Hi...
I have HQ web sites..
All my sites have unique IPs address DA30+ PA 45+ Low OBL unique content
Google indexed USA hosted.
If you are looking for blog post blogroll links please let me know ,
I will offer you very competitive rates and with quality work.
Looking forward to your positive re
Hi,
WTF?
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 01:18:18AM +, Debian FTP Masters wrote:
> Changed-By: Andreas Moog away (0.9.5+ds-0+nmu2) unstable; urgency=low
> .
>* Non-maintainer upload
> - d/p/01_fix_makefile: $LIBS need to come after $SRC while linking to
>fix building with ld --as-
Le 25/10/2013 00:39, Brian May a écrit :
> On 25 October 2013 03:33, Christoph Anton Mitterer
> mailto:cales...@scientia.net>> wrote:
>
> Well arguably, one shouldn't be too surprised if people get more and
> more pissed off by GNOME _upstream_ .
> They continuously try to push their a
On 10/25/2013 12:08 AM, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 10/24/2013 17:40, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>> This would mean:
> [...]
>> * Tweak CD and installer builds:
>>+ change what happens with no desktop selected to use xfce instead
>> of Gnome (netinst, DVD, BD etc.)
>>+ Add an exp
On 10/25/2013 12:30 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 22:16 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> On 10/24/2013 06:46 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 11:59 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 09:11:30AM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> On Thu, Oc
Steve McIntyre dijo [Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 04:40:48PM +0100]:
> Hi folks,
>
> This goes back to during the wheezy release cycle. There was a little
> discussion around a change in tasksel [1], but rather too late in the
> day for the change to make sense. Now we have rather more time, I
> feel. Let
]] James McCoy
> That doesn't contradict what I stated. One can use systemd (the
> package) without using systemd (the binary) as PID 1. I don't see any
> reason why Gnome would care what init system is used, while I do see
> reasons why they want to use the various other tools that come along
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:57:37AM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> James wrote:
> >On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> >> Let's change the default desktop for installation to xfce.
> >> ...
> >> Pros:
> >>
> >> * CD#1 will work again without size worries
> >>
> >> * Smaller,
To not be provided with a choice is utterly *horrible*.
There is init, upstart and sytemd; the linux boot manager
(GRUB) is a JOKE; see extlinux - use what the kernel devsuse.
Perhaps we should appeal to the BSD community.
:wq
:q
```:q
One can't help but wonder if we've finally got enou
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 07:25:18PM +0200, Frederic Peters wrote:
> > What's the status of GNOME on BSDs? How do they get around this sytemd
> > stuff, if it's not ported? Do they just use chunks of systemd like
> > Ubuntu?
>
> I can't answer for the systemd part but GNOME on BSDs mostly depends
>
The following is a listing of packages for which help has been requested
through the WNPP (Work-Needing and Prospective Packages) system in the
last week.
Total number of orphaned packages: 535 (new: 5)
Total number of packages offered up for adoption: 160 (new: 0)
Total number of packages request
Russ Allbery wrote:
> Christoph Anton Mitterer writes:
> > In sid, gnome-settings-daemon depends now on systemd.
>
> I'm missing a key bit of context here. Does gnome-settings-daemon just
> require that systemd be installed? Or does it require that the init
> system be systemd?
>
> The systemd
Wolodja wrote:
>On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 16:40 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>> This goes back to during the wheezy release cycle. There was a little
>> discussion around a change in tasksel [1], but rather too late in the
>> day for the change to make sense. Now we have rather more time, I
>> feel.
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 15:41 -0700, Mark Symonds wrote:
> No, no, no… drop GNOME.
>
> Useless anyway.
1. Don't top-post.
2. Assume good faith.
3. This list is for discussion of Debian development, not for random
opinions.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
Teamwork is essential - it allows you to blame
On 25 October 2013 10:54, Brian May wrote:
> * The Debian packages of Gnome currently will not install on non-Linux
> systems.
>
Seems I was mislead. On hurd and kfreebsd, gnome-settings-daemon does not
depend on systemd.
http://sources.debian.net/src/gnome-settings-daemon/3.8.5-2/debian/contr
On 25 October 2013 10:25, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 6:52 AM, Brian May wrote:
>
> > gnome-settings-daemon depends on systemd
>
> This is only true on Debian's Linux architectures:
>
>
> http://sources.debian.net/src/gnome-settings-daemon/3.8.5-2/debian/control#L58
Oh, ok, good,
On 25 October 2013 06:37, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I'm missing a key bit of context here. Does gnome-settings-daemon just
> require that systemd be installed? Or does it require that the init
> system be systemd?
>
Me too. Am getting rather lost as to why gnome-settings-daemon depends
on systemd.
Christoph Anton Mitterer writes:
> On Fri, 2013-10-25 at 09:39 +1100, Brian May wrote:
>> If you don't like Gnome, nobody is forcing you to use it.
> Well actually it's not that easy to avoid all of it, at least you get
> some libraries even when using 3rd party GTK/GNOME apps.
Meh. That's not
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 15:41 -0700, Mark Symonds wrote:
> No, no, no… drop GNOME.
>
> Useless anyway.
You really think such comments will help anyone or actually lead to
dropping it? o.O
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
James wrote:
>On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>> Let's change the default desktop for installation to xfce.
>> ...
>> Pros:
>>
>> * CD#1 will work again without size worries
>>
>> * Smaller, simpler desktop
>>
>> * Works well/better on all supported kernels (?)
>>
>> *
On Fri, 2013-10-25 at 09:39 +1100, Brian May wrote:
> If you don't like Gnome, nobody is forcing you to use it.
Well actually it's not that easy to avoid all of it, at least you get
some libraries even when using 3rd party GTK/GNOME apps.
> Trying to say "[GNOME upstream] continuously try to [.
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 7:47 AM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> Debian is the "Universal OS", isn't it?
Part of being a 'Universal OS' is being useful to as many people as
possible, including people who don't know what a "desktop" is and
people who don't have the ability to choose a desktop. A
On Fri, 2013-10-25 at 10:40 +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> Why force
> *every* user of the installer to make that choice, when many of them
> find the very question to be a needless imposition which makes the
> installer incrementally less helpful?
Sorry, but we're talking about Debian!
I don't think
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 6:52 AM, Brian May wrote:
> gnome-settings-daemon depends on systemd
This is only true on Debian's Linux architectures:
http://sources.debian.net/src/gnome-settings-daemon/3.8.5-2/debian/control#L58
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, ema
No, no, no… drop GNOME.
Useless anyway.
--
Mark
On Oct 23, 2013, at 1:30 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer
wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Well I hope this doesn't turn into some kind of flame war... about
> systemd, GNOME or similar.
>
>
> In sid, gnome-settings-daemon depends now on systemd.
>
> I
Paul Wise writes:
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> > There are different ways of presenting the choice that make the
> > choice more or less obvious, but it's hard to avoid a default choice
> > in an installer. […]
> >
> > If you need to eliminate the concept of default
Andrei wrote:
>On Jo, 24 oct 13, 16:40:48, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> This goes back to during the wheezy release cycle. There was a little
>> discussion around a change in tasksel [1], but rather too late in the
>> day for the change to make sense. Now we have rather more time, I
>>
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 16:08 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Even if you force the user to pick one of a list of options,
> users will tend to pick the first on the list.
Randomise the order (every time).
And note that I wouldn't suggest to add all things that can be vaguely
considered a desktop envir
On Fri, 2013-10-25 at 06:48 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> I agree with the people who suggest getting rid of the concept of a
> 'default' desktop but I don't know how practical it is since not all
> users will be capable of choosing a desktop.
I don't think user's are that stupid.
Just think about the
Paul Wise writes:
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> There are different ways of presenting the choice that make the choice
>> more or less obvious, but it's hard to avoid a default choice in an
>> installer. Even if you force the user to pick one of a list of
>> options,
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> There are different ways of presenting the choice that make the choice
> more or less obvious, but it's hard to avoid a default choice in an
> installer. Even if you force the user to pick one of a list of options,
> users will tend to pick t
Christoph Anton Mitterer writes:
> But do we really need a default desktop environment?
There are different ways of presenting the choice that make the choice
more or less obvious, but it's hard to avoid a default choice in an
installer. Even if you force the user to pick one of a list of optio
On 25 October 2013 06:24, Olav Vitters wrote:
> - GNOME 3.10 runs on OpenBSD (probably good to repeat this :P)
>
If I understand this correctly, upstream Gnome 3.10 will run fine on
OpenBSD.
However the Debian packages won't work on OpenBSD, as gnome-settings-daemon
depends on systemd which doe
On 25 October 2013 03:33, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> Well arguably, one shouldn't be too surprised if people get more and
> more pissed off by GNOME _upstream_ .
> They continuously try to push their agenda through and force their
> blessings (most of the time broken, e.g. NM, GNOME Shell)
Roger Lynn writes:
> How often is the choice of default desktop re-evaluated, and how is this
> done?
We have an argument about it at least once every release cycle. One of
the problems with the recurring argument is that we don't have a good
decision-making criteria. Another problem is that t
I agree with the people who suggest getting rid of the concept of a
'default' desktop but I don't know how practical it is since not all
users will be capable of choosing a desktop. So we need to develop
some guidance for them. In the netinst image and web pages a list of
desktop blends would need
Hi.
Since some people have demanded to drop GNOME as default desktop in "my"
"systemd effectively mandatory now due to GNOME" thread the following
popped up in my mind:
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 16:40 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Let's change the default desktop for installation to xfce.
Do we need
On 24/10/13 03:00, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 02:21:25AM +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote:
>> 2013/10/24 Steve Langasek :
>> > Well, that's one more reason the init system and the dbus services should
>> > be
>> > separated out in the packaging.
>> Some of the services consume fun
This is a move to SABOTAGE linux as an OS.
--
Mark
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 10:30:41PM +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Well I hope this doesn't turn into some kind of flame war... about
> systemd, GNOME or similar.
>
>
> In sid, gnome-settings-daemon depends now on systemd.
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 12:13:34PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> And this is not just an issue because of people not wanting to use systemd
> init, but also because systemd init *can't* run in a container.
Whoah, that's not true:
sudo systemd-nspawn -bD ~/images/fedora-19
works just fine :)
Zby
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 22:37 +0200, Olav Vitters wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 10:07:53PM +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> > I'd call such cases even intentional malicious behaviour against user.
> >
> > I'm sure you can easily find the related bugs, but please keep them away
> > from he
This seems a little bit of a distraction from the issue at hand (Debian
Development) — perhaps you and the OP could follow up off list?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 10:07:53PM +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> I'd call such cases even intentional malicious behaviour against user.
>
> I'm sure you can easily find the related bugs, but please keep them away
> from here, since the flames do not need even more coals to burn higher.
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Nicolas Guilbert
* Package name: snap-byob
Version : 4.0
Upstream Author : Jens Mönig
* URL : http://snap.berkeley.edu
* License : AGPL
Programming Lang: Javascript
Description : ITP: snap-byob -- A block-based d
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 21:42 +0200, Olav Vitters wrote:
> Could you give me a few bugnumbers and/or be more concrete what you mean
> with "outrageously"?
Yeah I could, but this already turned far too much into a flame war.
There's e.g. the bug that Evolution silently corrupts eMails, which is
known
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 09:49:48AM -0400, Marvin Renich wrote:
> I believe that systemd/GNOME upstream is intentionally coupling the two
> in order to force adoption of systemd. There are obviously others who
GNOME is not. And I'm speaking as a GNOME release team member.
A video of GNOME 3.10 ru
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 06:33:34PM +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> I know of my own tickets I've reported upstream and how outrageously
> GNOME deals with some critical things...
Could you give me a few bugnumbers and/or be more concrete what you mean
with "outrageously"? Do you mean some
Christoph Anton Mitterer writes:
> Well I hope this doesn't turn into some kind of flame war... about
> systemd, GNOME or similar.
> In sid, gnome-settings-daemon depends now on systemd.
I'm missing a key bit of context here. Does gnome-settings-daemon just
require that systemd be installed?
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 09:35:30PM +0200, Cesare Leonardi wrote:
> On 24/10/2013 17:40, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> >Let's change the default desktop for installation to xfce.
>
> I agree.
> I'm using it happily for more than a year and it mostly works. Less
> mature than Gnome 2.x, which i still miss
XFCE is short of maintainers, both upstream and debian, but 4.12 is
expected to be released sometime in the next 6 months. That said,
everything both debian and upstream is stable, and a number of 4.11
"development release" packages are able to be uploaded to experimental
if more people come onboar
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 12:25:12PM -0500, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Brian May (br...@microcomaustralia.com.au):
> > On 24 October 2013 11:09, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > > * it breaks other users of cgroups. I have not tested this personally
> > > (mostly because of the above point), but if I u
On 24/10/2013 17:40, Steve McIntyre wrote:
Let's change the default desktop for installation to xfce.
I agree.
I'm using it happily for more than a year and it mostly works. Less
mature than Gnome 2.x, which i still miss, but powerful and functional.
Pros:
* CD#1 will work again without
]] Thomas Goirand
> On 10/24/2013 04:51 PM, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
[...]
> > If GNOME decides they want the DBus interfaces from systemd, that does
> > not put any obligation on systemd or the systemd maintainers to split
> > those bits of functionality out of systemd.
>
> We've been reading a
]] Marvin Renich
> I believe that systemd/GNOME upstream is intentionally coupling the two
> in order to force adoption of systemd.
You're aware that GNOME and systemd upstreams are two completely
distinct groups with (AFAIK) very little overlap between them, right?
Even if one assume that they
Package: general
Severity: important
Dear Maintainer,
*** Please consider answering these questions, where appropriate ***
* What led up to the situation?
It's a fresh install (Wheezy and Jessie). There was no changes on the
system, and the fan works on high speed, with a normal temper
+1 to xfce, but it might be worth using a nicer theme than the current xfce one.
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 4:46 AM, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On 24/10/13 17:31, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>> What's the the status of XFCE regarding accessibility?
>>
>> That was a big strengh of GNOME for a long time, thoug
On 24/10/13 16:29, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> I haven't tested GNOME on kfreebsd-* for a long time now, but I
> assume that the package works if it has been successfully built,
> doesn't it?
I believe the effect of not having systemd-logind is that the features
for which GNOME uses systemd
On 24/10/13 17:31, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> What's the the status of XFCE regarding accessibility?
>
> That was a big strengh of GNOME for a long time, though I've heard
> rumors (sorry not to be more specific) that gnome-shell has some
> unsolved issues in that regard, which is a problem since GNO
Hi,
Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> [Another new topic, sorry -develites]
>
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 06:38:31PM +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
> > On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 18:31 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > > What's the the status of XFCE regarding accessibility?
> > >
> > > That was a big strengh of
Le 24/10/2013 18:34, Dmitrijs Ledkovs a écrit :
> On 24 October 2013 15:15, Gabriel de Perthuis wrote:
>> Le 24/10/2013 15:57, Dmitrijs Ledkovs a écrit :
>>> On 24 October 2013 14:18, Gabriel de Perthuis wrote:
Hello,
I've written a tool to import Debian packages into Git:
+++ Neil Williams [2013-10-24 18:06 +0100]:
> On Thu, 24 Oct 2013 16:40:48 +0100
> Steve McIntyre wrote:
>
> > This goes back to during the wheezy release cycle. There was a little
> > discussion around a change in tasksel [1], but rather too late in the
> > day for the change to make sense. Now
Quoting Brian May (br...@microcomaustralia.com.au):
> On 24 October 2013 11:09, Adam Borowski wrote:
>
> > * it breaks other users of cgroups. I have not tested this personally
> > (mostly because of the above point), but if I understand it right, it takes
> > over the whole cgroups system, requ
Le 24/10/2013 18:24, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> On 24/10/13 at 15:18 +0200, Gabriel de Perthuis wrote:
>> Hello,
>> I've written a tool to import Debian packages into Git:
>>
>> git clone deb::mypackage
>>
>> It does a faithful import of the package history from
>> snapshot.debian.org. There i
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
GNOME can run on BSD. This page documents the procedure done by one
user. https://wiki.gnome.org/TingweiLan/FreeBSD
On 10/24/2013 01:16 PM, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> [Another new topic, sorry -develites]
>
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 06:38:31PM +0200,
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 16:40 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> This goes back to during the wheezy release cycle. There was a little
> discussion around a change in tasksel [1], but rather too late in the
> day for the change to make sense. Now we have rather more time, I
> feel. Let's change the def
Hello,
Please keep debian-accessibility in Cc for accessibility matters,
otherwise concerned people won't be able to provide information :)
Neil Williams, le Thu 24 Oct 2013 18:08:56 +0100, a écrit :
> On Thu, 24 Oct 2013 18:31:52 +0200
> Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>
> > On 24/10/13 at 16:40 +0100,
On Thu, 24 Oct 2013 18:31:52 +0200
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 24/10/13 at 16:40 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> > This goes back to during the wheezy release cycle. There was a
> > little discussion around a change in tasksel [1], but rather too
> > late in the day for the change to make sense. No
On Thu, 24 Oct 2013 16:40:48 +0100
Steve McIntyre wrote:
> This goes back to during the wheezy release cycle. There was a little
> discussion around a change in tasksel [1], but rather too late in the
> day for the change to make sense. Now we have rather more time, I
> feel. Let's change the def
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 18:08 +0200, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> On 10/24/2013 17:40, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> > This would mean:
> [...]
> > * Tweak CD and installer builds:
> >+ change what happens with no desktop selected to use xfce instead
> > of Gnome (netinst, DVD, BD etc.)
> >+ A
[Another new topic, sorry -develites]
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 06:38:31PM +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 18:31 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > What's the the status of XFCE regarding accessibility?
> >
> > That was a big strengh of GNOME for a long time, though I've heard
>
Quoting Adam Borowski (kilob...@angband.pl):
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 03:40:04PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > On Oct 24, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
> >
> > > What do you mean by "holding hostile root." ?
> > http://blog.bofh.it/debian/id_413
> >
> > The missing parts (UID virtualization IIRC) ar
On 24/10/13 at 17:40 +0100, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
> On 24 October 2013 17:38, Svante Signell wrote:
> > On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 18:31 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> >
> >> What's the the status of XFCE regarding accessibility?
> >>
> >> That was a big strengh of GNOME for a long time, though I've
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Jyrki Pulliainen
* Package name: dh-virtualenv
Version : 0.5
Upstream Author : Jyrki Pulliainen
* URL : http://www.github.com/spotify/dh-virtualenv
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: Python, Perl
Description : Wra
On Jo, 24 oct 13, 16:40:48, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> This goes back to during the wheezy release cycle. There was a little
> discussion around a change in tasksel [1], but rather too late in the
> day for the change to make sense. Now we have rather more time, I
> feel. Let's change t
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:00:42PM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
> On Do, 24 Okt 2013, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > at this point, I would like to point at a very important part of the
> > "revised code of conduct" that Wouter is proposing: "Assume good faith".
> On Do, 24 Okt 2013, Adam Borowski wr
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 16:30 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > Now, let me know - is this the new way of silencing critical voices?
>
> No. But it is a gigantic leap forward in the culture of our community.
Well arguably, one shouldn't be too surprised if people get more and
more pissed off by
Quoting Adam Borowski (kilob...@angband.pl):
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 09:11:30AM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 02:09:46AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > > And I for one heavily use vservers
> >
> > It's a professional shame of mine that we are still trying to get ri
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 22:16 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 10/24/2013 06:46 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 11:59 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> >> On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 09:11:30AM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 02:09:46AM +0200, Adam Borowski wr
Sorry for not setting link to [0]
Here it is https://wiki.gnome.org/GnomeFlashback
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 6:45 PM, Zlatan Todoric wrote:
> But then again you have Flashback mode [0].
>
> And just bashing GNOME DE for systemd and GNOME Classic
> is not good enough point because probably the lar
But then again you have Flashback mode [0].
And just bashing GNOME DE for systemd and GNOME Classic
is not good enough point because probably the largest user base
of Debian user use GNOME.
This comment should not be seen as pro-GNOME as XFCE is
also decent DE which I also admire. Also I have que
On 24 October 2013 17:38, Svante Signell wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 18:31 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>
>> What's the the status of XFCE regarding accessibility?
>>
>> That was a big strengh of GNOME for a long time, though I've heard
>> rumors (sorry not to be more specific) that gnome-shell
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 18:31 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> What's the the status of XFCE regarding accessibility?
>
> That was a big strengh of GNOME for a long time, though I've heard
> rumors (sorry not to be more specific) that gnome-shell has some
> unsolved issues in that regard, which is a
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 16:05 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> >Well, Debian is aiming for full systemd integration with Jessie, so
> >there is that.
>
> Ummm, no. You and some others might be, but not Debian as a whole
> AFAICS.
I just wondered... when and how is this going to be decided? I mean,
wh
On 24 October 2013 15:15, Gabriel de Perthuis wrote:
> Le 24/10/2013 15:57, Dmitrijs Ledkovs a écrit :
>> On 24 October 2013 14:18, Gabriel de Perthuis wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>> I've written a tool to import Debian packages into Git:
>>>
>>> git clone deb::mypackage
>>
>> Is it compatible with Ia
Hi,
On 24/10/13 at 16:40 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> This goes back to during the wheezy release cycle. There was a little
> discussion around a change in tasksel [1], but rather too late in the
> day for the change to make sense. Now we have rather more time, I
> feel. Let's cha
On 24/10/13 at 15:18 +0200, Gabriel de Perthuis wrote:
> Hello,
> I've written a tool to import Debian packages into Git:
>
> git clone deb::mypackage
>
> It does a faithful import of the package history from
> snapshot.debian.org. There is some agressive caching built-in, and a
> bit of log
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Let's change the default desktop for installation to xfce.
> ...
> Pros:
>
> * CD#1 will work again without size worries
>
> * Smaller, simpler desktop
>
> * Works well/better on all supported kernels (?)
>
> * Does not depend on replac
Le 24/10/2013 17:08, Uoti Urpala a écrit :
> Surely you won't claim that tools
> depending on systemd as init is an argument to not use systemd as init!
It's an argument for not depending on those tools, since we don't want
to (and can't) rely on systemd being the init system.
Regards.
signat
Hi,
On 10/24/2013 17:40, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> This would mean:
[...]
> * Tweak CD and installer builds:
>+ change what happens with no desktop selected to use xfce instead
> of Gnome (netinst, DVD, BD etc.)
>+ Add an explicitly-named Gnome CD#1
>+ Remove the explicitly-named X
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 05:29:16PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> Yes, I just read what the release team put in their announcement and
> was repeating what one of the proposals were.
/
| Proposed Release Goals
| ==
|
| The call for release goals has finished and we
On Thu, 24 Oct 2013 23:00:42 +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
> On Do, 24 Okt 2013, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > at this point, I would like to point at a very important part of the
> > "revised code of conduct" that Wouter is proposing: "Assume good faith".
>
> On Do, 24 Okt 2013, Adam Borowski wrote
On 10/24/2013 05:05 PM, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Adrian wrote:
>>
>> Well, Debian is aiming for full systemd integration with Jessie, so
>> there is that.
>
> Ummm, no. You and some others might be, but not Debian as a whole
> AFAICS.
Yes, I just read what the release team put in their announcemen
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 15:40 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Oct 24, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
>
> > What do you mean by "holding hostile root." ?
> http://blog.bofh.it/debian/id_413
>
> The missing parts (UID virtualization IIRC) are upstream now, and should
> be ready for jessie.
>
> Until then
Hi folks,
This goes back to during the wheezy release cycle. There was a little
discussion around a change in tasksel [1], but rather too late in the
day for the change to make sense. Now we have rather more time, I
feel. Let's change the default desktop for installation to xfce.
This would mean:
Thomas Goirand wrote:
> We've been reading again and again from systemd supporters that it's
> modular, and that we can use only a subset of it if we like. Now, we're
> reading a very different thing: that it's modular *but* we need to
> re-implement every bit of it so that the modularity becomes e
Adrian wrote:
>
>Well, Debian is aiming for full systemd integration with Jessie, so
>there is that.
Ummm, no. You and some others might be, but not Debian as a whole
AFAICS.
--
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com
Support the Campaign for Audiovisual Fr
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 03:40:04PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Oct 24, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
>
> > What do you mean by "holding hostile root." ?
> http://blog.bofh.it/debian/id_413
>
> The missing parts (UID virtualization IIRC) are upstream now, and should
> be ready for jessie.
If I re
Marvin Renich wrote:
>* Tollef Fog Heen [131024 05:39]:
>> ]] Steve Langasek
>>
>> > On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 02:21:25AM +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote:
>> > > 2013/10/24 Steve Langasek :
>> > > > [...]
>> > > >> If Gnome depends on gnome-settings-daemon, which now depends
>on systemd,
>> > > >>
On Thu, 2013-10-24 at 09:49 -0400, Marvin Renich wrote:
> I believe that systemd/GNOME upstream is intentionally coupling the two
> in order to force adoption of systemd. There are obviously others who
> do not believe this. If it is true, however, I would consider it
> sufficient justification
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:00:42PM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
> On Do, 24 Okt 2013, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > My apologies, I overreacted.
>
> Clear critic with real background - many of us have the same experience -
> (how many times did my system break in the last years due to GNome?)
> are si
1 - 100 of 125 matches
Mail list logo
