Re: Proposal: Let's drop i386

2018-05-13 Thread Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
still sells 32bit only chips for IoT.  This at least keeps Ubuntu as a prime development environment for these devices. Please also keep a minimal installer. --mtx -- Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult Free software and Linux embedded engineering i...@metux.net -- +49-151-27565287 -- Ubuntu

Re: [14.04] nVidia GeForce 1080TI

2017-06-08 Thread Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
On 01.06.2017 08:45, Sebastian Busse wrote: > We are thinking of upgrading to current nVidia graphics cards. As far as > I can see, the GeForce 1080 is supported since 367.27 while the GeForce > 1080 TI is supported since 381.09. Considering the hostilty of that company against the FOSS

Re: Packaging nodejs-7.9

2017-05-04 Thread Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
On 04.05.2017 09:26, Jérémy Lal wrote: > At the moment, in debian, /usr/lib/nodejs is there to store all node > modules installed from debian packages. hmm, would that conflict w/ having certain "nodejs-$version" subdirs w/ the actual engines (the whole tree - not splitted out the several FHS

Packaging nodejs-7.9

2017-05-04 Thread Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Hi folks, I'm currently packaging nodejs-7.9 for various deb Distros. I'll have to maintain some applications that use the fanciest new features, and precompiled binaries from untrusted sources (eg. nvm+friends) of course are not an option. Before I go all of this alone - is there anybody here

Re: backports for trusty

2017-04-16 Thread Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
On 14.04.2017 08:31, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > I'm neither an Ubuntu developer, nor do I maintains some backports. > However, a lot of backports easily could be counter-productive regarding > the Long Term Support's policy. Why so ? > Consider to provide your packages by a PPA. I'm already trying

backports for trusty

2017-04-13 Thread Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Hi folks, anybody around here who also maintains some backports for trusty ? I've collected several packages which I maintain locally (eg. right now I'm packaging recent cairo w/ drm patches applied) and I'd like to put that into bigger community. --mtx -- mit freundlichen Grüßen --

dpkg packaging problems

2015-01-02 Thread Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Hi folks, I'm just packaging some library to various deb distros using pbuilder + git-buildpackage. Unfortunately, the .so's loose the +x flag in the package (while usual 'make install' is okay) - it seems that some of the dh stuff drops that flag :( maybe some of you guys might have an idea ?

Re: dpkg packaging problems

2015-01-02 Thread Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
On 02.01.2015 17:08, Martin Pitt wrote: Hi, Yes, man dh_fixperms. Shared libraries don't need to and should not be executable. Oh, wasn't aware of that. Just used to that as gcc sets that flag. Is it a bug in gcc, or are there platforms where +x is required ? cu -- Enrico Weigelt, metux IT

Re: The fate of Upstart

2014-12-04 Thread Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
On 03.12.2014 23:32, Vittorio wrote: If really you could succeed in getting rid of polkit and dbus, that would be a very good work. I completely agree with you. Polkit has given me a lot of headaches. Well, you're welcomed to join me :) I'll yet have to sort out certain conceptional issues

Re: Devuan

2014-12-02 Thread Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
On 02.12.2014 11:24, Martin Pitt wrote: Hi folks, Indeed that's another example where Debian offers a choice but Ubuntu doesn't -- we examine the alternatives, pick one, and support nothing else. (cf. combinatorial explosion and efficient maintenance and support). by the way: could anybody

smtp blacklisting [WAS: Re: Devuan]

2014-12-02 Thread Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
big_snip / Some time ago, I observed even major ISPs being blacklisted in some spamfilter appliance network (just forgot its name ;-o), where I'm *pretty* sure that they're not spamming (I know these guys personally, and they're quite professional, compared to other companies of this size) - and

Re: Devuan

2014-12-02 Thread Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
On 02.12.2014 11:11, Stephen P. Villano wrote: Personally, I prefer SElinux to polkit, but such isn't part of the Dont they play in entirely different areas ? I just started to care about polkit, when began doing weird things and causing network-manager to break (more precise: the gnome

Re: The fate of Upstart

2014-12-02 Thread Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
On 29.11.2014 22:31, I.E.G. wrote: Hi, I was a little surprised to see the ...has been converted to an upstart job message some time ago in response to a ~$ /etc/init.d/ stop/start/restart/foo . I tried the ~$ service stop/start/restart/foo and it either didn't work or produced the same

Re: Devuan

2014-12-01 Thread Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
On 01.12.2014 19:15, Tom H wrote: Especially after deciding a few months ago to switch to systemd! By the way: is it then be mandatory ? Because, for me, that would mean leaving Ubuntu, definitively. I'm currently exploring ways for getting rid of polkit, and also trimming down in other

Re: The fate of Upstart

2014-11-29 Thread Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
On 28.11.2014 13:41, Ben Tinner wrote: Hi, Recently, the developers of Ubuntu have decided to migrate the init system from upstart to systemd. So, I would like to find out what will happen to upstart after Ubuntu complete its transition to systemd. That might also depend on which init

Re: The fate of Upstart

2014-11-29 Thread Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
On 29.11.2014 00:39, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: Hi, Similarly, 16.04 LTS is not yet planned, thus i'm not sure whether it will or won't ship upstart. If it does, it will be another 5 years from then, or 2021. I really hope, it will continue to ship upstart and doesn't push towards systemd