, what we're all here for.

In any case, users _do_ have a say. They can force their systems to remain
on sys5 init, or switch to a different distro if that should also turn out
to be unsatisfactory. Likewise, upstream developers can refuse to include
unit files or systemd-supporting tidbits (like socket activation) in their
source code.

Fact is that the vast majority of them don't. There has been no huge outcry
among Fedora users about switching to systemd, for example. So, frankly,
there doesn't seem to be a need to maufacture one here.

I'm not accusing you of doing so, mind you, but sometimes that is what
these repeated attempts to warm up Debian's systemd discussion look like.

-- 
-- Matthias Urlichs


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013140643.gn3...@smurf.noris.de

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 07:59:24AM -0400, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> Which does kind of lead back to the question of what's the point of
> a social contract that says users and their needs are the priority.

The point is that the people involved in the processes we do have: the
developers, the technical committee; should be considering users first and
foremost with their actions. I have no reason to doubt that the tech-ctte
did exactly that.

However, if you think there's an impedence mismatch between SC §4 and the
processes we have in practice: for example, if you think there should be some
mechanism whereby non-DD users can have a say - then please propose something
concrete. Discussing a proposal would be on-topic for the debian-project
mailing list.

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013144226.gc24...@chew.redmars.org

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)


Matthias Urlichs wrote:

Hi,

Miles Fidelman:

Judging by the last couple of months, the rest appears to number <6 people.

A lot more than that, by my count.


Then the question is why almost all of these "lot more" people did not
second the GR proposal.


Well... as a couple of people have now pointed out, at least some people 
didn't know about it.


In reading through the archives, I have to say that the GR proposal was 
both buried in all the broader discussion of systemd, rather long and 
convoluted reading, and not well publicized.


I do wonder what would happen if a clearly worded proposal (e.g., start 
with "maintain systemv init as the default system" or "require that 
packages not depend on systemd running as PID1") were well publicized, 
today.






Those who are most impacted are sys admins of servers, and upstream
developers - the two communities most impacted, but that seem to have no say
in the matter.


Correct. So? Debian consists of its members, i.e. people working (in
whatever capacity) on Debian itself. _Using_ a distribution does not
in itself constitute working on it. Neither does work on an Upstream package.


Given a policy that stresses the primacy of users, it disturbs me that 
the technical committee and "members" don't seem to be paying any attention.


And... if a platform's technical leadership doesn't care about those who 
develop for that platform, that concerns me as well.


If you want to change that and include users and/or Upstream developers in
our constituency more directly, you're free to go ahead and draft/discuss
a GR for that. (I might even support it.)


Given that I have servers to run, and a full-time job that has nothing 
to do with that set of responsibilities -- I'm putting my efforts into:

- stretching out the lifetime of my current Debian installations
- looking for a new platform to migrate to

Somehow, neither of these seems like a great investment of time:
- wading through every single dependency that systemd might impact
- politicking (especially as I'm NOT a Debian developer eligible to 
propose or vote on GRs) - and this debacle has convinced me it's not 
worth becoming one




In any case, users _do_ have a say. They can force their systems to remain
on sys5 init, or switch to a different distro if that should also turn out
to be unsatisfactory. Likewise, upstream developers can refuse to include
unit files or systemd-supporting tidbits (like socket activation) in their
source code.


It sure would be interesting to survey folks on this.  I expect I'm not 
the only one busily looking for an exit.


Miles Fidelman


--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.    Yogi Berra


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: https://lists.debian.org/543be5d2.1070...@meetinghouse.net

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 10:46:42AM -0400, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> >Then the question is why almost all of these "lot more" people did not
> >second the GR proposal.
> 
> Well... as a couple of people have now pointed out, at least some
> people didn't know about it.

That's their own fault. By convention[1] GRs are sent to debian-project, it's
DDs responsibility to read this list to see GR proposals. Not only that, but
there was a huge amount of discussion all over the place leading up to the
tech-ctte referral, the prospect of a GR was well advertised, the tech-ctte
even discussed relaxing the majority requirements so that a GR could more
easily override them in this particular case. The discussion about the putative
GR was large[2]. I would suggest that those DDs who were unaware must be in
practical terms not involved in Debian much any more, except I know Thorsten
is, and I'm frankly stunned he missed it altogether.

> In reading through the archives, I have to say that the GR proposal
> was both buried in all the broader discussion of systemd, rather
> long and convoluted reading, and not well publicized.

It's the lion's share of traffic to -project in March[2].

> I do wonder what would happen if a clearly worded proposal (e.g.,
> start with "maintain systemv init as the default system" or "require
> that packages not depend on systemd running as PID1") were well
> publicized, today.

Bear in mind that the latter is currently the state of affairs anyway: "Bug
#746715: The technical committee expects maintainers to continue to support the
multiple available init systems."[3]

[1] This doesn't appear to be written down in the constitution, however.
I think it probably should. I will file a bug+patch.
https://www.debian.org/devel/constitution#item-4

[2] https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2014/03/

[3] https://www.debian.org/devel/tech-ctte#status

> Given a policy that stresses the primacy of users, it disturbs me
> that the technical committee and "members" don't seem to be paying
> any attention.

We definitely don't agree on this point here. I see the incredible lengths the
tech-ctte went to in order to have an open discussion, combined with the
outcome to support multiple init systems - unprecedented with any of the other
mainstream Linux distros - as doing exactly that.

> nothing to do with that set of responsibilities -- I'm putting my
> efforts into:
> - stretching out the lifetime of my current Debian installations
> - looking for a new platform to migrate to

I'd suggest the following

 - wait until jessie is actually stable before evaluating it
 - if, as planned, jessie supports multiple init systems, stick with
   the one you like.

> Somehow, neither of these seems like a great investment of time:
> - wading through every single dependency that systemd might impact
> - politicking (especially as I'm NOT a Debian developer eligible to
> propose or vote on GRs) - and this debacle has convinced me it's not
> worth becoming one

I would be very surprised if any significant proportion of the people upset by
the decision to support multiple init systems, with systemd as the default,
bother to do anything about it, apart from complain.

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013150107.gd24...@chew.redmars.org

Re: Bash usage: was implicit linkage

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 10:53 PM, Chris Bannister
 wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 02:10:11PM +0900, Joel Rees wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Which is another way of saying that you want others to have already made
>> >> the mistakes for you.
>> >
>> > No it isn't!  Ponder why most people take their car to a mechanic for
>> > servicing.
>>
>> And you snipped:
>>
>> >> As long as you recognize that somebody has to make the mistakes,
>> >> and don't mind watching and learning while they do, that's not necessarily
>> >> a bad thing, given courtesy and quid-pro-quo, of course.
>
> Not on purpose. I didn't see it. It wasn't near that paragraph.
>
>> Paying a mechanic is one kind of quid-pro-quo, wouldn't you say?
>
> Don't know about you, but I don't know anyone who pays their mechanic to
> make mistakes. Au contraire in fact.
>
>> Do I need to unpack that a bit more, talk about how testing is a
>> substitute for making mistakes?
>
> No thanks.

And yet it is apparent that you need it unpacked for you.

Good mechanics made plenty of mistakes while learning the trade, and
learned from their mistakes. That's what schools are for, and that's
why those who learn on the job practice on junkers and their own
hot-rods before they tackle customers' cars.

Tests at school are one more opportunity to make sure that most of the
learning by mistakes is behind you when you start working on customer
equipment.

(I don't want the straight-A student right out of school as my
mechanic, or doctor. Straight-A students make their mistakes on the
job.)

-- 
Joel Rees

Be careful when you see conspiracy.
Look first in your own heart,
and ask yourself if you are not your own worst enemy.
Arm yourself with knowledge of yourself.

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/CAAr43iOWKjMpdQCei65i-CuECnSXoDZyRWEnfs1Mhtz2ZZ0y=g...@mail.gmail.com

Re: implicit linkage

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 10:44 PM, Chris Bannister
 wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 07:14:29PM +0900, Joel Rees wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Jonathan Dowland  wrote:
>> > On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 02:48:55PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
>> >> On Sun, 12 Oct 2014 19:02:08 +0100 Martin Read  wrote:
>> >> > On 12/10/14 18:13, John Hasler wrote:
>> >> > > You have no problem with an 1800 line function?
>> > ...
>> >> > I have a problem with 1800 line functions in general;
>> > ...
>> >> I have no problem with an 1800 line function.
>> > ...
>> >
>> > *What* 1800 line function? The commit URI that was shared was an 1894-line
>> > *file* with a large function definition starting at line 638 and ending at
>> > 1890. That's a 1252-line function.
>>
>> mmm? 1800 vs. 1252 ?
>>
>> 30 years ago, when we still read printouts, 60 lines was considered
>> the ideal max because that's what would fit on a page.
>>
>> Nowadays, we use a screen, but 60 lines is hard on the eyes (9 pt or
>> so), so 40 lines is a good screen-full. But it turns out, with being
>> about to scroll quickly, that 60 lines is still not hard to reach.
>> Moreover, 60 lines seems to be a pretty good average for what an
>> experienced coder can keep in his head.
>
> LOC is a silly way to measure anyway. You could put all the code on one
> line --- PITA to read, but hey! it's only one line of code! :)

You didn't read the rest of my post, did you?

> "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-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
> Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013134448.GB2362@tal
>

-- 
Joel Rees

Be careful when you see conspiracy.
Look first in your own heart,
and ask yourself if you are not your own worst enemy.
Arm yourself with knowledge of yourself.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/caar43ipbkzh94rctqtmh1d-jhgpadmtsffzbdynfc6guwz5...@mail.gmail.com

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)

2014-10-13 Thread Ian Jackson

Miles Fidelman writes ("Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)"):
> In reading through the archives, I have to say that the GR proposal was 
> both buried in all the broader discussion of systemd, rather long and 
> convoluted reading, and not well publicized.

If four other DDs send me and Matthew Vernon private email to say that
they would support a GR on this subject, I will restart this
conversation on -project.

Until a total of six DDs want a GR, we should drop this topic.

Ian.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/21563.60534.190732.528...@chiark.greenend.org.uk

Re: Synaptic slow when Caribou is running after Gnome-shell update

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 03:35:51PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Am 13.10.2014 um 12:06 schrieb Stephen Allen:
> > I too had experienced this, seems to be fixed as of yesterday. Thanks
> > Michael.
> 
> Unfortunately, this is not fixed yet.
> Apparently the start is not triggered via the xdg autostart file, as I
> had originally suspected, but rather via D-Bus activation, i.e. via
> /usr/share/dbus-1/services/org.gnome.Caribou.Daemon.service.

Well, Synaptic isn't waiting 5 minutes to start anymore. :)
 
> Something tries to access org.gnome.Caribou.Daemon, which then triggers
> the start of caribou. I suspect this to be gnome-shell, but need to
> verify it.
> 
> Moving /usr/share/dbus-1/services/org.gnome.Caribou.Daemon.service away
> should (temporarily) workaround the issue, but obviously is not a
> permanent fix, as the file will be back on the next package update.

OIC I'm fine with waiting.
 


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013152740.GA12142@Jessie

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)

2014-10-13 Thread Didier 'OdyX' Raboud

I really don't buy the argument that "the GR proposal was too quiet to 
be noticed by 6+ people". I mean: the proposition happened to be in the 
middle of the post-TC decision wave, on the mailing lists where it 
belonged. The people who cared about the whole "default init for Debian" 
question _were_ following and contributing to these various lists. I'm 
therefore claiming that the people who missed the GR proposal were not 
sufficiently interested (otherwise they would've been subscribed to 
either -vote or -project, where these proposals belong). I'm also 
thankful that the proposer limited his proposal to these lists (I'd have 
considered a spread of the call over -devel, -user or other lists an 
abuse).

Le lundi, 13 octobre 2014, 16.15:02 Ian Jackson a écrit :
> If four other DDs send me and Matthew Vernon private email to say that
> they would support a GR on this subject, I will restart this
> conversation on -project.

Doing this now despite the fact that the GR didn't reach its 6 seconds, 
7 months ago, will lead to an incredibly bigger waste of time, just when 
we're about to freeze testing.

The GR train passed…

Cheers,
OdyX


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/17667995.ybzVghadep@gyllingar

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)

2014-10-13 Thread Andrew McGlashan

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

On 13/10/2014 11:21 PM, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Oct 2014, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> 
>> Those who are most impacted are sys admins of servers, and upstream 
>> developers
> 
> I’m both, and I joined Debian to try to make an impact…
> 
>> - the two communities most impacted, but that seem to have no say in the
>> matter.
> 
> … but even then, am drowned by the masses.
> 
> (I did not have the chance to Second the GR proposal
> because I was not even aware that there *was* one.)

Why does that not surprise me, that's really a statement, not a question.

It's clear to me that a proposal was being worked on, someone didn't
like the way that proposal was going, so they got in with a lesser and
somewhat different proposal; and they did this as quickly as they could
with the intention to pre-empt the other proposal that didn't get far
enough off the ground.  Then the new proposer made sure that there was a
very hasty vote that wasn't well enough known about.  IOW, this all
looks very, very political and it looks like the result was destined to
go that way.

A serious impediment to a GR at this time has to do with all the work
that has gone in to Jessie leading up to the freeze that is just around
the corner.  Had a suitably worded GR got up much sooner and was very
well advertised to EVERY DD to make sure they knew of it's existence,
then perhaps things might have been very, very different today.  OTOH,
it has become much more clear that systemd is much more than an init
system replacement and aspires to be even much more so [although
unfortunately many are ignoring these facts].  At least that
understanding should help a good number of DDs whom are paying attention
to take the ramifications of the change to systemd default much more
seriously.

Voting from now onwards [before as well as after the release of Jessie]
will likely mean that plenty of DDs wouldn't want to vote to undo any
works that were undertaken for the release of Jessie based on the change
of the init default to systemd; hopefully that won't taint the result
too much.

Also, hopefully Ian will get enough private emails to get a GR up and
going quickly with the merit of new GR is given proper consideration,
such that we can at least have a fair prospect of systemd being removed
from being the default init system -- at the very least.  Discussion on
- -project may still lead to no new or suitable GR, but at least that is a
step in the right direction.

The next concern I have is whether or not the private emails to Ian
should be necessary, why not at least CC that intention to this list so
that us users and system administrators can keep abreast of the progress
being made.

A.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)

iF4EAREIAAYFAlQ79jgACgkQqBZry7fv4vs4BgD/XTLGZ3y5j5dJXLFqJA5G6Hlz
GX682njHvQRthgRzRVoA/3C8FVukAS/dk9wUpPXGLw8H4yTcvRCLHX1uT4tSDZUU
=kO2T
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/543bf63d.5060...@affinityvision.com.au

Re: [exim4] mixed up about terminology

On 10/13/2014 10:36 AM, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 08:28:32AM -0400, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>> Which ones?  Specific names, please.
> 
> Newcastle University, UK, at least when I worked in that section
> last (a few years ago), for one.
> 
> 

And they still have their servers misconfigured?

Jerry


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/543bf98a.3000...@attglobal.net

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)

2014-10-13 Thread Joey Hess

Bas Wijnen wrote:
> I'll speak for myself here: I don't really care about the init system.
> I am unhappy with the emotions that this debate is causing, but I'm not
> very interested in the technical parts. From what I see on the mailing
> lists, it seems that a few users are very unhappy and they keep bringing
> this up.

Since there continues to be interest on -user about why no DDs are
proposing a GR to overrule this decision, I want to expand on that.

First, you have to understand that every single argument that has been
posted to debian-user about systemd was already hashed out on
debian-devel over a year ago. The discussions about systemd on -devel
went on for at least a full year. It was a major topic at DebConf13,
which included presentations by both upstart and systemd upstream
developers. Then we had the -ctte process which dragged on for quite a
while longer and rehashed most everything all over again. So at this
point, most of us are pretty tired of the subject.

Secondly, Russ Allbrey did an amazing job during the -ctte decision of
weighing systemd vs the alternatives. He was unbiased; he dug deep. It
really cut through the fog. When you see such good work being done,
there is less tendancy to second-guess it, even if you might disagree
with his conclusions. We really appreciate Russ[1].

Thirdly, DDs feel empowered to fix problems. Not because they can upload
packages to Debian, but because they can file bug reports and work with
others to get them fixed. It's what we do. An example: Yesterday, DD
John Goerzen had a really, really bad experience with systemd on his
laptop, which uses an unusual zfs+encryption setup. He ranted, like
anyone would in such a situation:
http://changelog.complete.org/archives/9237-first-impressions-of-systemd

... But then he got on #debian-systemd on IRC and filed several bugs, and
got help to get his system working, and followed up on the bugs with
the details that will let them be reproduced and get fixed.
Just now, he wrote there:
CosmicRay: glad to see you got some problems resolved :)
kini: yes, me too ;-)
I plan to post an update. I must say, this is one of
the most helpful communities I've seen in Debian.
that is something *huge*.

I'd hope that anyone who has the time and expertise to participate in
1000+ message theads about systemd that dig into the source code and
discuss rather rarified theories of software engineering also feels
empowered to file bug reports and work to get actual problems fixed.
If you do, you will probably feel less need to engage in such threads.
And, if you appreciate this process of how software is improved, you'll
start to, perhaps, become a little bit suspicious that some voting-based
GR process can have as good results overall.

Fourthly, I think that many DDs feel that releasing jessie with systemd
as the default won't make it appreciably harder to revert to
non-systemd-as-default later than it would have been if we stuck with
sysvinit for this release.

Not that it would be easy to ditch systemd. But there's a lot of FUD
going around here about sysvinit support rotting because systemd is the
default, while the fact is that Debian fFreeBSD doesn't have systemd at
all, and all the init scripts will be kept working for that reason if
nothing else. Also, the tech committe decision was that Debian continues
to support multiple inits to the best of our ability[2]. And, the init
scripts are a relatively miniscule portion of the code in Debian, and
don't tend to bit rot much anyway[4].

So most of our concern about being locked into systemd is that desktop
environments are coming to require it, and that systemd-shim may be hard
to keep working in the long term. But desktop environments like Gnome
were already requiring systemd before Debian switched to it; Debian
cannot hold back the tide.

I'd say that the chances of a GR at this point in the release process
are about 1 in 1000. It'd take 5 DDs simulantaneously having a bad day
like John did, or massive evidence of unhappy users. And I mean, hard
statistical evidence of that on eg [3], not a few users posting
arguments against systemd that are often highly slanted and innaccurate
and have in any case been seen over and over again before.

--
see shy jo

[1] Russ was awarded a handcrafted plaque for this at DebConf14.
We have never awarded anyone such a thing before. We really
appreciate Russ!

http://vincentsanders.blogspot.com/2014/08/without-craftsmanship-inspiration-is.html

[2] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=746715#278

[3]
https://qa.debian.org/popcon-graph.php?packages=sysvinit-core+systemd-sysv&show_vote=on&want_legend=on&want_ticks=on&from_date=&to_date=&hlght_date=&date_fmt=%25Y-%25m&beenhere=1

[4] If I still maintained a daemon and was concerned about its init
script bit rotting, I'd write a simple autopkgtest check that the
init script worked properly; we've gotten increasingly good infrastructure
to test

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)


Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:

I really don't buy the argument that "the GR proposal was too quiet to
be noticed by 6+ people". I mean: the proposition happened to be in the
middle of the post-TC decision wave, on the mailing lists where it
belonged. The people who cared about the whole "default init for Debian"
question _were_ following and contributing to these various lists. I'm
therefore claiming that the people who missed the GR proposal were not
sufficiently interested (otherwise they would've been subscribed to
either -vote or -project, where these proposals belong). I'm also
thankful that the proposer limited his proposal to these lists (I'd have
considered a spread of the call over -devel, -user or other lists an
abuse).




Actually - I'd contest that, for four reasons:

- as I've previously noted - the major impacts of systemd are being 
(going to be) felt by sysadmins and upstream developers - who don't 
necessarily follow debian-devel all that closely -- or have input


- the actual GR call for vote was buried on debian-vote - immediately 
jumped on regarding wording and procedural discussions


- actual discussion of the GR on -devel was completely swamped by all 
the other discussion of systemd


- folks have just now pointed to the -project list --- this is the first 
I've ever heard of that list - and I note that it is not even listed on 
https://lists.debian.org/users.html or 
https://lists.debian.org/devel.html -- only on the full list of lists, 
where it's buried without a description of what it's for


Miles Fidelman


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: https://lists.debian.org/543bfc64.4050...@meetinghouse.net

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)

2014-10-13 Thread Matthias Klumpp

2014-10-13 18:23 GMT+02:00 Miles Fidelman :
> Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
>>
>> I really don't buy the argument that "the GR proposal was too quiet to
>> be noticed by 6+ people". I mean: the proposition happened to be in the
>> middle of the post-TC decision wave, on the mailing lists where it
>> belonged. The people who cared about the whole "default init for Debian"
>> question _were_ following and contributing to these various lists. I'm
>> therefore claiming that the people who missed the GR proposal were not
>> sufficiently interested (otherwise they would've been subscribed to
>> either -vote or -project, where these proposals belong). I'm also
>> thankful that the proposer limited his proposal to these lists (I'd have
>> considered a spread of the call over -devel, -user or other lists an
>> abuse).
>>
>>
>
> Actually - I'd contest that, for four reasons:
>
> - as I've previously noted - the major impacts of systemd are being (going
> to be) felt by sysadmins and upstream developers - who don't necessarily
> follow debian-devel all that closely -- or have input
>
> - the actual GR call for vote was buried on debian-vote - immediately jumped
> on regarding wording and procedural discussions
You do understand that we have procedured at Debian to handle stuff
like GR proposals, right? And that procedure involves posting to
debian-vote, so doing that was the right thing to do.


> - actual discussion of the GR on -devel was completely swamped by all the
> other discussion of systemd
That's why it was posted to -vote, where it belonged to.

> - folks have just now pointed to the -project list --- this is the first
> I've ever heard of that list - and I note that it is not even listed on
> https://lists.debian.org/users.html or https://lists.debian.org/devel.html
> -- only on the full list of lists, where it's buried without a description
> of what it's for
Debian Developers know of this (or at least should know of these lists
and subscibe to the ones they are interested in). Since we are
building the distribution and have to carry the additional work our
decisions cause, it's good to follow well-established procedures. That
was done here, and the attempt has failed.
If users notice these project-internal things is not really a concern
- for users we write release notes, and encourage involvement in
discussions about the subject (or even explicitly request feedback).
So, there is really nothing wrong or broken here, everything works as it should.
And the thing we have to do now is to make Jessie as good as possible,
and the systemd transition as painless and bug-free as possible. And
of course, also document what people need to do if they want sysvinit
instead of systemd.
Cheers,
Matthias



-- 
I welcome VSRE emails. See http://vsre.info/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/caknhny8jefmhuhieco_bnvncmorq-28znd3fe3socdakhw3...@mail.gmail.com

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)


Joey Hess wrote:

Bas Wijnen wrote:

I'll speak for myself here: I don't really care about the init system.
I am unhappy with the emotions that this debate is causing, but I'm not
very interested in the technical parts.  From what I see on the mailing
lists, it seems that a few users are very unhappy and they keep bringing
this up.



I'd hope that anyone who has the time and expertise to participate in
1000+ message theads about systemd that dig into the source code and
discuss rather rarified theories of software engineering also feels
empowered to file bug reports and work to get actual problems fixed.
If you do, you will probably feel less need to engage in such threads.
And, if you appreciate this process of how software is improved, you'll
start to, perhaps, become a little bit suspicious that some voting-based
GR process can have as good results overall.


But that is the major objection of those of us who USE Debian -- the 
need to do so, particularly when this concerns production servers.




Fourthly, I think that many DDs feel that releasing jessie with systemd
as the default won't make it appreciably harder to revert to
non-systemd-as-default later than it would have been if we stuck with
sysvinit for this release.

Not that it would be easy to ditch systemd. But there's a lot of FUD
going around here about sysvinit support rotting because systemd is the
default, while the fact is that Debian fFreeBSD doesn't have systemd at
all, and all the init scripts will be kept working for that reason if
nothing else. Also, the tech committe decision was that Debian continues
to support multiple inits to the best of our ability[2]. And, the init
scripts are a relatively miniscule portion of the code in Debian, and
don't tend to bit rot much anyway[4].


I've recently seen rumblings about ditching kFreeBSD - for lack of 
support.  That could easily change the dynamic.


What is really problematic is the language about continuing to support 
sysvinit, without what seems to be a firm commitment to do so.  Worse, 
speaking as a sysadmin, three things really strike me as problematic:
- systemd claims to support some, but not all, functions of sysvinit 
scripts -- looks like that's going to impose a lot of system testing 
when deploying jessie

- systemd seems to keep changing APIs, leading to,
- systemd-shim remaining out of sync with systemd

Put together - that all says upgrade is going to be a nightmare, that 
can't be avoided.




So most of our concern about being locked into systemd is that desktop
environments are coming to require it, and that systemd-shim may be hard
to keep working in the long term. But desktop environments like Gnome
were already requiring systemd before Debian switched to it; Debian
cannot hold back the tide.


Again.. when did the desktop become the priority for Debian.  For years, 
Debian (and Linux in general) has been most useful in the server 
environment.  Breaking server deployments, at the expense of the desktop 
seems like bad policy.




I'd say that the chances of a GR at this point in the release process
are about 1 in 1000. It'd take 5 DDs simulantaneously having a bad day
like John did, or massive evidence of unhappy users. And I mean, hard
statistical evidence of that on eg [3], not a few users posting
arguments against systemd that are often highly slanted and innaccurate
and have in any case been seen over and over again before.



Unfortunately, I think you're right on this.  Which, at least as one 
server-side user, leads me to focus my efforts on finding a new platform 
that promises more stability in the future.  If I have to invest time in 
dealing with changes that break backwards compatibility, it's just as 
easy to do that for a different platform as it is for Debian.  (Migrated 
from Solaris to Red Hat, then to Debian -- a pain each time, but 
Debian's had a good run - looks like time for something different.)


I am curious about how many other people are busily looking for a new 
distribution as a result of this.



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: https://lists.debian.org/543bff13.4030...@meetinghouse.net

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)

2014-10-13 Thread Henrique de Moraes Holschuh

On Mon, 13 Oct 2014, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> In any case, users _do_ have a say. They can force their systems to remain
> on sys5 init, or switch to a different distro if that should also turn out

Which, I should add, is something we measure if the user installs
popularity-contest and opts-in to its measurements.

http://popcon.debian.org/

-- 
  "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
  where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
  Henrique Holschuh


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013170138.ga20...@khazad-dum.debian.net

who is looking for a new distro as a result of systemd (particularly server-side users)


Folks,

All the discussion about systemd, and what I perceive as a shift in 
priority, for the Debian developer community, of putting desktop users 
ahead of server-side users, has me

me seriously looking at:

1. maintaining my older Debian distro as long as possible
2. migrating to a new distro that is more focused on server-side, 
production use


I migrated to Debian about 20 years ago - starting with Solaris, then 
migrating to Red Hat, then ending up with Debian - the first two based 
on what hosting providers where offering, Debian when we moved to our 
own servers.  It's been rock solid for us, up until udev caused a bunch 
of hiccups a few years back (software that changes configurations in 
unexpected ways wreaks havoc on production systems).  Systemd scares the 
living daylights out of me - as much for the attitude of its developers 
as anything else.  It's looking more and more like time to move on to 
either a BSD or Open Solaris based platform (with ZFS as a bonus) - lack 
of Xen support is about the only thing holding me back.


I'm really curious to know how many others here have come to a similar 
conclusion, and what folks are looking at (in my case, SmartOS is 
looking better and better).


Miles Fidelman


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: https://lists.debian.org/543c01c2.6030...@meetinghouse.net

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)


Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:

On Mon, 13 Oct 2014, Matthias Urlichs wrote:

In any case, users _do_ have a say. They can force their systems to remain
on sys5 init, or switch to a different distro if that should also turn out

Which, I should add, is something we measure if the user installs
popularity-contest and opts-in to its measurements.

http://popcon.debian.org/



which sure seems to reinforce the popularity of sysvinit

18sysvinit   697126 583755 44903 63528  4940
19imagemagick671330 54630 97400 59765 459535
20pam664835 424521 161793 74475  4046
21evolution-data-server  661614 129835 138891 91065 301823
22perl   642831 412336 121683 76726 32086
23systemd630568 287748 54129 57693 230998


Then again, how much of that is simply an artifact of default 
initialization, vs. by choice, is unclear.




--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.    Yogi Berra


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: https://lists.debian.org/543c0a84.1080...@meetinghouse.net

Re: who is looking for a new distro as a result of systemd (particularly server-side users)

2014-10-13 Thread Curt

On 2014-10-13, Miles Fidelman  wrote:
>
> I'm really curious to know how many others here have come to a similar 
> conclusion, and what folks are looking at (in my case, SmartOS is 
> looking better and better).
>

Oh shit.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/slrnm3o2md.2d4.cu...@einstein.electron.org

debian-advocacy?

2014-10-13 Thread Anders Wegge Keller

 It seems that there's a lot of controversy about the SysV-replacement that
should not be named. Most, if not all of the arguments for, as well as
against seem to be of a philosophical, rather than stringent technichnical
nature. As such, they are probably not suited for this list. So my question
as a relative newcomer to the Debian ecosystem is if there is an -advocacy
list, where the philosophical differences can be beaten into the ground,
while keeping this list at a more factual level?

 If not, where do I propose the creation of such a list?

-- 
//Wegge


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013194503.6e415...@wegge.dk

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)

2014-10-13 Thread Henrique de Moraes Holschuh

On Mon, 13 Oct 2014, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> >On Mon, 13 Oct 2014, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> >>In any case, users _do_ have a say. They can force their systems to remain
> >>on sys5 init, or switch to a different distro if that should also turn out
> >Which, I should add, is something we measure if the user installs
> >popularity-contest and opts-in to its measurements.
> >
> >http://popcon.debian.org/
> 
> which sure seems to reinforce the popularity of sysvinit

...

> Then again, how much of that is simply an artifact of default
> initialization, vs. by choice, is unclear.

Right now it is the "defaults" effect, because Debian stable is included in
the report.  We don't have a "testing + unstable" report.

"Statistics per popularity-contest releases" gives you an approximate
breakdown of what is in the "all" report, I think.

We will only have decent data on this about six months after jessie becomes
stable.  But it will be useful nonetheless.

Being able to filter reports to consider only those from testing+unstable
might make it more useful at the shorter term, though.

-- 
  "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
  where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
  Henrique Holschuh

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013175522.gb20...@khazad-dum.debian.net

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)

2014-10-13 Thread Ansgar Burchardt

Hi,

[ Please followup on -user@, there is no need to have this on two
  lists. ]

Miles Fidelman  writes:
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
>> http://popcon.debian.org/
>
> which sure seems to reinforce the popularity of sysvinit
>
> 18sysvinit   697126 583755 44903 63528  4940

Not really: sysvinit is the (only) supported init system in (old)stable
which is also included in the result.

But in Jessie the init part is provided by the new sysvinit-core
package. So we can compare the installation numbers of systemd-sysv and
sysvinit-core to see what people have installed in Jessie.

As [1] shows the majority of Jessie users have migrated to systemd,
probably as an effect of GNOME starting to depend on it (around May
2014) and the new init package (around June 2014).

Ansgar

  [1] 

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/87y4sjon24@deep-thought.43-1.org

Re: who is looking for a new distro as a result of systemd (particularly server-side users)

2014-10-13 Thread Carl Fink

Slackware springs to mind.
-- 
Carl Fink   nitpick...@nitpicking.com 

Read my blog at blog.nitpicking.com.  Reviews!  Observations!
Stupid mistakes you can correct!


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013180216.ga29...@panix.com

Re: implicit linkage

On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 08:18:57 +0100
Jonathan Dowland  wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 02:48:55PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
> > On Sun, 12 Oct 2014 19:02:08 +0100 Martin Read 
> > wrote:
> > > On 12/10/14 18:13, John Hasler wrote:
> > > > You have no problem with an 1800 line function?
> ...
> > > I have a problem with 1800 line functions in general; 
> ...
> > I have no problem with an 1800 line function.
> ...
> 
> *What* 1800 line function? The commit URI that was shared was an
> 1894-line *file* with a large function definition starting at line
> 638 and ending at 1890. That's a 1252-line function.

OK, %s/1800/1252/g

I have a hunch the guy I replied to would have had as much of a problem
with a 1252 line function as an 1800 line one. My Ruby friends
disparage functions over 30 lines long. I view function lengths as an
implementation detail and don't worry too much about them. The code
looked reasonable to me.

> 
> Not only that but you're looking at a commit dating from August last
> year. The function doesn't even exist any more in current systemd[1].
> There are no functions of even a 100 lines length in that file now.
> 
> [1]
> http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/systemd/tree/src/core/dbus-manager.c

I'm not that concerned about function lengths anyway.


> 
> 
> > What I *DO* have a problem with is the guy's welding pam onto his
> > new init, and welding other critical and former separate OS
> > functionalities onto his "toolset", preventing (either technically
> > or by them being removed from the packages) former modules from
> > being used.
> 
> Which guy is that? The commit that the URI referenced was written by
> Lennart Poettering, so I guess you mean him; 

Yep.

> but that commit didn't
> touch the file that was being complained about. Maybe you mean one of
> the other 17 people who have contributed to that file?

I wasn't talking about that commit, I was talking about what has been
done, and what Poettering has stated his goal is.

> 
> > If I were to maintain his code, before reducing the 1800 line
> > function, I'd do something about the function with 20 arguments,
> > with each argument including a function call. I'd replace all of
> > that with a struct pointer. 
> 
> I'd start with *reading the code* if I were you; something you guys
> clearly aren't doing.

OK, nothing in that code was that important. I *did* notice a function
with 20 arguments, and I, personally, would substitute a struct pointer
for that. But, as I said before, my objection to systemd isn't coding
style.

> 
> But if you get past that you'll be pleased to discover that such
> clean ups and refactors are happening quite often. See e.g.
> df2d202e6ed4001a21c6512c244acad5d4706c87 ("bus: let's simplify things
> by getting rid of unnecessary bus parameters"). I'll leave you to
> guess the author of that one.

I couldn't find that, but once again, I'm not saying anything about the
coding style. As a matter of fact, the thrust of my post was basically
that I'm not concerned about the referenced code's coding style, I'm
concerned about the macro-architecture.

SteveT

Steve Litt*  http://www.troubleshooters.com/
Troubleshooting Training  *  Human Performance


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013141807.27141...@mydesq2.domain.cxm

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)

2014-10-13 Thread Jeroen Dekkers

At Mon, 13 Oct 2014 13:23:16 -0400,
Miles Fidelman wrote:
> 
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > On Mon, 13 Oct 2014, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> >> In any case, users _do_ have a say. They can force their systems to remain
> >> on sys5 init, or switch to a different distro if that should also turn out
> > Which, I should add, is something we measure if the user installs
> > popularity-contest and opts-in to its measurements.
> >
> > http://popcon.debian.org/
> >
> 
> which sure seems to reinforce the popularity of sysvinit
> 
> 18sysvinit   697126 583755 44903 63528  4940
> 19imagemagick671330 54630 97400 59765 459535
> 20pam664835 424521 161793 74475  4046
> 21evolution-data-server  661614 129835 138891 91065 301823
> 22perl   642831 412336 121683 76726 32086
> 23systemd630568 287748 54129 57693 230998
> 
> 
> Then again, how much of that is simply an artifact of default
> initialization, vs. by choice, is unclear.

Comparing those source packages is just comparing the previous
essential sysvinit package against udev. If you want a better picture
you should look at systemd-sysv versus sysvinit-core:

2335  systemd-sysv   19845 14413   925  4504 3 (Debian 
Systemd Maintainers)
4623  sysvinit-core   5634  4866   576   191 1 (Debian 
Sysvinit Maintainers)

Sysvinit-core was introduced in jessie and systemd-sysv conflicts with
sysvinit-core. Systemd-sysv is also available in wheezy, but there are
24486 reports from the popcon version 1.61 (testing/unstable) which
means only about 1000 of the systemd-sysv installs seem to be from
wheezy. So a big majority of the testing/unstable users don't seem to
have a problem with systemd, just like a majority of the DDs don't
have a problem with systemd or else we would already have had a GR.

It would be nice if the minority which doesn't like systemd would just
accept that systemd is the default init system in jessie and that the
majority of developers and users don't seem to have any problem with
that.

Kind regards,

Jeroen Dekkers

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/87wq83lt6p.wl%jer...@dekkers.ch

Re: who is looking for a new distro as a result of systemd (particularly server-side users)

2014-10-13 Thread Andrew McGlashan

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

On 14/10/2014 4:24 AM, Curt wrote:
> On 2014-10-13, Miles Fidelman  wrote:
>>
>> I'm really curious to know how many others here have come to a similar 
>> conclusion, and what folks are looking at (in my case, SmartOS is 
>> looking better and better).
> 
> Oh shit.

??

I looked at SmartOS [1] last year, it wasn't ready for my needs then.  I
would be interested to know where it is at now as I may consider it too.

Also, I've sent a request to the debian-bsd list to try and get some
answers on the viability of using kFreeBSD going forward -- that is the
"kFreeBSD future" [2] titled thread.  My latest post to this thread is
too new to give a direct link yet as I just posted about 7 minutes ago.

My preferences, for possible least change, would be to go with kFreeBSD,
but only if it is going to be around and not become a dead project.
However, if SmartOS is now ready for real prime time production use,
then I'll certainly consider it.

Thanks
A.

[1] http://smartos.org/
[2] https://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2014/09/msg00280.html
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)

iF4EAREIAAYFAlQ8Fl8ACgkQqBZry7fv4vv3xQD+M0wgAOc2owDpkAKflCXwYMie
T/XNn7Hr0yL7XzBb2RcBAKq1rFlnUkww6s3lvLDqaIHC8E/3RIpjJwpJwjKuJhpu
=Kt8l
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/543c1664.5080...@affinityvision.com.au

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)

Thanks Joey, for a fantastic write-up.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013183400.gb29...@chew.redmars.org

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)

2014-10-13 Thread Didier 'OdyX' Raboud

Le lundi, 13 octobre 2014, 12.23:00 Miles Fidelman a écrit :
> Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
> > I really don't buy the argument that "the GR proposal was too quiet
> > to be noticed by 6+ people".
> 
> Actually - I'd contest that, for four reasons:
> 
> - as I've previously noted - the major impacts of systemd are being
> (going to be) felt by sysadmins and upstream developers - who don't
> necessarily follow debian-devel all that closely -- or have input

Mind you, most if not all of the CTTE are both sysadmins and upstream 
developers, and I'd go as far as saying that most of DDs are either too.

> - the actual GR call for vote was buried on debian-vote - immediately
> jumped on regarding wording and procedural discussions

Yes, and? There was a proposal on -vote, which could have been followed 
by seconds, totally ignoring the side-discussions. Don't expect 
launching a GR about a) overriding a Debian body; b) the default init 
system to be a quiet ride.

> - actual discussion of the GR on -devel was completely swamped by all
> the other discussion of systemd

My feeling is that the swamping happened because some people disagreeing 
with the CTTE vote vented a lot of frustration through whining and 
complaining instead of focusing their energy to formulate a concrete 
proposal for a GR.

We're talking about finding _6_ seconds, so I'd only buy this argument 
if the threshold was 50 (or so) and we'd have only found a dozen 
seconds.

OdyX

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/2605439.lZGhNDzrLW@gyllingar

Re: who is looking for a new distro as a result of systemd (particularly server-side users)


Curt wrote:

On 2014-10-13, Miles Fidelman  wrote:

I'm really curious to know how many others here have come to a similar
conclusion, and what folks are looking at (in my case, SmartOS is
looking better and better).


Oh shit.




Would you care to elaborate on that?

--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.    Yogi Berra


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: https://lists.debian.org/543c17e0.5010...@meetinghouse.net

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)

On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 17:33:02 +0200
Didier 'OdyX' Raboud  wrote:

> I really don't buy the argument that "the GR proposal was too quiet
> to be noticed by 6+ people". I mean: the proposition happened to be
> in the middle of the post-TC decision wave, on the mailing lists
> where it belonged. The people who cared about the whole "default init
> for Debian" question _were_ following and contributing to these
> various lists. I'm therefore claiming that the people who missed the
> GR proposal were not sufficiently interested (otherwise they would've
> been subscribed to either -vote or -project, where these proposals
> belong). I'm also thankful that the proposer limited his proposal to
> these lists (I'd have considered a spread of the call over -devel,
> -user or other lists an abuse).
> 
> Le lundi, 13 octobre 2014, 16.15:02 Ian Jackson a écrit :
> > If four other DDs send me and Matthew Vernon private email to say
> > that they would support a GR on this subject, I will restart this
> > conversation on -project.
> 
> Doing this now despite the fact that the GR didn't reach its 6
> seconds, 7 months ago, will lead to an incredibly bigger waste of
> time, just when we're about to freeze testing.
> 
> The GR train passed…

So what do you suggest instead?

SteveT

Steve Litt*  http://www.troubleshooters.com/
Troubleshooting Training  *  Human Performance


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013143754.7880d...@mydesq2.domain.cxm

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)

On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 14:21:45 +0200
Thorsten Glaser  wrote:

> On Mon, 13 Oct 2014, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> 
> > Those who are most impacted are sys admins of servers, and upstream
> > developers
> 
> I’m both, and I joined Debian to try to make an impact…
> 
> > - the two communities most impacted, but that seem to have no say
> > in the matter.
> 
> … but even then, am drowned by the masses.
> 
> (I did not have the chance to Second the GR proposal
> because I was not even aware that there *was* one.)
> 
> bye,
> //mirabilos

mirabilos,

Thank you for being one of the few who stood up and said "hey guys,
let's not rush to judgement here." No matter how things turn out, I'll
always respect the stance you took, and how long you maintained that
stance in spite of people opposing you.

SteveT

Steve Litt*  http://www.troubleshooters.com/
Troubleshooting Training  *  Human Performance


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013144052.51d0e...@mydesq2.domain.cxm

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)

2014-10-13 Thread Andrei POPESCU

On Lu, 13 oct 14, 12:34:27, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> 
> Again.. when did the desktop become the priority for Debian.  For years,
> Debian (and Linux in general) has been most useful in the server
> environment.  Breaking server deployments, at the expense of the desktop
> seems like bad policy.

Do you have any evidence of systemd breaking your setup? If yes, would 
you please be so kind to at least file corresponding bugs?

Thanks,
Andrei
-- 
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: debian-advocacy?

2014-10-13 Thread Cindy-Sue Causey

On 10/13/14, Anders Wegge Keller  wrote:
>  It seems that there's a lot of controversy about the SysV-replacement that
> should not be named. Most, if not all of the arguments for, as well as
> against seem to be of a philosophical, rather than stringent technichnical
> nature. As such, they are probably not suited for this list. So my question
> as a relative newcomer to the Debian ecosystem is if there is an -advocacy
> list, where the philosophical differences can be beaten into the ground,
> while keeping this list at a more factual level?
>
>  If not, where do I propose the creation of such a list?


At first quick glance over, didn't find "advocacy" per se (by name),
but did see a possibility in debian-publicity:

https://lists.debian.org/debian-publicity/

Complete index of *our* Debian lists is... listed at:

https://lists.debian.org/completeindex.html

Hope that helps at least a little..

Cindy :)

-- 
Cindy-Sue Causey
Talking Rock, Pickens County, Georgia, USA

* runs with duct tape *


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/CAO1P-kCZepz9V63-Z-fWNR953bpf=ryx_a4x0fcvxu8x0vt...@mail.gmail.com

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)


Andrei POPESCU wrote:

On Lu, 13 oct 14, 12:34:27, Miles Fidelman wrote:

Again.. when did the desktop become the priority for Debian.  For years,
Debian (and Linux in general) has been most useful in the server
environment.  Breaking server deployments, at the expense of the desktop
seems like bad policy.

Do you have any evidence of systemd breaking your setup? If yes, would
you please be so kind to at least file corresponding bugs?




Hell no.  I have no time at all for testing at the moment - I've got 
production systems to maintain, and security holes to patch (I haven't 
even begun to think how many new security holes sytsemd is going to 
introduce).


Miles Fidelman




--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.    Yogi Berra


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: https://lists.debian.org/543c2065.1050...@meetinghouse.net

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)

2014-10-13 Thread Andrei POPESCU

On Lu, 13 oct 14, 10:36:17, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> 
> And, as a couple of folks have now pointed out, a lot of developers did not
> know about the initial vote proposal.

1 (one) is not "a lot".

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
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: debian-advocacy?

On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 19:45:03 +0200
Anders Wegge Keller  wrote:

>  It seems that there's a lot of controversy about the
> SysV-replacement that should not be named. Most, if not all of the
> arguments for, as well as against seem to be of a philosophical,
> rather than stringent technichnical nature. As such, they are
> probably not suited for this list. 

The preceding sentence is not at all true. If Red Hat is using Debian
as its proxy in monopolizing Linux, and morphing Linux into something
completely different, this is the business of rank and file Debian
users.

> So my question as a relative
> newcomer to the Debian ecosystem is if there is an -advocacy list,
> where the philosophical differences can be beaten into the ground,
> while keeping this list at a more factual level?

You're not the first to propose such divide and conquer. Without a lot
of stringent moderation, it's not going to work.

>  If not, where do I propose the creation of such a list?

It already exists: http://www.freelists.org/archive/modular-debian/

You can subscribe at http://www.freelists.org/list/modular-debian

Posting there does not preclude expressing systemd displeasure here.

SteveT

Steve Litt*  http://www.troubleshooters.com/
Troubleshooting Training  *  Human Performance


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013145849.11cb9...@mydesq2.domain.cxm

Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)

On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 20:13:23 +0200
Ansgar Burchardt  wrote:

> As [1] shows the majority of Jessie users have migrated to systemd,
> probably as an effect of GNOME starting to depend on it (around May
> 2014) and the new init package (around June 2014).

Everyone: Please, please, PLEASE read the preceding paragraph. Ansgar
made my anti-systemd argument perfectly.

SteveT

Steve Litt*  http://www.troubleshooters.com/
Troubleshooting Training  *  Human Performance


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013150257.2da8b...@mydesq2.domain.cxm

Re: who is looking for a new distro as a result of systemd (particularly server-side users)

On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 17:24:29 + (UTC)
Curt  wrote:

> On 2014-10-13, Miles Fidelman  wrote:
> >
> > I'm really curious to know how many others here have come to a
> > similar conclusion, and what folks are looking at (in my case,
> > SmartOS is looking better and better).
> >
> 
> Oh shit.

If I were going to give up free software and go proprietary, I'd go
Mac. Unfortunately, at this point I'm actually considering Mac as my
final backstop.

SteveT

Steve Litt*  http://www.troubleshooters.com/
Troubleshooting Training  *  Human Performance


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013144912.64e44...@mydesq2.domain.cxm

Re: Prolem with external monitor

2014-10-13 Thread Andrei POPESCU

On Lu, 13 oct 14, 12:19:51, Bret Busby wrote:
> 
> This is the first attemt to send that file as an attachment.
...
> [35.167] (--) PCI:*(0:0:2:0) 8086:0416:1025:0781 rev 6, Mem @ 
> 0xd300/4194304, 0xc000/268435456, I/O @ 0x5000/64
> [35.167] (--) PCI: (0:1:0:0) 10de:0fe4:1025:0781 rev 161, Mem @ 
> 0xd200/16777216, 0xa000/268435456, 0xb000/33554432, I/O @ 
> 0x4000/128, BIOS @ 0x/524288

Your laptop has two graphical adapters, a.k.a. Nvidia Optimus. This 
needs special support, see

https://wiki.debian.org/Bumblebee

> [36.697] (II) VESA(0): initializing int10

You Xorg is falling back to vesa, though it should be using intel. Since 
it seems like you will need backports anyway you might as well get a 
newer kernel and xserver-xorg-video-intel.

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
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: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)

On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 21:47:39 +0300
Andrei POPESCU  wrote:

> On Lu, 13 oct 14, 12:34:27, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> > 
> > Again.. when did the desktop become the priority for Debian.  For
> > years, Debian (and Linux in general) has been most useful in the
> > server environment.  Breaking server deployments, at the expense of
> > the desktop seems like bad policy.
> 
> Do you have any evidence of systemd breaking your setup? If yes,
> would you please be so kind to at least file corresponding bugs?
> 

I would suspect most cases are the result of deliberate decisions, and
are therefore by definition not bugs. I had a failure to boot, and a
non-working mobile dongle, both of which were not bugs but requirements
for me to change my systems. One occurred as a result of moving to
pid1=systemd, one as a result of *not* moving to pid1=systemd.

That will be the kind of breakage which may well occur when the great
Wheezy-Jessie upgrade begins, if pid1=systemd is enforced then. I have
seen it stated that it will not be, which would be sensible, but which
will then result in breakages where pid1=systemd *is* required. We know
about Gnome, which isn't too relevant for servers, but there will be
others.

Most of the gotchas will find their way into the release notes, not all
of them will. A few will be completely unforeseeable, due to unusual
configurations. Most of the problems will not be due to systemd
directly, but to new versions of systemd-ready software which become
un-systemd-ready when they meet the old configurations.

It might turn out to be necessary to make a Wheezy upgrade to the
then-current systemd from the present ancient one, presumably along
with a compatible kernel, to get that out of the way before the main
upgrade. I've been through a stable upgrade, I can't remember which,
that strongly recommended upgrading the kernel first and separately,
presumably for somewhat related reasons.

-- 
Joe

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013201930.24374...@jresid.jretrading.com

Re: who is looking for a new distro as a result of systemd (particularly server-side users)