Re: Tabs v.s. spaces
Cameron Patrick wrote: Nope, no fall-through in that one, so it doesn't help. It /is/ nifty though :-) Uh, there was a fall through there. Notice that if x has a value that isn't in the dictionary the if will fall through to the else. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- pgpM33yGILlrf.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Tabs v.s. spaces
Cameron Patrick wrote:
I don't think it is. Python doesn't have a switch/case equivalent. It'd
have to be done with a bunch of if's or something.
Well, depends. Do you consider its dictionary to be a switch?
>>> def foo():
... print "foolio"
...
>>> def bar():
... print "bario"
...
>>> baz = {'foo':foo, 'bar':bar}
>>>
>>> for x in baz:
... if baz.has_key(x):
... baz[x]()
... else:
... print 'blorg'
...
foolio
bario
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
---+-
pgpU2NJzQN4Ce.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: Tabs v.s. spaces
H. S. Teoh wrote:
Not for any non-trivial task, although I did try to learn it some time
ago. Recently, I had the chance to take another look at it; however, I
found Ruby, which seemed to have the best of both Perl and Python plus
true object-orientation. So when I move on from Perl (which I love, but
which admittedly has its flaws too), it will be to Ruby, not Python.
Perl has good points? *shudder* I looked at Ruby and saw that it was
taking many of the bad points of Perl.
PARSE: {
m/\G (void|int|float) /gcx && do { $type = $1 };
[EMAIL PROTECTED] /\*([^*]+|\*[^/])*\*\/@gcx && next PARSE;
m/\G \s+ /gcx && next PARSE;
m/\G \{ /gcx && do {
my @statements = parse_block;
push @block, @statements;
};
}
Possible.
try {
obj_handle handle = get_handle();
handle.write(data);
if (handle.error()) throw exception(obj_handle::write_error);
handle.verify(data);
if (handle.error()) throw exception(obj_handle::verify_error);
handle.commit();
if (handle.error()) {
commit_errors++;
if (retry_needed) {
retry_request();
}
}
}
Possible.
More Perl examples:
open FILE, $file1 or die "Unable to open $file1: $!\n";
while () {
...
}
close FILE or die "Error while reading $file1: $! ($?)\n";
open FILE, $file2 or do {
... # do something else
};
...
Possible.
Next example (C):
for (i=0; iPossible.
Output example (C/C++):
if (debug==1)
printf(gettext("Debug dump:\n"
"Current registers: %s\n"
"Watch values: %s\n"),
get_register_dump(),
get_watch_values());
Possible.
Finally, constructors example (C++):
classA::classA(int x, int y) : xcoor(x), ycoor(y) {}
classB::classB(void (*)(int x, int y),
void classA::*callback(int i)) :
xcoor(x), ycoor(y), cb(callback) {
if (callback==NULL) throw exception();
}
Possible.
Note how the flexibility to indent makes it possible to write simple
constructors on one line (classA), and layout complex constructors such as
in classB such that separate elements are clearly separated.
So exactly where's your problem with the white space again? If you
really wanted to do each of those you could easily enough. Oddly enough in
each case you'll mostly be removing braces. I hope this concludes the topic
for those who haven't touched Python badmouthing the whitespace issue since,
thus far, I've yet to see a single example which isn't possible in pretty much
the exact same visual style.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
---+-
pgpLPaEZO7rLq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: Tabs v.s. spaces
Tom wrote: On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 11:04:48AM -0800, Steve Lamb wrote: *It looks like multi-line method invocations require parenthesis to be indented at the paren level. Sometimes that's useful, but often I like to pack arguments tighter than that and indent only once on subsequent lines: myreallylongmethodname(bar, bar, bar, bar, bar, baz, baz, baz); myreallylongmethodname(bar, bar, bar, bar, bar, baz, baz, baz); Nope. That was just my stylistic choice. The rule is that lines are continued within an opening brace and whitespace is ignored. So both the above are legit. Serious #2: Multiple statements per line in diagnostic code and error flow control. The operant value in both these cases is some code is relatively unimportant to the main flow of the program and doesn't warrant gobs of space. Actually, this I can see. Although I certianly don't miss it. Of course if you really want it... [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~} python Python 2.3+ (#2, Aug 10 2003, 11:33:47) [GCC 3.3.1 (Debian)] on linux2 Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. >>> print "foo" ; print "bar" foo bar ...you can have it. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- pgpHjJNeIjBUG.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Tabs v.s. spaces
H. S. Teoh wrote: Yeah, 'whitespace' about sums up the value of it. Except to Python programmers, of course. :-P :-P Quite the contrary. First off generally flames are from the uninformed. Since in most cases the evils of whitespace are spouted off by those who have never once touched Python it is generally they who are flaming and not those who have actually used it. Secondly clearly they are deriving some worth from it. I mean you did post 12 messages to this thread. More than me, in fact. Finally I am still waiting for an answer to my two questions posed to you. 1: Have you ever used Python? 2: Provide an example of such free-style coding that you speak highly of. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- pgpZ44SgipXaq.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Tabs v.s. spaces
Isaac To wrote: E.g., it is more difficult to cut some code in one function and paste it into another. So for best results one really have to use an editor (and perhaps other tools) that knows about such significant whitespaces. Not really if one is wanting to maintain proper indention in both cases all one needs is an editor which is able to add or subtract indention levels. I certainly have had no problems in my Python coding on moving code around that are at different levels. Mark the block, move it, reindent it a level or two and be done with it. *shrug* -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- pgpPjq3sDEowe.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Tabs v.s. spaces (was Re: Programming first steps.)
Julian Mehnle wrote: I call that readable, but I guess somebody won't. ;-) Actually it is quite readable and sensible in that it breaks down the regex into parts that a human can read. Oh, and the equivolant would be legal in Python. Which was kind of my point on asking H.S. the two questions I did in the order I did. I doubt he's touched Python so is unqualified to discuss what is and is not possible with its use of whitespace and was hoping to get an example from him and show that it is perfectly legal in Python. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- pgpcN9opEtXIL.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Tabs v.s. spaces (was Re: Programming first steps.)
Tom wrote:
Do whitespace mistakes cause compile time errors? The frustrating thing
about fortran was variable names that started with C could be
interpreted as comments not indented correctly, which would just cause
that line to be skipped. Integer literals not indented correctly could
be interpreted as line numbers and would really cause havoc with
computed gotos. I.e., they were as super-frustrating to debug as
misspelled variable names in a declaration-less language, or the types
of bizarre situtations you get into in C when you start overwriting
memory.
Trust me, in Python were anything like that I would be right there with
ya. It isn't. Someone else address your specific questions so I won't here.
I just wanted to add that basically Python boils down to this:
It's the code you should write without the braces and semicolons.
Seriously. Take a piece of code from Perl or C or PHP or any other
language which has those constructs which is written properly (IE, human
readable) then just remove the braces and semicolons and you have the basic
equivolant of Python code. Granted the keywords and syntax are different but
the idea is the same. It's just properly indented code without braces and
semicolons. Here's an example that shows that nicely. Notice my argument
lists on both calls to self.FileList.AppendItem():
def Init_FileList(self):
'''Setup the initial tree for the FileList view'''
root_node = self.FileList.AddRoot('Mail dirs',-1,-1,NULL)
for dir in vars.maildirs:
dir_name = wxTreeItemData(dir)
dir_node = self.FileList.AppendItem(root_node, dir, -1, -1,
dir_name)
try:
for file in os.listdir(dir):
filepath = wxTreeItemData(dir + '/' + file)
if os.path.isfile(filepath.GetData()):
self.FileList.AppendItem(dir_node, file, -1, -1,
filepath)
except OSError:
self.err('Directory %s does not exist' % (dir))
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
---+-
pgpV5N4wk4aWt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: Tabs v.s. spaces (was Re: Programming first steps.)
H. S. Teoh wrote: That doesn't negate the fact that I find significant whitespace rather atrocious. I really rather use a language where I'm free to format the code the way I want it, to maximally convey its meaning, rather than to be forced to write it a certain way because some genius decided that whitespace should be significant. Two questions. 1: Have you ever programmed in Python? 2: Can you provide an example of such free-style coding that you speak so highly of? -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- pgp2ZZrcJAqr8.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Tabs v.s. spaces (was Re: Programming first steps.)
Tom wrote: Significant whitespace? Shudder, that brings back crusty old memories of Fortran. I have great fondness for fortran because of the wonderful mathematical algorithms in LinPack, but I have no fondness for significant whitespace. And? Does Fortran's rules map to Pythons? I often find that people who grouse about the whitespace are people who have never touched Python. Myself included before I touched Python. I can say this. I spent more time grousing about it in a few months than it has ever impacted my coding style in the years since. Have you touched Python? -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- pgplgG7NaC1N1.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Programming first steps.
One of these days I'll also learn how to proofread before I hit send... Steve Lamb wrote: decade of Wordstar-esque editors ending with joe. I have vi. I love Hate, not have. mode when you want to be in command mode. When in edit mode ESC costs you nothing. It doesn't change modes. So if you're not sure you're in When in command mode, not edit. *sigh* -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- pgpj6amYez0qK.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Programming first steps.
David Palmer wrote:
(2) Perl or Python. This seems to be another divided camp.
What are the capabilities of each? What are the applications of each?
Python and Perl have basically the same capabilities and applications as
the other. The major difference is Python doesn't look like warm-over
line-noise from the 80s.
I've already decided to use Vim, steep learning curve apparently, but
comprehensive functionality when you get there. Also extended capability
with lots of plugins.
I found vim easier to pick up than emacs and that was after over a decade
of Wordstar-esque editors ending with joe. I have vi. I love vim. I'd never
use vi unless vim isn't available. There really is little to compare the two
except that vim is based on vi.
With that said let me give you the biggest hint on learning any vi
variant: When in doubt, slap the ESC key. The commands and controls will come
in time but all of that doesn't mean a thing if you're in edit mode when you
want to be in command mode. When in edit mode ESC costs you nothing. It
doesn't change modes. So if you're not sure you're in command mode, just hit
ESC and you will be. Beyond that as long as you're used to an advanced editor
it is just learning the mapping for the concept {delete line} to the key(s)
{dd}/CNTL-Y/Home & Shift-END & DEL, etc.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
---+-
pgpwxIX2kjXZ3.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: Programming first steps.
Gunnar Wolf wrote:
I strongly reccomend Perl. Why? Well, that's how I learnt (or more
properly, how I picked up after years of inactivity) programming (I
had only BASIC experience before that). Perl is a language meant to be
easy to write - Yes, your first code will probably not be very
maintainable until you reach enough skills, but it will let you
concentrate on how to program, how to deal with programming concepts -
Don't care about what goes on behind scenes, there will be plenty of
time in the future to learn about memory management and stuff. I think
a newbie will really appreciate Larry Wall's vision of a
pseudo-natural programming language.
All of this applies equally to Python (and most other scripting languages
out there, to be honest) and I'd send a newbie to Python long before
inflicting Perl upon them. Don't get me wrong I started in Turbo Pascal and
really didn't get my grounding in programming until Perl but I sure wish
Python were around in the day.
Perl's TIMTOWTDI is a nightmare for beginners. Sure it's nice to know
you can do something different ways until you start reading examples which
actually start doing things multiple ways. A lot of programming isn't they
syntax it is the concepts the syntax is supposed to convey. Thinking in the
concepts is the hard part. Finding how to express those concepts is just
looking things up in a book. But in the beginning the two are the same. One
is learning both the concept and the syntax. Throwing a language at them with
multiple syntax for the same context is cruel and unusual punishment.
Python's diametrically opposed philosophy is much better. There should
ideally be only one obvious way to do something. With that in mind the
language itself is much smaller. Concepts are tied to one, maybe two syntax.
So in learning both at once, especially by reading examples, it is much easier.
Finally there is the simple fact that Python is interactive. There have
been many cases where I have a window on the left with my code and a window on
the right sitting in Python where I hash out my ideas because I'm not quite
sure how things are going to flow yet or exactly how the syntax works. I can
play with the syntax, keep my data fairly static, work out each step in detail
and as I do put that in the script on the left. IE, nothing quite compares to
learning how slices work across all kinds of sequences other thank just
playing with them like this:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~} python
Python 2.3+ (#2, Aug 10 2003, 11:33:47)
[GCC 3.3.1 (Debian)] on linux2
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> foo = '12345'
>>> bar = '1 2 3 4 5'.split()
>>> foo
'12345'
>>> bar
['1', '2', '3', '4', '5']
>>> foo[2:3]
'3'
>>> bar[2:3]
['3']
>>> foo[1:3]
'23'
>>> bar[1:3]
['2', '3']
>>> baz = tuple(bar)
>>> bar
['1', '2', '3', '4', '5']
>>> baz
('1', '2', '3', '4', '5')
>>> baz[1:3]
('2', '3')
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
---+-
pgpTKsDLUs0Z4.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: Tabs v.s. spaces (was Re: Programming first steps.)
H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 11:47:34AM -0600, Chad Walstrom wrote:
[snip]
I have a love-hate relationship with the significant whitespace.
I have a hate-hate relationship with it. I much prefer free-style syntax
where the programmer is allowed to use his best judgment on how to indent
the code. Of course, in less-than-ideal projects, or projects with
less-then-ideal programmers, this could result in a mess, but I'm speaking
of personal preference here.
Problem is that in languages which allow "free-style syntax" you're not
allowed free-style syntax at all. You're required to match }'s with {'s (or
the local language equivolents) and end all lines with ; (except for some
cases when you don't have to). This is still a restriction of the same order,
just with different characters and rules.
Oddly enough ever since picking up Python a few years back I've never
once felt constrained by its significant whitespace. I felt a profound
relief, however, when dealing with other people's code becuase it looked and
behaved just like mine. There is enough freedom in the rules that a
programmer doesn't have to worry about the end of the screen yet there is
enough sensible structure to make the code readable. I mean, let's get down
to it
if foo {
bar;
} else {
baz;
}
if foo
{
bar;
}
else
{
baz;
}
if foo {
bar;
}
else {
baz;
}
if you remove the points of contention between those three you're left
with...
if foo
bar
else
baz
...which is a colon away from legal Python syntax. :P
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
---+-
pgpmr0ZaaMWcX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: Tabs v.s. spaces (was Re: Programming first steps.)
H. S. Teoh wrote: On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 02:29:52PM -0600, Chad Walstrom wrote: On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 02:19:02PM -0500, H. S. Teoh wrote: Also, as an off-topic note, blank lines that contain tabs or spaces are Pure Evil(tm), especially in code. One of these days I should write a sed script to eliminate all incarnations of this Pure Evil(tm) from /usr/src. Python did away with that requirement for scope in 2.x. If you want to use blank lines for code logic separation in python < 2.0, you must nest the line as far as the current block. For that reason, I don't use blank lines within class or method definitions when writing for Python 1.5.x. [snip] Hmm, I did not know this before. *chalks up one more reason to avoid Python like the plague...* Uh, care to rewrite that since Python is now on 2.3 and 1.5.2 is several years old? -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- pgpBn1DSwtMxV.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Virus emails
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 16:17:45 +0200 Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Runs spamc twice. Usually it won't matter, but with higher traffic, the load > will increase for obvious reasons... spamc isn't run twice. exiscan-acl *can* run the mail through SA as a test. It doesn't /have/ to. So if one is using sa-exim one just does not have exiscan-acl check SA. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- pgpy4YgfbXUsz.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Virus emails
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 21:07:46 +0200 Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 10:43:30AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote: > > Same here though I am sticking with SA-Exim because it saves the mail > > in a certain range so I can throw it at the Bayesian classifier. > I usually don't have large enough partitions to hold all the spam (!) Certain range. Here it is things scored between 5 and 8. 5 is where things are considered spam. 8 is where I reject things outright. 12 is where autolearn is set. I want to send things in that range to the Bayesian classifier so the score would creep up hopefully to the point of being rejected. Comes out to about 1-2 a day. > > It also has the option of teergrubing. > I'm a bit scared of turning it on, didn't (see|read) enough documentation > for it. Simple concept, if a message scores high enough (25 is default) you just string the connection out for 5 minutes. > > It's generally accepted that for robust handling of Spam SA-Exim is the > > better route. For simple handling as well as virus scanning Exiscan-ACL > > is the better route. Lots of people just use both. > Isn't that pretty wasteful? Depends on what you consider wasteful. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- pgpAfnIiHxhgH.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Virus emails
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 16:45:55 +0200 Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For now I'm using the SA-Exim method because even though it's clumsy (needs > the .so file compiled from source so distribution isn't as trivial as an > apt-get invocation), I used it before the Exiscan patch was available and it > was reliable. (I'd welcome suggestions from other users about this issue.) Same here though I am sticking with SA-Exim because it saves the mail in a certain range so I can throw it at the Bayesian classifier. It also has the option of teergrubing. It's generally accepted that for robust handling of Spam SA-Exim is the better route. For simple handling as well as virus scanning Exiscan-ACL is the better route. Lots of people just use both. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- pgpczfRvlVnu7.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Virus emails
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 08:39:02 -0400 "H. S. Teoh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 08:46:15PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote: > > Except it never hits SA nor do I even have procmail installed. Can't > > stand the ugly beast. > It never hits SA? Almost all Swen mails I got were caught by my bogofilter > + SA setup. (It only missed like 2-3 out of at least 5000 per day.) Exiscan-ACL gets the message before Spamassassin does. So the checks are: Exiscan-ACL says Malformed MIME? Reject. Clamav says Malware (virus, worms, trojans, etc)? Reject. Spamassassin says its spam? Reject. > I noticed this also. However, I found that some of the subnets I blocked > "rested" for several hours, and then started bombarding me again. So I'm > leaving the rules in for at least a couple o' days before cleaning out > those with 0 count. Hrm, well the cycle of when to remote and reset could be tuned for daily or weekly operation. :) -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- pgpzy3zr8Pr0U.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Virus emails
You are aware Mutt is perfectly capable of responding to the list. Learn it, love it, USE IT! On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 10:20:46 -0500 Gunnar Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Steve Lamb dijo [Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 07:21:05PM -0700]: > > Gunnar Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > [1] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc0821.txt > > And what does RFC2821 have to say about it? > I would not trust every MTA to implement newer versions of the RFC - > However, it is up to you to decide ;-) Well that's the thing, isn't it. At some point we will have to work with that document and not legacy documents. Besides, you're operating under the impression that spamming software follow either. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- pgpUaCpPytag6.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Virus emails
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 22:44:50 -0400
"H. S. Teoh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Another major source is rr.com, which not only gives me tons of Swen, but
> also other spam in general. I've blacklisted rr.com in /etc/hosts.deny,
> but obviously I'm missing something obvious, 'cos rr.com spam still gets
> through unless I block them on the firewall.
rr.com pisses me off. They RBL other ISP provider's customer blocks so we
can't complain about their mess. Pathetic.
> [snip]
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/var/log/exim4# grep -i malware mainlog | awk '{print
> > $5}' |
> > sort| wc -l
> > 743
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/var/log/exim4# grep -i malware mainlog | awk '{print
> > $5}' |
> > sort| uniq | wc -l
> > 336
> What are the exim rules you used to catch these things?
exiscan-acl calling clamav and dropping it with a 550. A full log line
would be:
2003-09-22 07:38:05 1A1RpB-0007Xd-Of H=(smtp21.singnet.com.sg)
[165.21.101.201] F=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> rejected after DATA: This
message contains a viru s or other malware (Worm.Gibe.F).
> For me, I just created a special iptables chain in the NAT table and wrote
> a script to put DROP rules into it. Then I have a rule in PREROUTING that
> diverts all port 25 traffic to that chain (so that other stuff doesn't
> incur too much overhead---the chain is quite long and growing rapidly).
True. I'm just doing a blanket blacklist since I figure if they're
infected with this, what else will they hit?
> If you want to automate this more, you could write a spamassassin rule
> that matches Swen mails, then use procmail to filter it (match against the
> rule name in X-Spam-Status) through a script that grabs the IP address and
> enters it into the firewall.
Except it never hits SA nor do I even have procmail installed. Can't
stand the ugly beast.
> Caution is advised, though---some Swen mails are coming through the Debian
> lists, so you want to make sure you don't accidentally blacklist murphy or
> gluck. :-)
... Carp, so much for that idea, eh? :/
> But according to my observations from today, it's not a big deal if the
> first few messages get through---all my firewall rules were hand-added
> (only partially automated with some scripts), and they still catch a lot
> of subsequent crap. From the looks of it, infected machines are liable to
> repeatedly resend messages to the same target. The fact that you *did*
> blackhole the IP or subnet probably saves you from a lot of subsequent
> crap.
True. Right now I'm just adding IPs by awking out the IPs, cleaning off
the brackets and tacking it onto the end of shorewall's blacklist.
> I can literally watch the firewall counters go up every minute. Sometimes
> it's 3 or 4 per second. The stuff that still gets through ends up in my
> spam box at about 2-3 per 20 minutes or so. (Much better than the 120/hour
> during the weekend.)
Ahhh, here's an interesting tidbit. From shorewall's status.
Chain blacklst (2 references)
pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination
40 2400 DROP all -- * * 128.118.141.31 0.0.0.0/0
48 2880 DROP all -- * * 128.118.141.35 0.0.0.0/0
0 0 DROP all -- * * 128.83.126.136 0.0.0.0/0
1087 52176 DROP all -- * * 129.79.1.71 0.0.0.0/0
686 32928 DROP all -- * * 129.79.1.72 0.0.0.0/0
This in interesting. Some of these are hitting me a LOT and others have
not hit at all. I guess this means I can drop the ones with a 0 count, reset
the counts and let it go. This would, in theory, weed out the cleaned up
hosts while leaving in the infected, no?
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
---+-
pgpsg99Ynf1Pk.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: Virus emails
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 18:48:58 -0500 Gunnar Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [1] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc0821.txt And what does RFC2821 have to say about it? -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- pgpcssJgAdQlp.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Virus emails
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 19:34:58 -0400
"H. S. Teoh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've resorted to blocking port 25 to subnets from which these spams
What would help is to be able to block an IP once it's been hit. Thing is
I cannot for the life of me figure out a way to do it. Here's the first 25
that hit me today:
[12.166.16.7]
[12.166.16.7]
[12.166.16.7]
[12.166.16.7]
[12.166.16.7]
[12.166.16.7]
[12.166.16.7]
[12.166.16.7]
[12.17.134.9]
[128.143.2.219]
[128.143.2.219]
[128.146.216.43]
[128.146.216.45]
[129.82.100.130]
[129.82.100.130]
[130.244.199.129]
[130.244.199.132]
[132.64.1.17]
[142.165.19.3]
[142.165.19.5]
[142.169.1.100]
[144.135.24.153]
[144.135.24.153]
Notice the duplicates. Now if I could enter a blacklist entry into
shorewall after the first hit...
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/var/log/exim4# grep -i malware mainlog | awk '{print $5}' |
sort
| wc -l
743
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/var/log/exim4# grep -i malware mainlog | awk '{print $5}' |
sort
| uniq | wc -l
336
I'd drop the load from 743 down to 336. Assuming all of those are Swen or
some variant then it would be a savings of about 4Mb so far today.
Of course that's what's gotten past the IPs I've already blacklisted.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
---+-
pgpqCXSI4C5gg.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: IMPORTANT: your message to html-tidy
On Tue, 9 Sep 2003 12:50:51 +0200 "Julian Mehnle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > No, you can't make such a general statement that using content-based filters > is "better" than using DNS RBLs. It wholly depends on the listing policy of > the RBL, and in most cases, content-based filters will be the far worse > option, because it only drives spammers to make their spam stick out from > the general mail noise less and less! I.e. after prolonged, widespread use > of content-based filters, spam won't be easily distinguishable from your > normal mail traffic anymore from a machine's point of view. I beg to differ. I do not see this happening any time soon. I've seen some ingenious ways for spam to get through SA's blocks but the Bayesian classifier has caught them. Like it or not unless the spam is somehow related to the normal topics of conversation that the individual regularly engages in and is from places he or she normally gets mail from the classifier is going to catch it. The most recent example are the spams now that have maybe 3-4 random words in them and have the actual ad in an attached or linked image. SA passes it since it hits maybe 2-3 of SA's markers. However the Bayesian classifier tags it at 95% or higher. IE, it is being caught by the BC, SA's default configuration doesn't give enough weight to the BC for that alone to cause it catch it. Finally there's the issue that SA is using the RBLs in the manner Karsten stated, as a weight to determine whether or not the mail is spam and not an absolute marker that it is or is not spam. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- pgp2yatj97kLY.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: IMPORTANT: your message to html-tidy
On Tue, 9 Sep 2003 07:49:36 +0100 > It's the same sort of thinking that's causing no end of trouble for people > trying to communicate with AOL users: > http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=96264 > http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/03/04/13/2215207.shtml?tid=120 I've got an even better example if not as well publicized. When SoBig first hit my address was one that was being spoofed. I had tracked it to RoadRunner (rr.com). I forwarded them an example piece to tell the guy to cut it out. I was not yet aware of SoBig. Anyway they rejected at SMTP because I am in DSLExtreme's residential block. Fine, I'll call. I get the number for abuse from the whois database. I get a recording that tells me under no uncertain terms will they accept phone calls and I must email them directly. I call into the corporate headquarters and complain to a CCR. He tells me he cannot forward my call but is willing to walk over and talk to them directly if I provide him with the appropriate information. After fuming and learning what SoBig was I just let it drop. A friend asked if they had postmaster blocked as well. They did. I just found it mildly amusing that I, someone who's ran an SMTP server in residential space (with blessing from my ISP) for over two years now without a single complaint, was prevented from complaining about one of *THIER* residential customers who couldn't figure out he was spewing 100k attachments as fast as his little cable router could chug them out. End result: I blacklisted him at the firewall, had my secondary do the same. *shrug* > The difference between what I'm advocating and what you're doing: run > SpamAssassin _at_ _SMTP_ _receipt_, not after accepting the message for > delivery. Exim4 allows this readily. Hell, it has two different methods of doing it. Exiscan-ACL and SA-Exim. Exiscan-ACL was just recently added to exim4-daemon-heavy so for all intents and purposes anyone running Exim4 on a dedicated host already has the capability for SA filtering at SMTP. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- pgpStrMQhHnri.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: IMPORTANT: your message to html-tidy
On Mon, 8 Sep 2003 15:40:15 +1000 Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 06:04:39AM +0100, Karsten M. Self wrote: > > I'm coming to the view that we're approaching the era where all mail is > > going to have to be subject to filtering, at the MTA level. > Depends on how useful you want your e-mail box to be. It has been my experience that filtering at the MTA level has increased the usefulness of my mailbox considerably. Something that C-R will never be able to claim. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- pgpLIChFdsqlH.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug#207300: tmda: Challenge-response is fundamentally broken
On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 23:49:40 + Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 1. The modular design of SMTP agents like postfix do not allow > scanning of messages before the message has been accepted by the > MTA at the SMTP session. I think you would have to add hooks > into smtpd, but that is going to complicate the code. Well, that's postfix's problem. After years of hearing how modular is the superior method it is kind of ironic that a simple solution is complicated. > 2. All checks have to be automatic, and there is no chance of manual > review to ensure that the messages where geniune before bouncing it. Trust me, if SA scores it high enough do you really want to worry about it? Running SA-Exim here and with sensible defaults I've 550'd most spam and, after the Bayesian filtering caught up, most of the recent viruses. I am perfectly capable of of reviewing the messages as I have the option of saving them for review. I define the levels at which things get accepted, rejected or even teergrubed. So far my false positives have been exactly 0 for rejects as I allow a small window for grey area messages to get through for the user to manage. In that window exactly 2 messages were false-positives and they were/barely/ high enough to be marked as spam. This has been so effective I've been working on getting clamav hacked into Spamassassin so that future virus attacks can be avoided without the painful Bayesian ramp-up. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- pgpV7r5ETQv8e.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug#207300: tmda: Challenge-response is fundamentally broken
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 00:36:57 -0700 Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, since we're pointing fingers, it's really SMTP that's broken by > design, and all anti-spam programs (including C-R systems) are merely > stopgap measures that try to make up for SMTP's shortcomings. Oddly enough Spamassassin doesn't exasperate the problem. TDMA does. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- pgp81Uf26k2Ll.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug#207300: tmda: Challenge-response is fundamentally broken
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 16:31:59 + benfoley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Friday 29 August 2003 09:28, Steve Lamb wrote: > > Oddly enough Spamassassin doesn't exasperate the problem. TDMA does. > exacerbate is probably what you meant here. Quite so. 1:30am emails before the requisite round of CS to wake-up are prone to errors, no? -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- pgpMC75FKYQ9o.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug#207300: tmda: Challenge-response is fundamentally broken
Just some additional data points as I have been following this and other related C-R threads for a while now. On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 12:35:25 +0100 "Karsten M. Self" wrote: [ Snip ] > Specific to my own experience: over half the C-R challenges (TMDA or > otherwise) I've received have been for mail I didn't send. I expect > this trend to increase in both magnitude and percentage. I'm likely to > either ignore messages or filter them with other spam. The only C-R challenges I've gotten were when I actually responded to Alan Conner on D-U by accident. He had a habit of setting his reply-to and Sylpheed-Claws honored it. Normally I hit reply and get the list. This accounts for 3 C-R ever. Since they I've gotten at least a hundred or so in recent days thanks to the virus going around. [ Snip ] > More chillingly, other users post Sobig.F stats: > TMDA and Sobig.F virus - praise > Sven Neuhaus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Thu, 21 Aug 2003 17:04:09 +0200 > http://mla.libertine.org/tmda-users/2003-08/msg00120.html > In the last 3 days, I received more than 4000 copies of the Sobig.F > virus. Thanks to TMDA, I didn't even notice it until today (when I > noticed the 330megs in my pending folder). > That's 4,000 innocent parties spammed with C-R challenges, if I'm > interpreting what the meaning of 330 MiB in the pending folder is. This... is scary. Within hours of one machine trying to hit me I had blacklisted him at the firewall and implored my secondary MX to do the same. It was because each instance of a bounce or the virus itself was 100k. Praise for being ignorant of 4Gb of traffic being moved!? Praise for moving 4Gb in bounces? That's bordering on criminal. [ Snippage ] > This then leaves a small number of messages daily to be assessed -- they > are not viruses, spam, or on an existing whitelist. > My question at this point is: why not simply look at the damned mail > and figure out for yourself whether or not it's worth reading? We're > probably talking something like a couple of items, a few times a week. I posted a message to d-u a few weeks back with hard stats about that narrow band. I think it came down to 4 a week as my rough estimate. And, so far, not a single piece in that band was legitimate. I was in the process of adjusting sa-exim's limitations downward since the band wasn't so narrow any more. With Bayesian filters on, razor checked and auto-learning set to -2 and +5 for ham and spam respectively my average ham score was quickly approaching -5 and my average spam score was pushing well over 6 with very little, if anything, in between. I think I saw 1-2 pieces a day with scores between those two points. I figure if I adjusted my scores downward I would have been able to cut that close to 1 every 10 days or so. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- pgpxadPeDtMVs.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: tmda: Challenge-response is fundamentally broken
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 11:44:34 +0100 Stephen Stafford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sorry, but I do NOT see how this is a grave bug. It's wishlist (at best). I tend to agree with the grave aspect. > YOU might not agree that C-R systems are good (personally I detest them), > but that does NOT mean that we shouldn't release one. If the package is in > good shape and functions as advertised, then it IS fit for release. > Hey, how about if I decide that emacs is a huge bloaded piece of shit? Does > that mean we shouldn't release it? > Or if I decide that CUPS is rubbish and lprng is the One True Printer > Daemon? > Or that Gnome is a steaming pimple on the arse of desktop managers? > As long as SOME users like it, and find it useful and it fits THEIR needs, > then we should not be removing it from Debian (as long as it meets DFSG). > tmda appears to meet those criteria. It is NOT your place to decide what > software our users can and can't use. Fine. Some users like to send spam should Debian then package all spam producing software? Just because some users want the software is not enough of a reason to package and distribute it when there is a clear and demonstrable bad behavior inherent to the design and implementation of the software in question. Karsten's original filing proves there is a clear and demonstrable bad behavior inherent in *ALL* C-R systems. While I dislike Emacs and Gnome one would be hard pressed to demonstrate how they or their design are inherently exhibiting bad behavior. > This is NOT a grave bug. You have given NO reasons why the package does not > work as advertised, or fails to build, or fails to install or causes major > breakage to significant numbers of systems. Yes, Karsten did. Did you skip over the entire report or should we start packaging viruses now, too, since they perform as expected regardless of their effect on the larger picture? IE, it is possible for a package to "work as advertised" and still be wrong. > All you have is an opinion that C-R systems are bad. I share that opinion, > but that does NOT make this a grave bug. I await your spam and virus packages with earnest. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- pgpdq0VGTDBnL.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: About NM and Next Release
On Fri, 8 Aug 2003 23:39:25 +0100 Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Two pounds of flax. Oh, you play A Tale in the Desert? -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpijFulhTfpP.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: About NM and Next Release
On Fri, 8 Aug 2003 17:59:52 +0100 Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 10:32:07AM -0600, Joel Baker wrote: > Start with the things about Debian which are distinctly different from > other projects. You should be able to find some things which you want > to do which depend on these things. If not... well, why *are* you here? Would that fall under the preview of liking Debian? > I write software because I can, and I release it as free software > because that makes it better over time. Others will vary (I'm not in > the mood for writing an essay on the subject). Yes, but your choices were determined by what you liked. If not then you're the odd individual. Why do I write free software? Because I believe in giving back to the community that I've gotten so much from. I believe that the ideals set forth coupled with the fact it doesn't cost me anything in the short or long run means I stand to lose nothing and gain a while lot. But let's continue it. Why did I write the program I wrote? Because I like sa-exim. Because I like how it works and needed a tool to help out on area of it's operation. Why did I write it in wxPython using Boa-Constructor? Because I like Python. wxPython seemed to be an easy and fast way to write what I needed. Boa-Constructor helped in that. In the end I had fun working on the code and still do so even though the program is to a level where it suits my needs. So to break it down into keywords. Community, ideals, value, like, need and fun. "Because it was there" doesn't enter into the picture. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpIwdrQddWgP.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: About NM and Next Release
On Fri, 8 Aug 2003 09:33:24 +0100 Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Bullshit. Our "community" consists of heckling each other until we get > it right. Membership is about doing the damn work; I guess that's a > form of "resources". But I thought it was perfectly possible to perform work without membership. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpIvnAkb66xg.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: About NM and Next Release
On Fri, 8 Aug 2003 08:29:54 +0100 Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Actually, you have misconstrued it the other way. It really was "You > like it therefore you should contribute". No. There is a difference between these two statements: I like Debian therefore I should contribute. I like Debian therefore I want to contribute. As others have pointed out, you're way off base. So until you get the difference between those two this conversation is over between you and me. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpIZVax9cN4K.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: About NM and Next Release
On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 09:06:56 +0200 Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So it can if you use | or : or some other random character as well. > It's still a bit silly to have to reflow all your paragraphs at the > first quotation level, but whatever. Which I don't. Since the quoted text is automatically reflowed before quoting in most cases. Furthermore if one is trimming as one should one rarely gets past the first level anyway. And here I thought EMACS was the one true editor. Live and learn I guess. > I think alioth will help with this, since it's then easier to set up a > shared CVS repository and give other people access to your package and > making it fairly easy to get both DDs and non-DDs to help out. Hrm, now there's a thought. Certainly worth exploring. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpMoWtFaoJB3.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: About NM and Next Release
On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 08:52:14 +0200 Matthias Urlichs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > OTOH, most editors can be configured as to which characters they consider > to be quotes. True, but reflow across multiple levels tends to break when one has different quote characters to contend with. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpzERwq0JaPL.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: About NM and Next Release
On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 08:04:04 +0200 Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * Steve Lamb > (please trim your lines a little, 72 chars/line is considered > standard, to allow for a few levels of quoting before breaking the > lines on a 80 char wide terminal. TIA.) Please use a standard quote character, which is >. In that way pretty much any modern editor in the past, say, 10 years, can reflow quoted lines to fit within 80 characters. 72 was for the ~10 years before reflowing of quotes. > | That is true, but that doesn't make the package "important" in > | the sense I got from his message. What I envisioned was core > | packages. > It doesn't have «Priority: required» or important, no, but it's still > important to those users. Right, which I pointed out to him. I felt that the packages I installed were important to *me*. That doesn't change the fact that the sense of the word, I feel, was different when he said it since his intent was more along the case of core packages without functionality. > Apache was more or less unmaintained until thom, fabbione and myself > picked it up in April or so. If you want to help out, please do. Nono, I would not. As has been pointed out people should not take on management of a package they cannot handle. I know, without a doubt, apache would be beyond me. I'm starting with parchive2 and will work up from there. I had only picked apache as an example of something which would be considered an important package in the sense of one that is either required for Debian to run or would be sorely missed if it was not present as opposed to important in the sense of it being important to the people who install it. > So, «core packages» go without love for long periods of time as well, > unfortunately. Agreed. My idea is that the experienced maintainers might do well to offload some of the rote packages to people who are just learning about it so more people, overall, get experience while at the same time freeing their time up to devote to the packages for which their experience is called for. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpr5qtKoLQl7.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: About NM and Next Release
On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 07:32:43 +0200 Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Somebody ITP-ed cpufreq a little time ago. That's quite important if > you are using a laptop (which a lot of DDs are) with ACPI and you > don't want to burn all your battery. > New tools get written all the time, many to fulfill a niche which > wasn't there a year or two back. That is true, but that doesn't make the package "important" in the sense I got from his message. What I envisioned was core packages. IE, things that, without them, Debian would not run (libc?) or would leave a gaping hole that a slew of people would miss (apache?). I ITP'd parchive2, have the package done and waiting on a sponsor. I and pretty much anyone else who decodes binaries off the newsgroups uses it. I don't believe it qualifies as important as he meant it even though it is important to me. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpo7jSXZwEl5.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: About NM and Next Release
On Fri, 8 Aug 2003 00:08:38 +0100 Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Anybody who has to ask "Why should I/we/they contribute?" is not > suitable for Debian. Oddly enough, I've never asked that. > (The "answer", incidentally, is "because we can" > or "because it's there", or some other variation; it is a goal in > itself, and not a means to an end) That, however, is not enough in and of itself. I *could* very well contribute to FreeBSD. I don't. Why? Because I don't like FreeBSD. I like Debian. You're misconstruing that the statement is "you like it therefore you should contribute" when it is is "I like it therefore I want to contribute". There is no goal there, none, other than the contribution. > True but misleading. Liking the project, or not, is not actually > relevant - which is why it's a bad reason to join. And hey, that's > what I actually said, rather than any of the things you've claimed I > said. Quite the contrary, it is a telling reason. At no time should anyone who dislikes the project actually be working on it. At that point it ceases to become something worthwhile for them to work on and becomes an extra chore and duty they are performing out of a misplaced sense of, I dunno, honor. That, in turn, almost guarantees they will not be putting forth the best effort possible. Why anyone would willing work on a project they don't like and, consequently, gain nothing from is beyond me. > > Such as? > Wow. You really *weren't* listening. Of course not being that this is a written medium. Furthermore I might have missed the specific reasons you were thinking of. I don't know about you but reading this list is not my primary concern on this or any other day. Reading this list is something I do in my spare time. So if I missed the message you were thinking of, inadvertently skipped over and deleted it or in the press of my other concerns today have had it slip my mind I think that asking for confirmation is hardly out of line? I chalk this up to the base hostility that is characteristic to many of those with d.o addresses. > Having some specific, valuable things they want to contribute would be > a good one - like maintaining a package or group of packages. (That > doesn't necessarily mean they'll get an account, but it's a good > reason to try) Funny, I file that under "wanting to contribute". The exact line that was refuted as a lousy reason to join Debian was: "Because you think it's an awesome group with laudable goals and you want to contribute?" ^^ Yes, thinking that just because Debian is a swell idea is not enough. But wanting to contribute in addition to that is a damned good start. One, I might add, that thus far seems to jive with the reasons you're putting forth. > > Neither. I am pointing out that someone liking a project is hardly a > > reason to reject them out of hand. > An idea which you made up entirely on your own, and then attributed to > me. So which is it? Uh, no. You're the one who wrote that someone liking Debian was a lousy reason for them to join. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgp86Mcpty3Xd.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: About NM and Next Release
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 23:25:41 +0100 Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I *do not* want people to contribute *because* they "like the > project". What other reason would their be? Why would they want to contribute to a project they don't like esp. when there is no financial gain for it? IE, do what you like. If you don't like it, don't do it. I suspect what you mean to say is that you don't want people to contribute *solely* based on the fact that they like the project. You, however, have not yet mentioned that. > They should find some other reason to contribute. Preferably one which > makes sense. We've suggested one or two in other parts of this thread. Such as? > Please tell me you are not seriously taking the words of Sherlock > Holmes as the foundation of all logic. Of course not. But if the shoe fits. > Is this merely an attempt at libel, or are you really that confused? Neither. I am pointing out that someone liking a project is hardly a reason to reject them out of hand. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpQm8qd2Vd2u.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: About NM and Next Release
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 15:49:28 -0500 Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 05:10:01PM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote: > > I've always thought KDE a wonderful example of what happens when you > > give commit access to just about anybody too. > > Scott > > (GNOME user) > Oh you mean the fact that KDE has rapid development... Yep. ;) Or the fact that KDE was founded to make a desktop environment while GNOME was founded to kill KDE. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpNseF6305U4.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: About NM and Next Release
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 13:29:03 -0700 Craig Dickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andrew said that merely liking Debian wasn't a good enough reason to > want to join the project. No, he said it wasn't a good reason. No "enough". Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "TBH, that's a lousy reason to join Debian. Send a cheque or something." > His point, I think, was that you should have a desire to _do_ something in > particular, whether or not you are a "Debian developer". That would be the part where the original poster says "and wants to contribute". IE, they think Debian is a good group with ideals worth working towards *and* wants to contribute. > Is your goal to be a Debian developer, and you're willing to do some work in > order to be accepted into the project? Or is your goal to get some useful > work done, in which case being an official developer is just a convenience? Am I the only one who sees those as one and the same? To become a developer you get work done. The desire to get work done comes from wanting to contribute. Wanting to contribute comes from liking Debian. > For meaningful values of "contribute", sure. But being a project member > with a d.o account is not essential to contributing, and its arguable > how significant a "contribution" it is to just maintain a few packages > when Debian is so big already (unless they're important packages, in > which case it seems you are more likely to get through the NM process > quickly). But the whole point of different people maintaining different packages, even the "unimportant" ones (Sorry, but most of the packages installed on my machine are important to *me*) is so that a small base of people doesn't need to maintain an absurd number of packages themselves. Even here, though, there seems to be some division within Debian. It comes back to the two faces Debian presents of shunning people for not contributing but shunning them if they attempt to. You place importance of maintaining "just a few packages", right? Yet in this thread (and many like it over the years) time and again the other point driven home is that people should not maintain something they are not actively using, at a minimum, or on the outside something they are incapable of maintaining. Not everyone can maintain or help out on the "important" packages but they can keep the larger bulk of things in line. They should not be shunned because they don't have years upon years of packaging experience. Of course they don't. That's the whole point of *NEW* maintainers, is it not? > I don't deny that the sponsorship requirement for non-developers is > annoying, It shouldn't be. If Debian really wants maintain a division between "people who contribute by packaging a few 'unimportant' packages" and "Maintainers" there are a few things they should do. 1: Get some verbage in there. I maintain a package. To me it seems logical I should go through the new "maintainer" process. But that gets me to be a Debian... Developer. Call it the new Developer process. Separate out maintainers (those who maintain packages) vs developers (those who actively develop Debian *and* maintain its core, er, important packages). 2: Set up a formal group that does nothing but sponsor. Their main goal is to sponsor non-core, non-developer packages. 3: Have the Developers look over their package list and seriously ask themselves if they must maintain everything on that list or if a non-developer maintainer could just as easily do the work. If so have a reverse process from the sponsor process. We have RFS, why not RFM? IE, "Here's a package I am willing to sponsor, who will maintain it?" > but if worse comes to worst, you can simply set up your own > repository and Bugzilla somewhere and publicize its location for the benefit > of those users who want your packages. This, of course, is contrary to the responses of many d.o holders who cite this practice as one of the evils of RPM and why Debian is superior. Because of its centrally maintained repository. > The NM process, viewed from the outside (and I'm on the outside too), > looks like quite a mess. I dislike the obvious dishonesty of the project > having a documented process for new maintainers, important aspects of > which are ignored by the people responsible for running it. That this is > excused by various other project members is rather sad. I dislike the fact that the project is willing to be open about its bugs, open about the process when it comes to software and documentation but is closed about the processes of running the project. People here have said that why a NM applicant is in limbo is not a matter of public concern. I feel that item 3 of the Social Contract applies. We Won't Hide Problems We will keep our entire bug-report database open for public view at all times. Reports that users file on-line will immediately become visible to others. Yes, it specifically mentio
Re: About NM and Next Release
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 21:23:20 +0100 Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Of course that isn't true, I was just showing the farce of your > > statement. Obviously you want people who like the project to contribute. > You have failed miserably at understanding my statement. I do not want > people to contribute because they "like the project". This is not > "obvious"; moreover, it's wrong. Uh, no. You have 3 possible pools. 1: Someone likes Debian. 2: Someone dislikes Debian. 3: Someone hasn't formed an opinion of Debian or doesn't care about Debian. Do you want contributions from 2 or 3? IE, someone who dislikes it or someone who is uninformed or ambivalent to the whole process? > None of which implies that they have to "hate" the project before > joining. Well, you've rejected the one category I think it would be logical to look at. What's left is most likely and all that. > Uhm, yes we can. Did you read what I wrote? We want people who will be > unaffected by such things. Note that the fact that we self-select for > such people is the cause, rather than the result, of this. So, let me get this straight. You want people who will want to contribute to a project which shuns them if they don't, shuns them if they do, expects them to eat crap and like it. That about right? -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpnRNa7HzbB0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: About NM and Next Release
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 20:23:48 +0100 Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 12:06:39PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote: > > On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 17:23:17 +0100 > > Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 12:27:00AM +0300, Richard Braakman wrote: > > > > Because you think it's an awesome group with laudable goals and you > > > > want to contribute? > > > TBH, that's a lousy reason to join Debian. Send a cheque or something. > > *cough* Oh, right, we should hate Debian, loathe it before joining, > > right? > Do you have difficulty with English? That is not what I said. No. But you said that the opposite is the wrong reason. If we like Debian it is a bad reason to want to contribute. So the it is only logical to presume that if you feel liking is a bad reason disliking might very well be a good one. Of course that isn't true, I was just showing the farce of your statement. Obviously you want people who like the project to contribute. > And that doesn't make any sense; what are you talking about? The fact that Debian seems to be hostile? > My whole point is that Debian does not need people who need encouraging. We > need people who will do the work *without* encouragement, mostly > because they ain't going to get any. But it doesn't have to actively shun and discourage people who want to contribute, either, does it? > If you are attempting to suggest that people should be given accounts > as a form of encouragement, then there are two problems with this > idea: No, I am pointing out that it appears that Debian, on the whole, needs an attitude readjustment. On the one hand you have d.o people blasting people for not contributing and on the other you have d.o people discouraging people from contributing. You cannot have it both ways. Either you accept the contributions that come or you stop blasting people because they don't contribute. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgp2pPA1HoKmJ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: About NM and Next Release
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 17:23:17 +0100 Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 12:27:00AM +0300, Richard Braakman wrote: > > Because you think it's an awesome group with laudable goals and you > > want to contribute? > TBH, that's a lousy reason to join Debian. Send a cheque or something. *cough* Oh, right, we should hate Debian, loathe it before joining, right? > I'm not sure there are any good ones other than having some specific > (technical, not political) things you want to see done and are willing > to do. In that case, you won't have to be told to demonstrate stuff - > you'll just do it, because you want to. Bull. Do you know how many times people with d.o accounts will blast others to "do something!" Obviously this isn't enough yet it seems like Debian doesn't want to encourage people who want to do the rarest of things... contribute. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgp2RaTC2UWfr.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should MUA only Recommend mail-transfer-agent?
On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 07:27:01 +0200 Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't know the laws where you come from, but in .no, I think this > would be very illegal. Also, you don't want to archive everything > that passes through a mail server, that'll just give you a huge bunch > of unorganized crap. Here it isn't. That is because that correspondence is done on company time using company equipment supposedly for company purposes. They have the right to keep records of what is going on and some companies do, indeed, keep records. Obviously they're not going to keep the spam. The point is though that they do keep records and unless your personal mail is caught by some automatic filter or is removed manually (in which case it is read anyway) it can be saved. > Then you send it to the archive manually. Tell that to the PHBs that make policy, not me. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpaU6OR4wg8d.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should this be filed as grave? Gcc-2.95
On 06 Aug 2003 16:48:18 -0500 Joe Wreschnig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Let them go. IMO it's far better to install more than is necessary, but > always get the desired functionality, than install less than is desired, > and then have to spend 20 hours recompiling for the necessary > functionality. ECUSE me? Care to explain how this has any relevance at all? gcc-2.95 is going to somehow break without a SYMLINK to 3.3? It's going to require a RECOMPILE because a SYMLINK TO A COMPLETELY UNRELATED VERSION ISN'T PRESENT!? Do you have any idea how idiotic that sounds? "Yes, you're going to spend 20 hours recompiling for the require functionality because... well... a symlink was missing that would have forced another unrelated package to be installed." Sorry. I've spend time trying to get it to do what I want and amazingly enough, once there, I had the functionality I wanted. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpBbM89C1hRj.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should this be filed as grave? Gcc-2.95
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 17:45:44 -0400 Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 02:39:42PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote: > > On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 17:06:53 -0400 > > Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > You haven't listened. > > You've not said anything worth listening to. > *plonk* Ah, yes, the sound of reality hitting a closed mind who can't deal with people who ask questions and actually provide reasonable evidence on why their questions are valid. I'm sorry, Matt, that you can't explain it without resorting to insults. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpcrcoZzRWpc.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should this be filed as grave? Gcc-2.95
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 16:26:06 -0500 (CDT) Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Have you ever heard of alternatives? If 2 packages are installed, both > providing the same alternative, it's up to you to decide which is used. Yes, I have. I've used it quite a bit. > I'm not saying that /usr/bin/gcc is managed by alternatives, or should be. > I'm just saying the use case is the same. No, it is not. > If you want gcc-2.95, instead of the default gcc(whatever it is), then call > gcc-2.95 directly. The difference is, as I pointed out to someone else privately, that if I install, say, nvi it can be called as vi using /etc/alternatives. It does not, however, depend on a vi package which contains a symlink which, to be fulfilled, depends on *another* vi package (vim, elvis, elvis-tiny) to be satisfied. When I install anything which is managed by /etc/alternatives other, potentially incompatible, versions of similar or the same software is not installed. No, I get what I asked for and ONLY what I asked for. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpCUjE9Guyf9.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should this be filed as grave? Gcc-2.95
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 17:06:53 -0400 Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You haven't listened. You've not said anything worth listening to. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpYDwXPJGa8f.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: About NM and Next Release
On 06 Aug 2003 16:27:24 -0500 Joe Wreschnig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It's a problem, but it's a problem every large project and many small > ones have, not just Debian. Claiming that Debian is dying because of it > is absurd. I never claimed Debian is dying and if I were it would be for a completely different reason. No, I am just pointing out that having this x+1 for y packages seems to be a problem. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpqJlS5gxVvV.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should this be filed as grave? Gcc-2.95
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 16:22:51 -0400 Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yes, it is too much to ask, because it is impossible to explain the reason > for something which isn't so. gcc 2.95 doesn't require gcc 3.3, it just > requires some version of the 'gcc' package with a version number >= > 1:2.95.3-2. Which in unstable is 3.3, a completely different version. Which in turns requires gcc 3.3. Package: gcc [SNIP] Depends: cpp (>= 3:3.3-1), gcc-3.3 (>= 1:3.3-0pre9), cpp-3.3 (>= 1:3.3-0pre9) So saying that 2.95 requires 3.3 is not a stretch at all because it does through dependancies. > A more useful question would be, why does gcc-2.95 depend on gcc? The > answer, as usual, you could have found for yourself in the changelog: > gcc-2.95 (2.95.3.ds3-5) testing unstable; urgency=low > * For each binary compiler package xxx-2.95 add a dependency on > xxx (>= 1:2.95.3-2). Fixes #85135, #85141, #85154, #85222, #85539, > #85570, #85578. > * Fix typos. Add note about gcc-2.97 to README (fixes #85180). > You may refer to all of those bugs for reasons why this is so. Uh, no. I see no reason why gcc-2.95 must depend on a package which does nothing more than install a symlink called gcc which, in turn, depends on gcc-3.3 forcing 3.3 to be installed. Furthermore it is insane that a person could apt-get install gcc-2.95 ; gcc -v and get 3.3! > > "Yeah, so what that you asked for exim 3, bind 8, python2.2 and > > kernel-image-2.4.20. You got them? What do you care that exim4, bind9, > > Python2.3 and kernel-image-2.4.21 were installed!?" Uh, because I didn't > > ask for them to be installed? > You are beginning to rave. Well, when faced with the idiocy above where noone else seems to see the problem where when one version is asked for and a completely different version is installed I think anyone would rave. It isn't that hard a concept to grasp. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpEwdvhc9uXR.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should this be filed as grave? Gcc-2.95
On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 21:34:26 +0200 Matthias Urlichs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So how can we get it into your head that the other is _not_ a problem? By explaining why gcc 3.3 is needed for gcc 2.95 to work in the first place! Is that too much to ask? Apparently! Lemme put it this way: In no other package that I am aware of does installing an older version require installing a NEWER version to work! > You asked for gcc-2.95. You got gcc-2.95. Whatever else you got should be > of no consequence whatsoever. And you don't see a problem with that? "Yeah, so what that you asked for exim 3, bind 8, python2.2 and kernel-image-2.4.20. You got them? What do you care that exim4, bind9, Python2.3 and kernel-image-2.4.21 were installed!?" Uh, because I didn't ask for them to be installed? > If gcc-2.95 hadn't pulled in gcc which pulled in gcc-3.3, you'd've got _no_ > gcc. That strikes me as being singularly unhelpful. Ok... why? Imagine that, gcc-2.95 never worked in the past because it needed 3.3 to even be installed? -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpczxKBFwI0T.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should this be filed as grave? Gcc-2.95
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 19:29:30 +0100 Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thus, while the situation isn't optimal, I can't see a better way. Thank you. In the past 3 days you're the first person to actually explain why things are contrary to how every other package is instead of trying to brow-beat me with the same nonsense over and over. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgp2ZbxTmmPTN.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: About NM and Next Release
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 19:50:36 +0100 Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > About the same as finding a sponsor, then, with about the same ease of > maintenance afterwards (i.e. you still have to run your changes past > someone, not upload them directly). Except when your sponsor goes AWOL for 3 weeks after giving them the URL to download the packages to paw through and upload. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpEur1NL662F.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should MUA only Recommend mail-transfer-agent?
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 14:00:38 -0500 Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sorry, that's the admin's job to configure. If the user and the > admin are one and the same, why does it matter if the configuration is > done in a local or a global config file? (sudo dpkg-reconfigure ...) > And if the user is /not/ an admin, ... wasn't there a thread about > usability issues lurking here just a minute ago? Erm, configuring an SMTP server for a mail client is not an admin level thing. I mean, c'mon, fetchmail can be run as the user and the same user can configure a pop server there. *shrug* -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpPXdKPYCzTL.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should MUA only Recommend mail-transfer-agent?
On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 12:13:41 -0600 Hans Fugal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It would alter the way my mail is sent. Are you sure? I see nothing in the patch that would require the use of SMTP. The verbage always says "allow". I do not see the code for using the local MTA removed at all. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpU9U6WQCBYU.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: NM non-process
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 13:11:47 -0500 (CDT) Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > No, I never said their status was unjust. I said the process appears > > broken. Two completely different statements. I cannot think of any > > conceivable justification for ANY application to be present for years. > > That has nothing to do with just or unjust. > Saying it's broken, implies you know the exact nature for the delay for some > applicants, and that their long waiting period is not due to some real > reason, but due to some magic value. This implies you think it's unjust. Erm, no, read my message again. The fact that there are people in the queue that long, regardless of reason, is an indication that something is wrong. If the people are there because the DAM doesn't have the cajones to say "No, we don't want you in the project" and decline their application is a problem. It has been said here several times about some people in the queue that they are in the queue because the DAM doesn't want to let them in, period. I am not saying the DAM is just or unjust in his determination. I'm saying that leaving them there when a determination has been made is broken. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgp5ogXSRCWMv.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: NM non-process
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 13:09:15 -0500 (CDT) Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 6 Aug 2003, Steve Lamb wrote: > > Actually, I think it does. They should either be accepted or rejected > > within x days. x being somewhere below rand(20) * 365. Either they are > > in, rejected, or the application closed because of a lack of interest on > > the developer's part. > So, somewhere between 0 days, and 19*365 days, or 20 years. So, I see no > problem then. Er, yeah, flubbed that one didn't I? Of course I did mentioned earlier tha a few months would be the acceptable limit on the outside. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgplVL8qw1hQy.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should this be filed as grave? Gcc-2.95
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 12:36:45 -0500 (CDT) Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 6 Aug 2003, Branden Robinson wrote: > > (IMO, the kernel ignoring $(CC) is the kernel's problem.) > Don't you know your O doesn't matter, only Steve's? This isn't a matter of opinion. Simple test. When you install the following packages what do you get? exim: bind: python2.2: kernel-image-2.2.20: gcc-2.95: Now, play the old kid's game. "One of these is not like the other, one of these does not belong..." The one that doesn't belong is the one that installs a version of software *other* than what was requested. The one that doesn't belong is the one that does something contrary to every other package out there. That isn't an opinion. That is fact. That is quantifiable. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpLHvY6eKSdF.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: NM non-process
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 12:56:20 -0400 Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 08:01:55AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote: > > On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 10:30:11 -0400 > > Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I don't see your name on http://nm.debian.org/nmlist.php. What part of > > > the process are you claiming is broken? > > I wasn't aware my name had to be on the list to recognize that some > > have been there for years. > And neither does the fact that some have been there for years indicate > anything in particular. Actually, I think it does. They should either be accepted or rejected within x days. x being somewhere below rand(20) * 365. Either they are in, rejected, or the application closed because of a lack of interest on the developer's part. > You need some familiarity with the process, or else the individual > situations of the applicants, in order to claim that their status is unjust. No, I never said their status was unjust. I said the process appears broken. Two completely different statements. I cannot think of any conceivable justification for ANY application to be present for years. That has nothing to do with just or unjust. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpshs1nobG4r.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should MUA only Recommend mail-transfer-agent?
On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 18:50:21 +0200 Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * Steve Lamb > | How many local users are you going to have on a laptop whose correct > SMTP| server changes as a function of their location? > Usually: one, I guess. So 1 person, 1 location to change. > | Oddly enough I only have one program for that now. Sylpheed-Claws. > | Fortunately it can do something that most SMTP servers can't without some > | rather painful configuration: send mail through different SMTP servers > based| on the account from which the mail was sent. > Why do you want to do that? Imagine being at work, polling mail from home and then wanting to send mail back out. If the computer, say the laptop, is configured to forward to work mail now you're using the company server to send out personal mail. Even forgiving the whole idea of "Ya'll shouldn't do that on the clock" because people do have lunch breaks and so on some companies archive all mail that travels through their servers. Do you want your private mail ending up in the company archives for several years? I don't. Conversely while at home and answering work mail, presumably on the same machine, you'd want the mail to hit the corporate SMTP server first. Why? Because of the archives above. If you're communicating with an off-site contact and skip the corporate server their archives are incomplete. With this dual system you'd want mail from account A to go to SMTP server A, mail from account B to go to SMTP server B regardless of location. > | Hell, if you want to get technical about it I could do that without > | an MTA easily enough. Tell them to use "mail" as the smtp server, > | edit resolv.conf and have "mail" resolve to whatever server they > | need to send to. > Then you'd have to restart the program each time you change > resolv.conf due to a stupidity in glibc. Given the number of times people have to switch SMTP servers I don't think this is an issue worth worrying about. Certainly worth mentioning, but not much more. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpVSNLwctZ2l.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should MUA only Recommend mail-transfer-agent?
On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 10:48:29 -0600 Hans Fugal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > New mutt users might be slightly confused by the mutt way of doing > things but that doesn't mean we have to patch mutt for their sakes. > Naturally, it's up to the package maintainer how to differ from > upstream, but this mutt user would be miffed. Why? It would in no way alter how you do things. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpUA4suiIWmj.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should this be filed as grave? Gcc-2.95
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 11:26:12 -0500 Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > (IMO, the kernel ignoring $(CC) is the kernel's problem.) One problem doesn't excuse the other. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpUqL26bbldl.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should MUA only Recommend mail-transfer-agent?
I do not need CCs. I am obviously active on the list. On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 23:28:52 +0800 Cameron Patrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 08:04:00AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote: > It is if they have to dig up what the correct SMTP server is. Or if > they're on a laptop whose "correct" local SMTP server changes as a > function of time. How many local users are you going to have on a laptop whose correct SMTP server changes as a function of their location? > | And what if the local user wants to use a remote SMTP server for some > reason? > They are welcome to configure ssmtp or exim to forward to a smarthost. > This has the additional advantage that there's only /one/ point where > the outgoing SMTP server needs to be specified, and if it changes later, > there is only one program that needs to be reconfigured. Oddly enough I only have one program for that now. Sylpheed-Claws. Fortunately it can do something that most SMTP servers can't without some rather painful configuration: send mail through different SMTP servers based on the account from which the mail was sent. Hell, if you want to get technical about it I could do that without an MTA easily enough. Tell them to use "mail" as the smtp server, edit resolv.conf and have "mail" resolve to whatever server they need to send to. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpguNlIymPtJ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should MUA only Recommend mail-transfer-agent?
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 09:27:10 -0500 Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > And is a much better choice than expecting every user to locally > configure smtp settings in the MUA. Lack of direct-SMTP support in mutt > is a good thing. Yeah because entering "smtp.isp.com" is just so trying for most people. And what if the local user wants to use a remote SMTP server for some reason? H. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpKoPcuEeShw.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: NM non-process
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 10:30:11 -0400 Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't see your name on http://nm.debian.org/nmlist.php. What part of the > process are you claiming is broken? I wasn't aware my name had to be on the list to recognize that some have been there for years. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpo1NVbqjlNE.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: NM non-process
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 10:07:40 -0400 Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Not if the projects have different goals. If the goal is the same only the process to that goal is broken then it is a waste of time and effort. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpiCn5FAzxd8.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should MUA only Recommend mail-transfer-agent?
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 13:10:03 +0200 "Bernhard R. Link" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If mutt spoke SMTP, it would be a MTA itself. (Perhaps still missing > the proper interface to link /usr/lib/sendmail to mutt, but that would > be the lesser part). No, it would not. It would be using another method of accessing an MTA. Just because Mozilla speaks HTTP, HTTPS and FTP doesn't make it a web server, a secure web server and an ftp server. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpicpinBn2wP.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: How to install X-Chat in five hours (or more)
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 13:34:49 +0200 Michael Piefel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Am 6.08.03 um 13:04:41 schrieb Emile van Bergen: > > Neither tab-completion or globbing is available when I'm editing a file > > and have to write those path names. > In Vim insert mode, press ^X^F for completion, ^N/^P to choose among > many. Also, in GTK+, file selector boxes allow for tab completion. *blink, blink* Wow, Neat! Learn something new every day. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgp01MoUXbK9M.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should MUA only Recommend mail-transfer-agent?
On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 09:35:29 +0200 Matthias Urlichs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > IMHO using any local mailer is a bad idea on a desktop system. You send > off the mail, your MUA says "Sent", you power down or just close the > laptop, and, if your smarthost happens to be a bit slow today, the mail > sits there indefinitely. While I agree with you yuo are aware that this is a religious war that makes the likes of EMACS vs Vi and Isreal vs. Palastine look like child's play, right? -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgplskzCOxNAJ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: How to install X-Chat in five hours (or more)
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 23:30:11 +0100 Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hixie's pretty well-known in certain other free software circles. What > I've seen of him elsewhere implies to me that he isn't incompetent in > the least, and frankly I think you're going way overboard in the > hostility of your responses. I'm sure it's possible for us to recognize > that things aren't perfect even if we disagree on how to fix them. You're most likely right, I'll bow out. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgp1k6Er4gb9A.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should this be filed as grave? Gcc-2.95
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 12:16:43 -0400 "H. S. Teoh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Downgrading sounds like overkill in this situation. I only had to edit > /usr/src/linux/Makefile to change HOSTCC to gcc-2.95 and export > CC=gcc-2.95 in the environment, and it worked fine for me. This is on > 2.4.21, of course, but I suspect the same holds for 2.4.20. [ SNIP ] > ln -s /usr/bin/gcc-2.95 /usr/bin/gcc > > ln -s /usr/bin/gcc-3.3 /usr/bin/gcc Both of which I'd have to remember to do again later on if I compiled the kernel again. No, when 2.95 didn't work for whatever reason when I told make to use it I preferred to reduce the variables on the system. If 3.3 isn't present it can't be invoked, period. I don't have to remember to edit Makefiles later on on a different revision. I don't have to remember to reset symlinks, change alternatives or equivs or anything. I'm miffed mainly because I asked for 2.95 installed and got 3.3 as part of the deal. I don't take kindly to software installing other software without a clear need and there simply was no clear need. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpqD18CMCOyb.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should MUA only Recommend mail-transfer-agent?
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 21:42:43 +0200 "Artur R. Czechowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I would like to know Md's opinion, but for me there are no reasons to relax > dependencies for mutt (and other MUA). I would not like to do it without > policy requirements because it concerns also other MUA's. But it doesn't really concern other MUAs. Neither KMail or Sylpheed-claws have a depends on an MTA. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgp7SwlzTQAZU.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: How to install X-Chat in five hours (or more)
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 22:16:37 +0200 Emile van Bergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I would even scream at > > /Variable Data/ > > simply because it encourages slow and RSI-inducing click and drag > behaviour, because such path names are impossible to type in (and this > one even requires escaping the space to distinguish between the argument > separator). Come now, there is always tab. Of course there is another reason why such descriptive names aren't all that great. Here's me sitting in a directory mounted off my Windows box. Can you tell where the unix system leaves off, where the Microsoft system catches on and why the Microsoft system was clearly never meant to be viewed from the command line? :) [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/mnt/morpheus_D/Program Files/Microsoft Games/Asheron's Call} If it were an all unix world we might have this: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/mnt/morpheus_D/Games/AC} No less descriptive, just as readable but, by gum, I have more than 3 spaces before my command wraps! And heaven forbid I go one directory deeper! -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpf68OSEt0xK.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: How to install X-Chat in five hours (or more)
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 21:38:19 +0200 Emile van Bergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Apple has a great way of doing that. They don't dumb down, they don't > belittle you, they assume an intelligent being who can grasp reasonably > complex English sentences, but who has less knowledge of computer > idiom. *blink, blink* Funny, I consider Apple on of the worst when it comes to dumbing down the interface. Let's not forget they only took about 10 years to get *2* mouse buttons because it was too confusing. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpNO5gaWvjcw.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: How to install X-Chat in five hours (or more)
Oh, look, someone else who CCs when it is obvious the person they're responding to is participating right here. On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 09:55:59 -0700 (PDT) Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 5 Aug 2003, Steve Lamb wrote: > What manual? I rest my case. > I receieved the machine with Debian preinstalled and no offline > documentation except a post it note with the root username and password. And this is the problem of Debian... how? I would ask why you weren't given better help from the person who installed it or why you didn't ask them for help. The facilities are there. > On other systems (Mac OS X, Windows XP, etc) I am clearly shown where to > look for more information (on Windows, in fact, the OS goes to the other > extreme and tries to ram help down your throat), but on Debian, there was > no clear path to the documentation. And on my install the same is true. KDE menu, Help. > >> It hurts because it scares users. > > And? > From a usability point of view, scaring users is a bad thing. Ever hear the saying "Unix is user friendly, it's just picky about its friends." You missed my entire point. Debian isn't scaring off users. It is scaring off *neophyte* users. However, that segment of the population is covered by *other distributions*. This is a *good thing* as Debian often attracts users with some experience who want exactly what it has to offer. > And I'm a geek, one who has been using GNU-based distributions on multiple > machines on a daily basis for at least 3 years, and Sun for 6 years before > that, and I _still_ have difficulty. This should be ringing usability > alarm bells. No, it shouldn't. I should be ringing alarms about the veracity of your claims and your capabilities. > Being usable does not mean catering for the lowest common denominator; I > fully agree that other distributions are more adequately positioned to > target computer illiterate users. Debian is quite usable. *NO* computer system, however, is going to be completely intuative to someone who is handed it with nothing more than "Here, here's the username and password. g'luck!" Quick, tell me, how do you get more software for Windows? Help doesn't point you to TUCOWS or the like. > Without meaning offense, that is a very selfish attitude. No, it is selfish for people to come into a culture and flat out state, "No, I don't want to learn so things should change to cater to ME!" > The number of future debian users is *significantly* larger than the number > of existing users, unless something drastic happens to either humanity or > debian itself. Why should everyone who will use debian in future be forced > to learn archaic commands, paths, and deal with other historical holdbacks, > instead of the few who already use it being taught easier conventions? Because they're not that hard to learn and the easier conventions are not "easier" in any quantifiable sense of the word. Furthermore any system you, or anyone else, would propose would cause no end of upheaval to the software that ran on it. It would take years to make any meaningful shift and in the end guess what would happen. New users would still have to learn where everything goes. > Right. That's poor UI. However, it's not _that_ much better on Debian: Quite the contrary. > By "Incomprehensible status message" I mean things like: > >bootlogd. >Activating swap. >fsck 1.35-WIP (01-Aug-2003) >Running 0dns-down to make sure resolv.conf is ok...done. >Please contribute if you find this software useful. >DHCPDISCOVER on eth0 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 5 >Starting Xprint servers: Xprt. If the pause were after fsck and it was showing that it was checking the disk that would let me know the machine is doing something. If the pause is after DHCPDISCOVER I can surmise that if the network isn't hooked up then it is waiting for a timeout there. Furthermore if I am calling up to my dad who is 400 miles away and doesn't know all that much about Linux he can read me the lines and I can tell him likely causes of problems and pauses. Try that with "See, about 12 seconds into bootup the little bar stops rotating for about 30 seconds." Like I said, those messages aren't meant for the neophytes. The neophytes aren't going to get it either way. They're there for the people that have to fix it when it breaks which may be through the interface of the neophyte. Do you REALLY think I want to walk my father through turning on boot-up logging on his Windows box, have it boot, then talk him, through booting into safe mode and *then* have him drill down to where the log would be? Yeah,
Re: Should this be filed as grave? Gcc-2.95
Adam, where does it say anywhere in my sig or headers that I want a CC? I read the list just fine, you can reply to the list and only the list just fine. I don't appreciate replying to what I think is a private message only to see a copy of it in the public area and have to resend the message for others to see. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpwYxfZdMQ89.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should this be filed as grave? Gcc-2.95
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 11:06:26 -0400 "H. S. Teoh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Did you check your compile logs to see if it actually compiled with > gcc-2.95 or with just gcc (==3.3) ? It happened to me several times that > when building 2.4.21, it would use gcc-2.95 for the initial configuration > and cleanup targets (since I specified CC=gcc-2.95), but revert to gcc for > the actual build. That is most likely what happened. I didn't check logs. Didn't care. It didn't work, fuggit, I needed the machine stable and was mighty pissed that I couldn't just rip 3.3 off the damned system to force the issue without resorting to a serious downgrade to woody packages just to do it. > I had to hand-edit kernel makefiles to stop it from using gcc by default > and use gcc-2.95 instead. Or perhaps try setting CC=gcc-2.95 in your > environment before running the build. Might have worked but forcing the issue is better IMHO. Without 3.3 present there is absolutely no chance of some process down the line sanitizing the environment and monkeying up the works. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpmQil8My3gr.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: How to install X-Chat in five hours (or more)
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 08:14:23 -0700 (PDT) Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Note that, if for some reason the user knew about the command > "apropos", even that wouldn't help him -- none of dselect, aptitude, > and apt-get come up for "apropos install" or "apropos setup". I do believe they are mentioned several times in the manual. Y'know, that thing collecting dust over yonder. > It hurts because it scares users. And? > You will lose many more than you will gain, since there are many more > computer illiterate users than geeks. And? There are a slew of other OSs and Linux distributions as well. This is what always gets me in discussions that are based on the lowest common denominator in computer users; the presumption that everyone wants to cater to them. It has been my experience that packages that cater to the lowest common denominator are packages I don't care to use because I find them *hard to use* even though they purport to be "easy to use". I have almost always been on the side of the scale where I preferred the "harder" package because in the long run, once I got over the nominal learning curve, it was easier to use. However there was always that drive to go for the lowest common denominator, the computer illiterate. It has ruined more programs that I care to list because they would add too much, dumb things down, make the program too large and hard-to-use in the quest to get people who have to ask "Left or right click" after the first time you tell them to right-click something. IE, people with no concept of "default behaviors/actions". I have never, EVER understood why anyone would want to take a package which is beloved by the niche geek market and destroy it for the illiterate market. That is triply so for commercial packages. You're wrong in saying that we (in general) would gain more by making our package (program, OS, etc) more palatable to the neophyte. As I said above, there are a slew of OSs and distributions that cater to that segment. To move Debian into that realm would be to lose what it has and compete with established entities. 100% of this slice is better than <1% of *that* slice. > Just to clarify, I've nothing against verbosity itself. /var/log, for > instance, is great (although "var" is a historical name that really > should be replaced by something more user friendly, but that's another > story). The problem is verbosity when things don't go wrong. Erm, no, it should not be. While it is a historical name it is a name that should remain because every person who's ever worked on a Unix-like system during that history knows where /var is, why it is there and what is in it. It is up to those new people to catch up, not for us to ruin what works and works well in the vain attempt to catch more of a market which, in the end, doesn't really matter as this is not a commercial venture. > I'm all for a "tell me what is going on" feature for debugging. Which is why you need verbosity when nothing is going wrong. Let's see a show of hands on this situation. Ya boot up a Windows box post after '95. Here's the sum of it letting you know something is going on: a rotating palette for the bar at the bottom. The palette stops rotating. So, uh, what's wrong? Oh, wait, it started rotating again. No, wait, it stopped again... for 30 seconds. No, there it goes, it's fine. > Even then, though, it would be nice if the verbose messages were > consistently formatted, and used plain english instead of jargon. > Error messages like "E: Invalid operation foo" are not helpful. No, that's a bad idea. Take a look at IE's 404 message sometime. It's a dumbed down version which doesn't explain jack or shitte. Error messages are there for people who know what they need to do. People who don't know what they need to do will not have that knowledge suddenly imparted upon them by a "plain english" error message because, without the jargon to point you in the right direction, there would be absolutely no place to start. > The first option I'm faced with is: >* 0. [A]ccessChoose the access method to use. > I have no idea what that means. I tried using it (not logged in as > root) and I got the following message: Did you choose it to find out? >dselect: requested operation requires the superuser privilege > Yet another example of an obscure error message. :-) Uh, no, it isn't. Superuser, aka, root. But not always root. sudo can grant superuser access w/o root. Also any account with a uid of 0 has superuser access but that doesn't mean it is called root. I recall one job where we had root and jfroot. Both were uid 0 but they had different passwords. Don't ask me why we had to 0s w/different passwords. Didn't make sense to me then, doesn't make sense to me now. But the really ironic part about all this is that the above message is more of the "plain english" message you want. Root i
Re: Should this be filed as grave? Gcc-2.95
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 10:54:38 -0400 Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Don't compile your kernel with gcc 3.3. I don't know whether the bugs lie > in the kernel or in gcc (or both), but this combination does not work > correctly. Yeah. That was the whole reason I was trying to get a copy of 2.4.20 compiled with gcc 2.95. I didn't know if it was the compiler or the newer version of the kernel that had the problem. I just knew that my problems started with the newer version. If 2.4.20 is stable for 2 weeks I'll move it to my "stable" boot option, compile 2.4.21 w/gcc 2.95 and install it as the current and give it a whirl. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpAa52aqzGqG.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should this be filed as grave? Gcc-2.95
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 09:33:53 -0400 > Please stop crusading, and find out what your kernel build actually > did. Because it works just fine for all the rest of us. Who's crusading? I am pointing out what I see as an apparent problem for discussion. Crusading would be to file the damned bug without discussion and defending it to the last breath. Calm down! -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpClj4e8XXDx.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should this be filed as grave? Gcc-2.95
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 09:25:38 -0400 Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Then perhaps this particular problem was not with gcc 3.3. I think some > additional investigation would be prudent before any talk about grave bugs. Which is why I asked here first before just filing. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpw6uX16u2UM.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should this be filed as grave? Gcc-2.95
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 08:56:50 -0400 Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yes, I know that's 2.4.21, but I'm not going to unpack a whole 2.4.20 tree > to demonstrate that it works the same way. It does. I never said it didn't work. What I said was that when I did it 2.4.20 had the same error as if it were compiled with 3.3. So without compiling 2.4.20 w/ide-cd in it you're not replicating what I did and providing any basis of comparison whatsoever. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpzCqOoIThkC.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should this be filed as grave? Gcc-2.95
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 00:25:27 -0400 Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I fail to see how 2.95 installing both 3.3 and 2.95 somehow equates to > a problem! A failed kernel compile when trying to bring stability to a machine constitutes as a problem in my book. > I build kernels with alternate compilers all the time. Did you check > the log to see which compiler the kernel actually built with? Given that I told it to build with 2.95 and it failed in the same manner as with 3.3 but when I installed 2.95 from Woody which ONLY installs 2.95 it succeeded I, quite frankly, don't care if it compiled with 1.10.0.101.10.2. 2.95 should install what it says it installs, 2.95. Debian has version numbers in the names for a reason and that reason being when people NEED the previous version and not to upgrade to the current one. See the whole thread about exim vs exim4 as reference. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpObY4Tf4W0w.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should this be filed as grave? Gcc-2.95
On Mon, 4 Aug 2003 21:14:08 -0700 Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Uh, no. I am aware of that. That, however, did not prevent it from > running the wrong GCC. v2.4.21 of the kernel had a problem with 3.3. Correction, 2.4.20. For some reason 2.4.21 seems to be crashing my system hard every few minutes/hours/days (pick one). EG, see: 1 151 days, 15:35:00 | Linux 2.4.20Tue Feb 4 01:18:37 2003 2 8 days, 06:50:33 | Linux 2.4.21Sun Jul 13 06:54:34 2003 3 7 days, 12:59:18 | Linux 2.4.21Sat Jul 5 17:54:21 2003 4 3 days, 19:56:57 | Linux 2.4.21Wed Jul 30 23:49:33 2003 5 3 days, 04:21:28 | Linux 2.4.21Thu Jul 24 05:24:04 2003 6 2 days, 14:54:17 | Linux 2.4.21Mon Jul 21 13:55:47 2003 7 2 days, 07:26:42 | Linux 2.4.21Sun Jul 27 11:01:21 2003 8 0 days, 20:15:04 | Linux 2.4.21Tue Jul 29 19:09:21 2003 9 0 days, 15:30:14 | Linux 2.4.21Sun Aug 3 21:08:12 2003 10 0 days, 06:15:31 | Linux 2.4.21Wed Jul 30 15:26:33 2003 Unfortunately I didn't keep the 2.4.20 kernel package hence the need to recompile it. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpoqGLs3OGW1.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Should this be filed as grave? Gcc-2.95
On Mon, 4 Aug 2003 23:37:32 -0400 Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What you meant to do was to run "make CC=gcc-2.95" instead of make. There > is no need to futz around with the default gcc version; just ask for what > you want. Uh, no. I am aware of that. That, however, did not prevent it from running the wrong GCC. v2.4.21 of the kernel had a problem with 3.3. It would die repeatedly on the same line in ide-cd.h. I did tell make to use gcc-2.95 and it failed on the exact same line. Removing gcc, which is 3.3, gcc-2.95 which depended on 3.3 (this is NOT 2.95 in my eyes) and then installing the packages from woody did allow me to recompile that version of the kernel. I fail to see how 2.95 installing 3.3 somehow equates to 2.95. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpuXaBQgLH2c.pgp Description: PGP signature
Should this be filed as grave? Gcc-2.95
Package: gcc-2.95 Depends: gcc (>= 1:2.95.3-2) Package: gcc Version: 3:3.3-2 ^^^ I was having a hell of a time recently trying to compile 2.4.20 (machine's been flaking since an upgrade to 2.4.21) which fails under GCC3.3. So I tried compiling under 2.95 which was... 3.3. Finally had to remove all copies of gcc then manually install the Woody version of gcc to get one that matched the intent of gcc-2.95. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. |-- Lenny Nero - Strange Days ---+- pgpDumAF3Tr8C.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#201125: ITP: par2 -- Parity Archive v2
Package: wnpp Version: unavailable; reported 2003-07-13 Severity: wishlist * Package name: par2 Version : 0.2 Upstream Author : Peter Brian Clements <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://parchive.sorceforge.net/ * License : (GPL) Description : Parity Archive v2 This utility applies the data-recover capability concepts of RAID-like systems to individual and multiple files. It is most commonly used in the posting and recovery of multipart archives on Usenet. . It supports the 'Reed-Soloman Code' implementation that allows for recovery of any X blocks for X parity blocks present. It is popularly used on USENET postings but is not limited to this use. . Upstream source: http://parchive.sourceforge.net/ (I have contacted Rene Weber, maintainer of parchive, to see if he(?) intends to package par2. Barring interest within the next week or so I would like maintain this package. As of this writing I have a package put together which passes lintian but does have a few problems. Namely the build-depends is not correct and it installs 4 man pages when 1 with 3 symlinks will do. I am not a current maintainer and will be looking to become a maintainer for this and other packages.) -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux teleute 2.4.21 #1 SMP Sat Jul 5 17:29:22 PDT 2003 i686 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C
Re: Move proftpd to contrib
On Sat, Sep 18, 1999 at 09:57:44AM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote: > An alternative is wu-ftpd. It would be rather foolish to support wu-ftpd > 100%, however, it has almost the same status as sendmail - it is a very > well tested and greatly improved software, for years now. You're right, it has the same status as sendmail. Overly large, bloated and slow with several other daemons already made that beat it in performance and size by miles. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+-
Re: FreeBSD-like approach for Debian? [was: Re: Deficiencies in Debian]
Thursday, September 16, 1999, 10:50:57 AM, Raul wrote: > Um.. you're just not lazy enough... > # cd /usr/local/bin > # ln -s /usr/bin/perl ln -s `which perl` /usr/local/bin/perl -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+-
Re: /opt/ again (was Re: FreeBSD-like approach for Debian? [was: ...])
Thursday, September 16, 1999, 3:23:25 AM, Marek wrote: >> How are you going to get the data on to the drive without a minimum >> installation on it in the first place? > Geez (that's your favorite expression, ain't it?) - you really don't know > what backups are for. I know what they are for. > They are there to BACK UP everything, make a snapshot of your critical > system so that you can restore it within at most TWO hours. Backing up data > only is good on non-critical sites, the other category requires fast > restoration of the entire system. In that light reinstallation and > reconfiguration is not an option. It isn't an option. OK, I again ask how you propose to get the data onto the system without a minimal installation? What, put the tape on the hard drive and wait for osmosis to set in? Do the "bit transfer dance" and rely upon the good will of the gods? You're also almost as good as stating that one cannot backup /etc, toss in a spare drive, do the install off a local NFS/FTP mount (less than 2 hours by a long shot) throw /etc back in (no need for a tape even, whatta concept!) and then get the rest of the data from there in under 2 hours. Funny, I've seen that done several times across two different jobs now. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+-
Re: debian O'Reilly book cover is up
On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 07:36:19PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote: > What do people think about the art? Pretty nice. The more important question is, who's preordering? :) -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+-
Re: /opt/ again (was Re: FreeBSD-like approach for Debian? [was: ...])
Wednesday, September 15, 1999, 3:56:02 PM, Richard wrote: > Did you *ever* even *attempt* to read the FHS? It took me less time > for me to find this than it did for you to whine about not having a > specific cite. Did anyone else who were quoting from it? All of them did the same thing I did, read up on /opt and why it was placed where it was. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+-
Re: /opt/ again (was Re: FreeBSD-like approach for Debian? [was: ...])
Wednesday, September 15, 1999, 1:44:38 PM, Raul wrote: > Then perhaps this entire discussion should be moved to the fhs-discuss > list. Operative word was, well, was. Discussion over. Someone finally read what I wrote and provided what I asked for instead of trying to beat me into submission with reasons which did not fit the criterion presented. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+-
Re: /opt/ again (was Re: FreeBSD-like approach for Debian? [was: ...])
Wednesday, September 15, 1999, 12:37:41 PM, Anders wrote: > > Thank you for finally providing a very good reason for a new top level > > domain. About the only thing missing, IMHO, is a specific cite from the > FHS > > (section number would be good) but I'll take your word for it. > On page 6: Thanks much. :) -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+-
Re: FreeBSD-like approach for Debian? [was: Re: Deficiencies in Debian]
Wednesday, September 15, 1999, 10:27:47 AM, Jonathan wrote: > Source code is not variable. Once its downloaded and compiled, it just > sits there. The whole point of a "ports" collection is that for a given > package, you have the corresponding source to every binary. That does not > change. It belongs in /usr/pkg The database that constitutes the ports is variable. The source code itself does change at the same rate as the database if not more so because most software is constantly changing. According to this logic, all the *.deb packages apt and dpkg download should go in /usr, not /var. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+-
Re: /opt/ again (was Re: FreeBSD-like approach for Debian? [was: ...])
Wednesday, September 15, 1999, 12:29:30 PM, Anders wrote: > Then can you tell me how your three steps are easyer and faster them our > one step? How are you going to get the data on to the drive without a minimum installation on it in the first place? -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+-
Re: /opt/ again (was Re: FreeBSD-like approach for Debian? [was: ...])
Wednesday, September 15, 1999, 12:20:43 PM, Anders wrote: >>>>Steve Lamb wrote: > > Nor is it the case with /opt. > As long as you don't count the "Filesystem Hierarchy Standard". Considering this thread was a criticism of the inclusion of it into that standard, one cannot count that. It would be like arguing the validity of the Bible as a historical document of the life and times of Jesus H. Christ with someone who is calling into question the validity of the Bible and then saying, "Well, that's not true only if you don't count the Bible." -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+-
