Installing? Why debian?

Debian still wants interesteing user to take netinstall.iso or any other *iso because of Debian installation, but recommends the US-Shit GRUB. it is usefull to study Heise.de before and absolut all from Ubuntu about the GReatly Ugly and UnUseabe pile of sht B. This shit in combination with

Re: Why Debian packaging structure is so difficult

On 09/01/2023 13:20, Sadhu Santh wrote: If not, why the upstream structure is not made simpler? If I remember correctly, current repository layout minimizes traffic at the moment of new release. .deb packages are already synced as a part of testing suite. Almost certainly it is explained

Re: Why Debian packaging structure is so difficult

On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 01:59:50PM +0530, Sadhu Santh wrote: > > > > I am hosting a local Debian mirror for my LAN. This helps in low internet > > > bandwidth use. > > > > > > I keep only the required distributions (past five years and testing > > > release). > > > > > > Compared to other

Re: Why Debian packaging structure is so difficult

On 09/01/23 17:48, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: On Mon, Jan 09, 2023 at 11:50:23AM +0530, Sadhu Santh wrote: Hi, I am hosting a local Debian mirror for my LAN. This helps in low internet bandwidth use. I keep only the required distributions (past five years and testing release). Compared to

Re: Why Debian packaging structure is so difficult

On Mon, 9 Jan 2023 07:35:18 -0700 Charles Curley wrote: > On Mon, 9 Jan 2023 07:18:53 -0500 > Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: > > > The best solution, IMHO, is to mirror using a tool that is aware of > > the specific structure of apt repositories. Personally, I have had > > excellent success with

Re: Why Debian packaging structure is so difficult

On Mon, 9 Jan 2023 07:18:53 -0500 Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: > The best solution, IMHO, is to mirror using a tool that is aware of > the specific structure of apt repositories. Personally, I have had > excellent success with apt-cacher-ng, which functions much like a > squid proxy. You

Re: Why Debian packaging structure is so difficult

On Mon, Jan 09, 2023 at 11:50:23AM +0530, Sadhu Santh wrote: > Hi, > > I am hosting a local Debian mirror for my LAN. This helps in low internet > bandwidth use. > > I keep only the required distributions (past five years and testing > release). > > Compared to other distributions such

Why Debian packaging structure is so difficult

Hi, I am hosting a local Debian mirror for my LAN. This helps in low internet bandwidth use. I keep only the required distributions (past five years and testing release). Compared to other distributions such ArchLinux/RockyLinux (single line Rsync can do the job), the partial mirroring

Re: why Debian?

No, I didn't take the kernel development. I am just a data scientist, using python, R, spark, hadoop to do the application jobs. Thanks. On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 1:33 PM SAIFI wrote: > On Thu, 2 Dec 2021, Piper H wrote: > > > For debian and ubuntu, which one should I choose as my personal >

Re: why Debian?

On Thu, 2 Dec 2021, Piper H wrote: For debian and ubuntu, which one should I choose as my personal development system? @Piper, if intend to do 'development' work in modern C++ on your system, suggest you download 'bookworm'. This gets you glibc-2.32-4 and hence gcc 11.2.0-2 Here is the

Re: why Debian?

Thanks for the info you provided @Karthik . That would be very helpful Regards Piper On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 7:03 AM Karthik wrote: > On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 1:37 AM Piper H wrote: > > > > @Karthik glad to see the info you providesd. > > You're welcome,feel free to ask questions,Im happy to

Re: why Debian?

On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 1:37 AM Piper H wrote: > > @Karthik glad to see the info you providesd. You're welcome,feel free to ask questions,Im happy to help > Especially for cudnn running on ubuntu 18.04 and above. It's just 18.04 and not above as other versions only have partial support LTS

Re: why Debian?

@Karthik glad to see the info you providesd. Especially for cudnn running on ubuntu 18.04 and above. Does debian have good support for DNN stuff? Thanks. Piper On Thursday, December 2, 2021, Karthik wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Dec 2, 2021, 5:27 PM Piper H wrote: > >> For debian and ubuntu, which

Re: why Debian?

I am a data engineer. Most time works around Hadoop, Spark, Streaming, MQ, R and Python stuff. I have my personal Mac, but want to learn more on Linux dev and ops. Thanks. Piper On Friday, December 3, 2021, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: > On Thu, Dec 02, 2021 at 07:56:31PM +0800, Piper H wrote: > >

Re: why Debian?

On Thu, Dec 02, 2021 at 07:56:31PM +0800, Piper H wrote: > For debian and ubuntu, which one should I choose as my personal > development system? > Thanks. > What are you developing _in_ ? Debian stable is pretty much unconditionally stable and includes huge amounts of software. On the other

Re: why Debian?

On Thu, Dec 2, 2021, 5:27 PM Piper H wrote: > For debian and ubuntu, which one should I choose as my personal > development system? > Thanks. > Depends on your use case and preference If you're experienced enough or willing to learn then either of them are equally good and you shouldn't have

Re: why Debian?

On 12/2/21 3:56 AM, Piper H wrote: For debian and ubuntu, which one should I choose as my personal development  system? Thanks. pleas do some more research. it is Personal choice: for a Stable and Secure, with no problems, everyday computer use, use Debian for experimental plunking around

Re: why Debian?

Piper H wrote: > For debian and ubuntu, which one should I choose as my personal > development  system? The question is almost blasphemic; The original (Debian) of course! ;-)

Re: why Debian?

For debian and ubuntu, which one should I choose as my personal development system? Thanks. On Thu, Dec 2, 2021 at 7:02 PM Anssi Saari wrote: > Thanos Katsiolis writes: > > > The reasons I chose them is that Debian is considered a stable and > reliable OS (the policy of the OS is not to > >

Re: why Debian?

Thanos Katsiolis writes: > The reasons I chose them is that Debian is considered a stable and reliable > OS (the policy of the OS is not to > include as many and as much quickly as possible new features), and that it > has a large and dependable community. Isn't that enough? I guess I'd say

Re: why Debian?

Thanos Katsiolis writes: > Hello, > > I am new to the Debian distribution and I would like to hear opinions > ... Well, i like GNU Emacs than Debian. And i also new to Debian. Before i used Ubuntu 18.04 LTS. Debian 11 Bullseye is not bad with GNU Emacs ^^^ Sincerely, Gnus fan Byung-Hee

Re: why Debian?

On 11/14/21 4:56 AM, Thanos Katsiolis wrote: Hello, I am new to the Debian distribution and I would like to hear opinions from experienced users on why someone should choose them as OS. The reasons I chose them is that Debian is considered a stable and reliable OS (the policy of the OS is not

Re: why Debian?

For me Debian strikes a nice balance between convenience and staying out of my way and preserving my changes when I want to customize things. As mentioned, apt, though I like using aptitude through its TUI mostly, handles dependencies not just for installing but for removing packages as well.

Re: why Debian?

Actually, this question lets me raise a deeper one. Why Linux...at all? I am often in discussions where the question comes up, mostly because on the one hand its everywhere, but on the other it seems its broader user base is limited. Intellectuals, developers, programmers, certainly, but

Re: why Debian?

On Sun, 14 Nov 2021 14:56:39 +0200 Thanos Katsiolis wrote: > Hello, > > I am new to the Debian distribution and I would like to hear opinions > from experienced users on why someone should choose them as OS. > The reasons I chose them is that Debian is considered a stable and > reliable OS

Re: why Debian?

On 14/11/2021 12:56, Thanos Katsiolis wrote: > Hello, > > I am new to the Debian distribution and I would like to hear opinions > from experienced users on why someone should choose them as OS. > The reasons I chose them is that Debian is considered a stable and > reliable OS (the policy of the

Re: why Debian?

Hello, The reasons I chose them is that Debian is considered a stable and reliable OS (the policy of the OS is not to include as many and as much  quickly as possible new features), and that it has a large and dependable community.  Debian stable release(currently 11

Re: why Debian?

On Sun, Nov 14, 2021, 6:27 PM Thanos Katsiolis wrote: > Hello, > > I am new to the Debian distribution and I would like to hear opinions from > experienced users on why someone should choose them as OS. > The reasons I chose them is that Debian is considered a stable and > reliable OS (the

why Debian?

Hello, I am new to the Debian distribution and I would like to hear opinions from experienced users on why someone should choose them as OS. The reasons I chose them is that Debian is considered a stable and reliable OS (the policy of the OS is not to include as many and as much quickly as

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Tue 16 Jun 2020 at 21:28:11 (+0200), l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > 16 juin 2020 16:30 de deb...@lionunicorn.co.uk: > > > It might be easier for people to follow the substance of this thread > > if you posted in such a way as to include one simple self-descriptive > > test in each post, and not

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On 18/06/20 8:08 am, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 08:02:11AM +1200, Richard Hector wrote: >> > See for more details. > >> I understand the phenomenon. I don't understand why modern software (eg >> the list software) still does it. >

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 08:02:11AM +1200, Richard Hector wrote: > > See for more details. > I understand the phenomenon. I don't understand why modern software (eg > the list software) still does it. Well, imagine you're a mailing list. A dozen

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On 15/06/20 11:44 pm, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 10:13:11AM -0500, David Wright wrote: >> On Sat 13 Jun 2020 at 16:05:17 (+0200), l0f...@tuta.io wrote: >> > However, this extra ">" should have been deleted upon viewing the email, >> > no? >> >> How would the viewer's email

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi. On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 02:06:08PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > Hi, > > 13 juin 2020 à 21:14 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: > > > You're looking at the wrong header. It's X-Spam-Status and > > X-Amavis-Spam-Status you should worry about. Authetication-Results is > > set by your MTA

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 09:28:11PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > Hi, > > 16 juin 2020 14:50 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: > > > And *now* it gets interesting. Because what's came to the list was text: > > > > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Content-Transfer-Encoding:

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi, 16 juin 2020 14:50 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: > And *now* it gets interesting. Because what's came to the list was text: > > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Can we imagine that the ML simply 64-decodes the email and

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Tue 16 Jun 2020 at 13:10:38 (+0200), l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > 13 juin 2020 à 21:05 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: > > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 09:01:59PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > >> 13 juin 2020 à 17:12 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: > >> > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 06:10:15PM +0300, Reco wrote:

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi. On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 01:10:38PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > > Your e-mail passed DKIM test on my MTA with flying colors. > > > > Try that base64-encoded html thing next. > > > It was already base64 encoded, see below: > > --79Bu5A16qPEYcVIZL@tutanota > Content-Type:

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi, 13 juin 2020 à 21:05 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: > Hi. > > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 09:01:59PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > >> 13 juin 2020 à 17:12 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: >> >> > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 06:10:15PM +0300, Reco wrote: >> > >> >> Let's see. >> >> >> >> >From what I saw

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi, 13 juin 2020 à 21:14 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: > You're looking at the wrong header. It's X-Spam-Status and > X-Amavis-Spam-Status you should worry about. Authetication-Results is > set by your MTA receiving your own mail from the list. > > But yes, they are both OK for this and your

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 10:13:11AM -0500, David Wright wrote: > On Sat 13 Jun 2020 at 16:05:17 (+0200), l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > > However, this extra ">" should have been deleted upon viewing the email, no? > > How would the viewer's email client know whether the > in > >From had been added by

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Sat 13 Jun 2020 at 16:05:17 (+0200), l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > 13 juin 2020 à 14:21 de a...@strugglers.net: > > > The mbox mail archive format is a single file containing all > > messages concatenated together. Separate messages are recognised by > > a line that starts: > > > > >From >

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/12/20 3:36 AM, A_Man_Without_Clue wrote: Mine appears under "Sound & Video" I'm using LXDE Debian Buster. Thanks a lot. That's where I just found mine.

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Andy Smith wrote: >On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 12:21:12PM +, Andy Smith wrote: >> The mbox mail archive format is a single file containing all >> messages concatenated together. Separate messages are recognised by >> a line that starts: >> >> >From y...@example.com ... > >Amusingly I didn't think

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 09:05:24PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > 13 juin 2020 à 21:01 de l0f...@tuta.io: > > > Ok let's see for me as well: > > > > >From my point of view > > > > >From: l0f4r0 > > > > l0f4r0 > > > Everything's ok: > > Authentication-Results: w3.tutanota.de (dis=neutral;

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

13 juin 2020 à 21:01 de l0f...@tuta.io: > Ok let's see for me as well: > > >From my point of view > > >From: l0f4r0 > > l0f4r0 > Everything's ok: Authentication-Results: w3.tutanota.de (dis=neutral; info=dmarc domain policy); dmarc=pass (dis=neutral p=quarantine; aspf=r; adkim=s; pSrc=dns)

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi. On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 09:01:59PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > 13 juin 2020 à 17:12 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: > > > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 06:10:15PM +0300, Reco wrote: > > > >> Let's see. > >> > >> >From what I saw this should fail DKIM test. > >> > >> And, for the good

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

13 juin 2020 à 17:12 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 06:10:15PM +0300, Reco wrote: > >> Let's see. >> >> >From what I saw this should fail DKIM test. >> >> And, for the good measure: >> >> >From: this is not a valid RFC-822 header >> > > Ok, clearly I don't have any problem

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi. On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 12:21:12PM +, Andy Smith wrote: > Hi, > > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 02:08:14PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > > 13 juin 2020 à 09:52 de a...@strugglers.net: > > > Looking at the email concerned, it had a line starting with "From" > > > quoted with a ">". > >

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 06:10:15PM +0300, Reco wrote: > Hi. > > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 04:32:02PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > > I've another example:  > > https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2020/06/msg00016.html > > One more time, I started a new line with "From" which got escaped

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi. On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 04:32:02PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > I've another example:  > https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2020/06/msg00016.html > One more time, I started a new line with "From" which got escaped with a > leading ">". > Result: dkim=fail reason="body hash does

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

I've another example: https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2020/06/msg00016.html One more time, I started a new line with "From" which got escaped with a leading ">". Result: dkim=fail reason="body hash does not match". Maybe it's the root cause after all... Does someone else have DKIM issues as

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi, On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 09:28:45AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: > On Saturday 13 June 2020 09:19:39 Andy Smith wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 09:12:06AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: > > > No > present > > > > I think you are confused. None of us wrote any such line so I have > > no idea where

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi, 13 juin 2020 à 14:21 de a...@strugglers.net: > The mbox mail archive format is a single file containing all > messages concatenated together. Separate messages are recognised by > a line that starts: > > >From > y...@example.com> ... > > As you can imagine if a message body contained such

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Saturday 13 June 2020 09:19:39 Andy Smith wrote: > Hi Gene, > > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 09:12:06AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: > > Here is a copy/paste of the from line as it arrives here > > From: l0f...@tuta.io > > No > present > > I think you are confused. None of us wrote any such line so

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Sat, 2020-06-13 at 07:56 +, Andy Smith wrote: > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 07:52:55AM +, Andy Smith wrote: > > Looking at the email concerned, it had a line starting with "From" > > quoted with a ">". > > > > Mailing lists often do things like that, breaking DKIM. > > I will add that I

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi Gene, On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 09:12:06AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: > Here is a copy/paste of the from line as it arrives here > From: l0f...@tuta.io > No > present I think you are confused. None of us wrote any such line so I have no idea where you are seeing it, unless you are looking at

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Saturday 13 June 2020 08:24:49 Andy Smith wrote: > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 12:21:12PM +, Andy Smith wrote: > > The mbox mail archive format is a single file containing all > > messages concatenated together. Separate messages are recognised by > > > > a line that starts: > > >From

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 12:21:12PM +, Andy Smith wrote: > The mbox mail archive format is a single file containing all > messages concatenated together. Separate messages are recognised by > a line that starts: > > >From y...@example.com ... Amusingly I didn't think to point out that by

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi, On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 02:08:14PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > 13 juin 2020 à 09:52 de a...@strugglers.net: > > Looking at the email concerned, it had a line starting with "From" > > quoted with a ">". > > > Indeed! I hope it's not a mistake of mine (usually I proofread my emails > before

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

cNeZzZT14A==Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2020 19:37:52 +0200 (CEST)From: l0f...@tuta.io To: Debian User Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: Re: why !oh why Debian and application listMIME-Version: 1.0Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printableX-Rc-Vir

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 07:52:55AM +, Andy Smith wrote: > Looking at the email concerned, it had a line starting with "From" > quoted with a ">". > > Mailing lists often do things like that, breaking DKIM. I will add that I recall that Debian postmasters have been asked before about making

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi, On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 10:30:44PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > 12 juin 2020 à 22:16 de mst...@debian.org: > > More information from the OP, it looks like the message sent to the list > > was base64 encoded html. So I'm guessing that the list software > > autoconverted that to plain

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Vi, 12 iun 20, 22:45:13, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > 12 juin 2020 à 22:32 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: > > > Of course, > > refraining from sending html e-mails here would be easier solution ;) > > > I'd like nothing better but it seems this is not possible currently on > Tutanota web app. You

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 11:53:40PM +0300, Reco wrote: No, the body is not interesting at all here. What I'm interested in is the result of DKIM check, and that's might be written in e-mail headers. Or not. dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)"

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 10:45:13PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > Hi Reco, > > 12 juin 2020 à 22:32 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: > > > Removing Content-Type (and maybe Content-Transfer-Encoding) from OP's > > DKIM policy should do the trick, although it can has certain undesirable > >

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi Reco, 12 juin 2020 à 22:32 de recovery...@enotuniq.net: > Removing Content-Type (and maybe Content-Transfer-Encoding) from OP's > DKIM policy should do the trick, although it can has certain undesirable > side-effects if MTA in question is used for other purposes. > Thanks, I will submit this

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 11:32:20PM +0300, Reco wrote: Hi. On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 04:16:23PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 12:36:29PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: > On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 09:52:57AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi. On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 04:16:23PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: > On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 12:36:29PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 09:52:57AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 03:48:42PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > > > > My email

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi, 12 juin 2020 à 22:16 de mst...@debian.org: > More information from the OP, it looks like the message sent to the list was > base64 encoded html. So I'm guessing that the list software autoconverted > that to plain text--which would mean there's no way to preserve a valid DKIM > signature.

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 12:36:29PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 09:52:57AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 03:48:42PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: My email below got a DKIM issue. It validated fine here, not a debian list issue. For the record, I

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 09:52:57AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 03:48:42PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: My email below got a DKIM issue. It validated fine here, not a debian list issue. For the record, I looked at the wrong email. The right one did fail DKIM

Re: [OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 03:48:42PM +0200, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: My email below got a DKIM issue. It validated fine here, not a debian list issue.

[OT] Regular DKIM issues on this ML (was: Re: why !oh why Debian and application list)

Hi, My email below got a DKIM issue. This is not the first time for me on this ML so I'm trying to debug the situation with my email provider. Does someone on this list mind forwarding to me (as an attachment please, not inline) his/her own specimen of my original email below please? I need

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

have you tried Alt+F2 (brings up a search menu X-D) On 6/12/20 10:31 AM, Joe wrote: > On Fri, 12 Jun 2020 10:36:20 +0900 > A_Man_Without_Clue wrote: > >> On 6/8/20 2:23 AM, Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: >>> Well, as the subject suggests, I'm a bit fed up with the logic >>> behind how installed

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On Fri, 12 Jun 2020 10:36:20 +0900 A_Man_Without_Clue wrote: > On 6/8/20 2:23 AM, Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: > > Well, as the subject suggests, I'm a bit fed up with the logic > > behind how installed programs are sorted out in the Applications > > menu. > > > > The need to go hunt down an

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/8/20 2:23 AM, Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: > Well, as the subject suggests, I'm a bit fed up with the logic behind > how installed programs are sorted out in the Applications menu. > > The need to go hunt down an installed application seems yester century. > > I just installed Picard, and it

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

Hi, 11 juin 2020 à 23:13 de notoneofmyse...@gmx.de: > On 6/7/20 10:58 PM, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: > >> Please just run the following commands as a simple user (no need to cd to >> anything): >> * cat /usr/share/applications/org.musicbrainz.Picard.desktop >> * cat

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/8/20 8:20 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote: Debian does very little customization of the various Desktop Environments, you are experiencing upstream's take on usability. Kind regards, Andrei Thanks a lot, Andrei, this is very, very helpful.

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/7/20 10:58 PM, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: Please just run the following commands as a simple user (no need to cd to anything): * cat /usr/share/applications/org.musicbrainz.Picard.desktop * cat /usr/share/metainfo/org.musicbrainz.Picard.appdata.xml * desktop-file-validate

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/7/20 11:20 PM, Andrei POPESCU wrote: On Du, 07 iun 20, 19:23:24, Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: Well, as the subject suggests, I'm a bit fed up with the logic behind how installed programs are sorted out in the Applications menu. The need to go hunt down an installed application seems yester

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On Du, 07 iun 20, 19:23:24, Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: > Well, as the subject suggests, I'm a bit fed up with the logic behind > how installed programs are sorted out in the Applications menu. > > The need to go hunt down an installed application seems yester century. > > I just installed Picard,

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: Well, as the subject suggests, I'm a bit fed up with the logic behind how installed programs are sorted out in the Applications menu. The need to go hunt down an installed application seems yester century. I just installed Picard, and it does not show up in Sound and

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On Sun, 07 Jun, 2020 at 20:19:48 +0200, Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: >On 6/7/20 7:52 PM, Peter Ehlert wrote: [...] > What window manager/desktop suite are you using? > >GNOME Metacity That's unusual these days. Are you getting your application menu from gnome-panel?

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: > > suppose. But really, it's a basic user experience need, not like trying > to set up a server or virtual machine kind of project. :) Those are also user experience needs. The essence of Linux is that at any time, an ordinary user should be able to put on their

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: > very different. I want to imagine a world of using a stable and secure > computer to achieve much more. Or, perhaps my frustration is influenced > by chastisement from a friend recently, a programmer, who said; life's > short, time is precious, why spend time getting

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

Hi, 7 juin 2020 à 19:23 de notoneofmyse...@gmx.de: > I just installed Picard, and it does not show up in Sound and Video, > where logic would suggest it be. > >From my side, Picard appears under Multimedia>MusicBrainz Picard. Here is the related desktop file (org.musicbrainz.Picard.desktop):

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

Hi, 7 juin 2020 à 22:03 de notoneofmyse...@gmx.de: > Thanks for your help. Please see above. To be sure, I'm running as > 'root.' Should I log into 'regular' user and do these again? > Please just run the following commands as a simple user (no need to cd to anything): * cat

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/7/20 10:22 PM, Marco Möller wrote: I am surprised about Ubuntu in your experience not being as stable and secure as Debian. While Debian is a philosophy and developing an extremely good OS, Ubuntu builds on top of it. Substituting philosophy by commercial interests and that's when I

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/7/20 9:33 PM, Joe wrote: Wouldn't that be something like Android? Where the user no longer owns his computer, and therefore cannot break it, where there is one and only one minimally-customisable user interface, where only software approved by the OS vendor is available where the

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 07.06.20 19:54, Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: (...) And I will add, it was never the ambition of Debian to replace the User experience with Windows or OSX, unlike Ubuntu and many others. I've stuck with Debian for what I cannot find in Ubuntu; stability and security. But user experience is well

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/7/20 9:24 PM, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: OK, just to be sure, can you please copy/paste in 2 text files the content of: * /usr/share/applications/org.musicbrainz.Picard.desktop * /usr/share/metainfo/org.musicbrainz.Picard.appdata.xml xscreensaver-properties.desktop yelp.desktop

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On Sun, 7 Jun 2020 19:54:07 +0200 Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: > I've stuck with Debian > for what I cannot find in Ubuntu; stability and security. But user > experience is well below compared to other distros. It's unfortunate, > then it seems, that Linux seems destined for the geek world. This is

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

OK, just to be sure, can you please copy/paste in 2 text files the content of: * /usr/share/applications/org.musicbrainz.Picard.desktop * /usr/share/metainfo/org.musicbrainz.Picard.appdata.xml + give us the output for: desktop-file-validate /usr/share/applications/org.musicbrainz.Picard.desktop

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/7/20 8:48 PM, l0f...@tuta.io wrote: What is your output of: dpkg -L picard Are you sure you want it, it's pretty long. I've made a text document of it. It's attached, all 8 pages of it. (.odt) Thanks for asking and helping. picard_issues.odt Description:

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

What is your output of: dpkg -L picard

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/7/20 7:52 PM, Peter Ehlert wrote: On 6/7/20 10:23 AM, Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: Well, as the subject suggests, I'm a bit fed up with the logic behind how installed programs are sorted out in the Applications menu. The need to go hunt down an installed application seems yester century. I

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/7/20 10:23 AM, Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: Well, as the subject suggests, I'm a bit fed up with the logic behind how installed programs are sorted out in the Applications menu. The need to go hunt down an installed application seems yester century. I just installed Picard, and it does not

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/7/20 7:37 PM, Richard Owlett wrote: On 06/07/2020 12:23 PM, Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: Well, as the subject suggests, I'm a bit fed up with the logic behind how installed programs are sorted out in the Applications menu. The need to go hunt down an installed application seems yester

Re: why !oh why Debian and application list

On 6/7/20 7:37 PM, Richard Owlett wrote: On 06/07/2020 12:23 PM, Seeds Notoneofmy wrote: Well, as the subject suggests, I'm a bit fed up with the logic behind how installed programs are sorted out in the Applications menu. The need to go hunt down an installed application seems yester

  1   2   3   4   5   >