Re: The Spirit of Free Software, or The Reality

2015-07-16 Thread IOhannes m zmölnig (Debian/GNU)
On 07/16/2015 08:29 PM, Don Armstrong wrote:
 On Thu, 16 Jul 2015, Simon Richter wrote:
  The problem is that the icons are displayed in the search field
  dropdown, which should be fully functional before visiting the first
  site.
 I was hoping that it could be semi-functional, with placeholder icons
 until the site in question is actually visited. But if the icons are
 necessary, then they're necessary.
 

what is the site in question you are referring to?

as in: the first time the user starts the browser, the search field will
be filled with empty (placeholder) icons. whenever they enter a search
term and select one of the unknown¹ search engines, the search is
performed (e.g. on wikipedia) and the placeholder icon is updated with
the real icon (since wikipedia was visited anyhow), and from know on the
user knows at least one of their search engines.
this feels a bit like
 Quaff the blue speckled potion.
 You have no more potions of blindness.

fmgsdr
IOhannes


¹ not totally unknown: there's a tooltip showing the name of the search
engine if you hover over it.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Bug#756446: ITP Backgammon2 - a C# implementation of Backgammon game

2014-08-02 Thread IOhannes m zmölnig (Debian/GNU)
On 07/31/2014 07:04 PM, Alexander Alemayhu wrote:
 On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 05:35:18PM +0600, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
 The name is bad too.
 But this is just an RFP, so...

 
 Why is the name bad?
 

has the 2 any meaning apart from being the other package (though i
fail to see the first package).

gfmdsar
IOhannes




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Bug#729203: [FFmpeg-devel] Reintroducing FFmpeg to Debian

2014-07-29 Thread IOhannes m zmölnig (Debian/GNU)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

On 2014-07-29 03:20, Marco d'Itri wrote:
 if they are not drop in replacements, and it would also be a
 pain if
 higher up packages link-in both ffmpeg  libav and some 
 clashing symbols are present...
 This is why the new ffmpeg will use different symbols. Again, read 
 the first message.
 

according to the first message, this is *not* true.
the packages will have different libraries-names / sonames, but this
does not mean that they don't have clashing symbols.
if both library foo (/usr/lib/libfoo.so.3.21) and library bar
(/usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libbar.so.4.1) export the symbol knarzifax,
then how do you make sure that an application that is linked against
both libraries for different functionality always chooses the korrect
knarzifax?

this becomes a real world issue, as soon as plugins are involved
(which i find a common practice to access multimedia frameworks).
application flurp has a both flurp-plugin-libav and
flurp-plugin-ffmpeg installed.
whichever plugin is loaded first, will pull in a library that shadows
the symbol knarzifax for the *other* plugin.

fgamsdr
IOhannes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/
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=vaCN
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53d748dc.4010...@debian.org



Re: Bug#729203: [FFmpeg-devel] Reintroducing FFmpeg to Debian

2014-07-28 Thread IOhannes m zmölnig (Debian/GNU)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

(resending, to keep debian-devel and the bug-report in the loop)

personally i would welcome if both libav and ffmpeg could co-exist
within Debian¹.
as i see it, libav and ffmpeg have diverged, and as such i would like
to have the choice which one to use.


On 2014-07-28 11:55, Marco d'Itri wrote:
 On Jul 28, Alessio Treglia ales...@debian.org wrote:
 
 Personally I don't feel like dropping libav in favor of ffmpeg 
 now at this stage.

+ 1
i don't think that dropping libav is appropriate at all.

 Except that, for a lot of the depending packages, there would be
 an immediate benefit in the number of bugs fixed.

at least in theory.


 Personally I feel that we have inflicted libav on our users for
 way more time than it was sensible to do.

i would appreciate it, if you (and anybody else) used a less flammable
| touchy language.


fgmadr
IOhannes



¹ but then i'm not a member of the security team :-)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/
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=PGZV
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53d6345a.6050...@debian.org



Re: Point 1 of Social Contract

2014-05-05 Thread IOhannes m zmölnig (Debian/GNU)
On 05/05/2014 05:30 PM, Solal wrote:
 No +1 because proprietary firmware is unethical too.

hmm, have you read the post you are replying to and what the +1 was
referring to?

and please do stop top-posting...

fgmards
IOhannes

PS: am i just feeding the troll?




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature