Re: Here's how to make yourself happier
Steve Litt grabbed a keyboard and wrote: > Hi all, > > Here's how I just made my life happier and less stressful: > > == > GARBAGE=/dev/null > > ### DEBIAN LIST UBERSCREAMER ARNOLD BIRD'S 4 ADDRESSES > :0: > * ^From.*naturalli...@dcemail.com > $GARBAGE > > :0: > * ^From.*arnoldb...@cosmicemail.com > $GARBAGE > > :0: > * ^From.*usspookslovesys...@muchomail.com > $GARBAGE > > :0: > * ^From.*fredw...@mail.ru > $GARBAGE > == > > > I'll probably have to add more to that as he comes on line with a slew > of other identities, but .procmailrc is a pretty easy filtering > mechanism. > > Life is more pleasant when you don't have to hear that stuff. Unless you have a reason to want one test per address, you could simply put them all in a single test. > :0: > * > ^From.*(naturalli...@dcemail.com|arnoldb...@cosmicemail.com|usspookslovesys...@muchomail.com|fredw...@mail.ru) > $GARBAGE Collect them all! :-) --Dave smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd FUD
On 04/03/14 17:11, Bret Busby wrote: > On Mon, 3 Mar 2014, Andrei POPESCU wrote: > >> >> On Lu, 03 mar 14, 18:57:09, Bret Busby wrote: >>> >>> I think that it is unfortunate that we are apparently expected to >>> throw out all of our hardware (including printers and other such >>> accessories), and, replace it all, each time a new version of an >>> operating system, is released. >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence >> >> (not implying this is the case here though) >> >>> The MFP thing, as far as I am aware (I have not yet been able to use >>> all of its functionality, due to the Debian policy regarding >>> firmware) [...] The two things are unrelated, except perhaps by the second law of thermodynamics. :) >> >> Assumptions. Please start a new thread about how to get your MFP running >> with recent Debian. >> > > Query was posted to Debian Printing mailing list in October 2013. No > response. There you go again, that's the second time you've done that in this thread - refusing to acknowledge the requests of others while simultaneously expecting their assistance. Some people make life harder than it has to be, and you, insist on shaving cats. > >> > > Unless they were found to be harmful (malicious, or, harmful to the > system, as opposed to being inefficient), they should have been preserved. > > Change for the sake of chanmge, especially when it eliminates useful > things, is not good. That's a sophistic presumption, an argument device that's unsuited to a forum of mostly technical thinkers. > > If the majority are not using something, that should not cause it to be > deleted. Wouldn't that result in the "needs" of a minority dictating what the majority get? Wouldn't that be um, incongruous with your indignation with universal injustices (and African business monopolies)? > > Reading the user guide / instruction manual / other instructions, before > using something new, is relatively simple, but, it is generally not done. True, but does that mean it's a good idea? In all the years of reading your posts on various forums, and spending (wasting?) time trying to help you solve your stated problems the one thing you've consistently demonstrated was you don't read the man, you don't even make the effort to comply with the basic guidelines on how to get help on this list. If you just want to vent your spleen about world injustice, reminisce about your past and ramble on about various subjects that aren't even vaguely related to Debian please do so on the off-topic list. > >>> But, I see no reason why a later version of an operating system, >>> should not be able to natively run software written for an earlier >>> version of the operating system, with, if needed, protections >>> inbuilt into the later version of the operating system. >> >> Cost of maintenance. In case of FLOSS this means the time of interested >> contributors. >> > > Ah, "there's the rub". > > And that is why, also, useful programs, like Firestarter and Arora, have > "gone by the way", and have been abandoned. > > And, that is why what runs on one version of Debian Linux, no longer > works on the next version of Debian Linux. > > Which is my problem. > > But, is it better to keep maintaining working software, or, to abandon > working software, When you've done it then you'll know the answer to the question(?) With all your skills and experience that shouldn't be hard - and unlike Debian developers you could just scratch your itch (obviously while supporting the needs of the minorities). A number of people have patiently asked you questions with the honest intent of helping you yet you've ignored them, they've made suggestions that would make their life easier (social barter) which you've also ignored. Maybe you should consider changing your behavior and expectations instead of hoping optimism will win out over experience and you'll get that satisfaction you crave? Or perhaps you just like having something to complain about (as if life doesn't provide sufficient cause). Kind, and somewhat stunned, regards -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53158020.6000...@gmail.com
Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd fight
On Mon, 3 Mar 2014, Bret Busby wrote: Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 19:04:20 From: Bret Busby To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd fight On Mon, 3 Mar 2014, Lisi Reisz wrote: Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 18:31:20 From: Lisi Reisz To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd fight Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 10:48:12 + (UTC) Resent-From: debian-user@lists.debian.org On Monday 03 March 2014 09:49:13 Andrei POPESCU wrote: I strongly advise that on your next buy (not necessarily MFPs) you also consider how well that device is supported with Linux. Bonus if the manufacturer contributes to that support. If enough of us are doing the same it might eventually open the eyes of manufacturers towards the benefits of FLOSS, etc. It has transpired that the AIO in question is a Samsung. Samsung are *very* good at supporting Linux. I recently had a lot of help because the suppiled driver for a Samsung AIO would not run correctly in Debian 7. As the chap who was helping said, there are a lot of version of a lot of distros. They cannot guarantee that a single driver will run with all. What they did do, was help and supply an alternative driver, and stay with me until it was running correctly on two machines. Lisi The responses that I got from Samsung, were that their printers are not compatible with Debian Linux, after Debian Linux 5. I had contacted Samsung. -- Bret Busby Armadale West Australia .. "So once you do know what the question actually is, you'll know what the answer means." - Deep Thought, Chapter 28 of Book 1 of "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: A Trilogy In Four Parts", written by Douglas Adams, published by Pan Books, 1992 See below. -- Bret Busby Armadale West Australia .. "So once you do know what the question actually is, you'll know what the answer means." - Deep Thought, Chapter 28 of Book 1 of "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: A Trilogy In Four Parts", written by Douglas Adams, published by Pan Books, 1992 On Tue, 4 Mar 2014, Bret Busby wrote: Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2014 14:36:26 From: Bret Busby Bcc: b...@busby.net Subject: [ANSWER]CLX-3185FW not compatible with Linux (fwd) -- Bret Busby Armadale West Australia .. "So once you do know what the question actually is, you'll know what the answer means." - Deep Thought, Chapter 28 of Book 1 of "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: A Trilogy In Four Parts", written by Douglas Adams, published by Pan Books, 1992 -- Forwarded message -- Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2012 16:24:38 From: Samsung Customer Support Center To: b...@busby.net Subject: [ANSWER]CLX-3185FW not compatible with Linux Logo [visual.jpg] [spacer.gif] Dear Bret Busby, We appreciate you contacting Samsung Electronics and being a valued customer. We understand that you want to know if CLX-3175FW printer is compatible with Debian 6 Linux operating system. We are sorry; this printer is not compatible with Debian 6 Linux operating system. However, it is compatible with Debian 3.1, 4.5 and 5.0 operating system. If you require additional assistance, you can email us by clicking on the URL below: http://bit.ly/cPKXqU Samsung values you as a customer and want to insure that we have provided you with the answer you were looking for. If for any reason the information we provided did not resolve your issue, we have various contact channels that are available to assist in resolving your concern. For Immediate assistance with a live agent, you can chat with us here For support by phone, you can reach us at 1-800-SAMSUNG Samsung’s Social Media Team is available to assist with providing up-to-date information or answering questions 9AM to 10PM EST (Mon – Fri). Visit us on Facebook Visit us on Twitter Thank you for being a Samsung Customer! Samsung Online Support [banner_support.jpg] [banner_download.jpg] [banner_account.jpg] [banner_contact.jpg] Have a question? Contact Samsung Support through one of our social media channels. [facebook.png] [twitter.png] [google.png] [youtube.png] Content Feedback [FORM] Q1: How satisfied were you with this content? Very Satisfied Satisfied Somewhat Satisfied Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied Please do not reply back to this email message as this email address is used for outbound messages only. If you are not satisfied with the answer we provided, please click here if you have a question on another product, click here Privacy | Legal Copyright © 1995-2011 Samsung Electronics America Inc. All Rights Reserved. Samsung is a registered trademark of Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. Screen Images simulated. [email_read.jsp?emailseqno=#Ema
Here's how to make yourself happier
Hi all, Here's how I just made my life happier and less stressful: == GARBAGE=/dev/null ### DEBIAN LIST UBERSCREAMER ARNOLD BIRD'S 4 ADDRESSES :0: * ^From.*naturalli...@dcemail.com $GARBAGE :0: * ^From.*arnoldb...@cosmicemail.com $GARBAGE :0: * ^From.*usspookslovesys...@muchomail.com $GARBAGE :0: * ^From.*fredw...@mail.ru $GARBAGE == I'll probably have to add more to that as he comes on line with a slew of other identities, but .procmailrc is a pretty easy filtering mechanism. Life is more pleasant when you don't have to hear that stuff. SteveT Steve Litt* http://www.troubleshooters.com/ Troubleshooting Training * Human Performance -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140304013145.0a92a28f@mydesk
Re: Replacing systemd
On Tue, 04 Mar 2014 04:07:33 +0100 Jerome BENOIT wrote: > > > On 04/03/14 02:50, Steve Litt wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > > > I just checked with my local Linux group (GoLUG), and the opinions > > there are that systemd is not a particularly good thing. I also > > heard from our LUG's most vociferous proponent of Daemontools that > > Daemontools wouldn't be a good replacement because it has no > > concept of running things in a specific order. > > > > So let me ask you this: If I wanted to replace systemd on a future > > Debian system, what would I replace it with, and how? > > openrc ? Thanks Jerome, I'll look into it. SteveT Steve Litt* http://www.troubleshooters.com/ Troubleshooting Training * Human Performance -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140304011847.4d59d5dd@mydesk
Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd fight
On Mon, 3 Mar 2014, Andrei POPESCU wrote: On Lu, 03 mar 14, 18:57:09, Bret Busby wrote: I think that it is unfortunate that we are apparently expected to throw out all of our hardware (including printers and other such accessories), and, replace it all, each time a new version of an operating system, is released. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence (not implying this is the case here though) The MFP thing, as far as I am aware (I have not yet been able to use all of its functionality, due to the Debian policy regarding firmware) [...] Assumptions. Please start a new thread about how to get your MFP running with recent Debian. Query was posted to Debian Printing mailing list in October 2013. No response. But, I had understood that the purpose of creating UNIX (and, Linux IS supposed to be a "UNIX-like" operating system), was to have available an operating system, upon which software would run without requiring modification to adapt to the underlying platform. Well, according to Wikipedia Unix was designed on the PDP-11[1]. Surely things have changed since, don't you think? [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDP-11 Of course, things have changed. My first use of UNIX, was on a VAX 11-785 running a version of BSD (4.2, from memory), about 30-35 years ago. Computer graphics and GUI's, as we know them, did not exist. But, that doesnot mean that a programme writen in UNIX "C", then, that ran, should not be able to run equally well, now,, unless it was faulty oramlicious, and was trapped by improved protections Thus, from what I understood, as a crude example, a program written in "C", would include library and function calls, to standard libraries, and could happily operate, if it was written in UNIX "C", on any installation of UNIX, on any hardware platform. What if in the meantime it has been discovered those libraries and function calls are inefficient/buggy/etc. and better alternatives have been implemented? As programs move on to newer libraries and function calls the old ways just keep rotting because nobody is using them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_rot Unless they were found to be harmful (malicious, or, harmful to the system, as opposed to being inefficient), they should have been preserved. Change for the sake of chanmge, especially when it eliminates useful things, is not good. If the majority are not using something, that should not cause it to be deleted. MNost people now do not use an axe or a shovel, or, know how to use them, but, they are still useful tools. And, while I understand that a person who knows how to use a double headed axe properly, is even more rare, if I happened to know how to use one, I would want useable double headed axes to be still available. That should be relatively simple - the preservation of the standard libraries, and, the standard functions, with standard functionalities, which could be expanded, if needed, but, at the same time, preserving the standard functionalitites and libraries. If it would be simple it would have been done :) Not necessarily. From memory, making silage is relatively easily done (and, inexpensive), but few people, now, have even heard of silage, let alone know how to make it, or, still make it. And, it is supposed to be more nutritious than hay. It is simple, when camping, to dig a trench around a tent, to drain away rain water, but few who go camping with tents, have any idea of the concept, or, implement it, instead, getting their tents flooded. Putting cold water in a pot, and heating it, before adding milk, to heat the milk, can stop the milk from sticking to, and, burning to, the bottom of the pot, but, not everyone does it. Reading the user guide / instruction manual / other instructions, before using something new, is relatively simple, but, it is generally not done. I think that the problem that has occurred, is that, instead, mutations have been imposed, so that functions and libraries, have instead, been renamed or, replaced, in order to impose obsolescence, rather than to maintain functionality. Not likely, not even for proprietary software. So, why, then, is software written that is compatible with Debian 5, not compatible with Debian v n>5? It seems to be "Who needs functionality, when we have all of these whistles and bells? They might not serve any useful purpose, but, they catch your attention." "whistles and bells" also have their purpose, even if you (or me) disagree. Some have have purpose other than to irritate, but, not many. We are aware (I think, and, I believe) that Microsoft, in order to force sales of its products, designs operating system and application software, versions, that are not backward compatible, so as to force sales, so that it can keep "squeezing blood out of a stone", requiring people to be continually buying software that they should not need. Hanlon's razor? http://en.wikipedia.o
Re: more spammy Systemd FUD from the chocolate teapot project
On 04/03/14 13:22, Sam Kuper wrote: >> --- dmcgarr...@optonline.net wrote: >> From: Doug >> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org >> Subject: Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems - SysV is >> FINE. >> Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 19:27:23 -0500 >> [...] >> 1. Debian is *not* the universal operating system. After Windows and Mac >> OsX, and maybe Unix, probably Ubuntu is. Rubbish. > > This is either trolling, or a serious misconception. The latter. > Assuming good > faith (i.e. the latter): Debian is "universal" because it runs on a > huge range of architectures. The others you mentioned aren't, because > they don't. > > Also, Debian is universal in a different sense: it's the upstream root > of an enormous family of distros, of which Ubuntu is just one. Yes - but why argue the toss - that can only lead to spending time with tossers? What does the logo say? http://www.debian.org For all the reasons you've mentioned, plus it's support for alternative kernels. > > Regards, > > Sam > > Kind regards -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53156652.9090...@gmail.com
Re: was Four people troll - now meandering off elsewhere - Systemd or the highway.
By emailing each of the above email mailing lists, it's not hard to guess who you are. It is sad. It is in your interests (for sanity, to stop your tsunami of loss of respect, etc) to simply stop. Take a holiday. Come back in a time (weeks, months) that provides for you to return to communicating like an adult. Also add in not top posting, not swearing on forums intended to be family-friendly, as well as treating others on the list with respect. That will all stand you in much better stead for your future. May you find peace, Zenaan On 3/4/14, Arnold Bird wrote: > So because systemd people won, now after 13 years I have to leave > and find another distro. > > This is BS. > The systemd people do this is every single distro they take over. > > It is their way or the highway. > > I absolutely hate you systemd people. > > --- jstuc...@attglobal.net wrote: > > From: Jerry Stuckle > To: debian-user@lists.debian.org > Subject: Re: was Four people troll - now meandering off elsewhere - > Corporate Speak > Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 19:59:04 -0500 > > On 3/3/2014 5:12 PM, Arnold Bird wrote: >> All bullshit. Notice how the systemd men always talk in corporate speak. >> Says volumes. Your supposed contracts can go to hell. >> > > So says the guy who can't even reply to the list properly (in multiple > instances)... > > > > Note that I am not necessarily a fan of systemd (I'm still not decided). > But I suggest you find another distro. > > Jerry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/caosgnstsnh3mrtgs+5qvzdhxxsv9gsztefrfghnwb1djsqw...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems - SysV is FINE. Systemd won, sysV/OpenRC/etc fans must leave
This is called projection. The poster evidently has a very hard case of it. "The world is so mean. I didn't get what I want. So I'm going to keep crying publicly and say a bunch of untrue and severe exaggeratons." Oh well, hopefully time will heal... Zenaan On 3/4/14, Arnold Bird wrote: > Can't do it all myself. > Debian was created by 1000s of people. > > The systemd people take over. > > They then say all anti-systemd debate is trlling > or spm, and that anyone that doesn't > like systemd has to go make their own > linux distribution by themselves, > no matter the fact that they, the systemd > people did not create debian, they just > co-opted it by targeting the decision > making positions. > > It's OK for the systemd people to use others. > Anyone else has to go it alone, even if > what they like is allready supported. > > "buh buy, we won, gtfo" > Here's the door to bsd, etc. > > It's like getting kicked out of your own country. > "Go create your own, we bought the politicians and > thus control the passive army" > > --- dmcgarr...@optonline.net wrote: > > From: Doug > To: debian-user@lists.debian.org > Subject: Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems - SysV is > FINE. > Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 19:27:23 -0500 > > On 03/03/2014 07:02 PM, Arnold Bird wrote: >> I myself do not like systemd either. >> >> Why don't I go use some other distro >> since a vote was won on some corner >> mailing list by a grand total of >> 4 people infavor and 4 people against >> about one week ago?? >> >> Well: >> >> Debian is the universal operating system. >> I shouldn't have to. >> >> /snip/ > I should not have to forgo all the packages of debian, all my experiance > with debian (13 years), because four people deciced I and everyone of > the thousands of debian developers and debian users should use systemd > and that is it. The people who make debian are not beholden to gnome, > systemd, redhat. The people on that committie might be. The people like > me who are opensource programmers do not have to just accept the > decision of the systemd backers. > > /snip/ > > Two comments: > 1. Debian is *not* the universal operating system. After Windows and Mac > OsX, and maybe Unix, probably Ubuntu is. > 2. Since you are a programmer, and Linux is an open source system, why > not modify the part that includes the undesired code > and put back the desired code? You could then publish the revised > version as "Good Linux" or whatever you decided to call it. > > (I am not a fan of Ubuntu, just saying. . . .) > > --doug > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > listmas...@lists.debian.org > Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53151deb.9010...@optonline.net > > > > > > _ > Free e-mail, simple, clean and easy to use. Visit CosmicEmail.com for your > instant free account. > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > listmas...@lists.debian.org > Archive: > https://lists.debian.org/20140303174511.529d9...@m0005296.ppops.net > > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CAOsGNSTh9QUrhR=eju8rmh6vpwcafnqcjwtx1juqow+y-vf...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems - SysV is FINE.
On 3/4/14, Arnold Bird wrote: > I myself do not like systemd either. > > Why don't I go use some other distro > since a vote was won on some corner > mailing list by a grand total of > 4 people infavor and 4 people against > about one week ago?? > > Well: > > Debian is the universal operating system. > I shouldn't have to. And you don't HAVE to! You and your repeated FUD - saying things which are untrue, or imply something, which implication is not true, but which leads the not-informed reader to reach your erroneous conclusion! I call that deception too, besides FUD, misleading, covert and underhanded. You and your multiple "personas" whilst accusing others of using "personas"! You and your repeated political position, whilst accusing others of being "political". You and your repeated aspersions against pretty much everyone who doesn't agree with you! > Everyone, here it is again: > "You do not like systemd, then get out" No one said that. The TC vote was never, and never shall be, and never would be considered possible to be "Debian shall remove all init systems other than _pick_one_"!! > Simple mantra repeated by the systemd men and women. Simple lies repeated by the "persona" over and over and over again. It is getting old! Please stop with your deceptions, mis-truths, half-truths, covert and gutter-talk rubbish! > I should be able to chose my init system, Do you have a disability stopping you? I switch here and there between SysV init and systemd, for a year now, as part of my ongoing transition to systemd. Unfortunately for day-to-day use I still have to use SysV, but I endure... > just as I am able to chose my kernel, my So you're not kernel-challenged, but you are init-challenged? You're strange... > window manager, my email client, everything. You're not gender-challenged? I am gender challenged - I'm pretty well stuck being the sex I am. But I don't complain on debian-user about that! > Linux IS about choice. You might think it is. Sounds like you're stability-challenged to me. Perhaps leg-disabled? > Debian doubly so. Debian IS the universal operating > system, and that is not just a slogan. Oh do, wax lyrically! It is definitely news to me that my sid install no longer boots on SysV init... or any other init I choose for that matter. Me thinks you're universally-challenged. Yeah. That's it. > Secondly, just about every upstream linux distro > has been target by and has been caused to > switch to systemd. Impressive. Can systemd target the US goverment too?OK. > All the rest of the distros Ahah! An expert have we. Let's listen closely to the expert: > are mostly derivatives of the 8 big ones. > There is no choice anymore, practically Oh, OK! Glad we got an expert to clear up _that_ one. I really was confused on this very issue. At peace I now am. > Any dissent has been banned and purged > from a number of them. Wow! That's pretty amazing. Russia would be proud! > I should not have to forgo all the packages > of debian, all my experiance with debian > (13 years), because four people deciced > I and everyone of the thousands > of debian developers and debian users > should use systemd and that is it. Sorry, dissent has been banned! You have no choice in Debian any more! Systemd is all you can use, may use, will use! SysV init shall be purged from sid and jessie in the next 13 days, Canonical is ex-communicating upstart, and you are to be crucified for your init script suggestion earlier today, after a public flogging in Times Square. The good ol' days of the inquisition have returned heretofore! > The people who make debian are not > beholden to gnome, systemd, redhat. Oh yes, they, are! You are mistaken on so many levels Mr Anonymous! Even I am beholden to Red HatCanonicalNSA. I can't disclose any details yet though... > The people on that committie might be. You've mixed them up with us on debian-user. Perhaps a cool glass of water? > The people like me who are opensource Source of sources, opensource of course, that's why you are public about who you are. > programmers do not have to just accept > the decision of the systemd backers. Sorry. You do! Don't even think about any other option! You shall not only be chastised, you shall be chased, hounded even, by Canonical and Red Flag employees driving tanks. I'm serious - I wouldn't mess with those guys. > You keep pushing us and pushing us > and conquering our community projects. I for one welcome our new communist community overloards! > This will have consequences. Be careful. Consequences have consequences. Zenaan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CAOsGNSQ40K-W-Zpe_Q2-YWC0k_09x=jwkxyr2tbvtsdej+w...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
On 3/3/14, Scott Ferguson wrote: > On 02/03/14 23:21, disbandtechc...@tfwno.gf wrote: >> Notice how the fknuts always try to change the tables. >> "It's YOU who are the shill!" > > OMG you're so right (lol) > > Not that I want to keep you from your work. > In all seriousness, the work of a troll, is important. The troll: *) vaccinates list members against hypocrisy *) galvanises list members together where previously they thought they had major differences, whilst in the face of the troll it's clear we are united *) provides abundant opportunities for some humour and laughter I for one welcome our new troll sanity litmus tester! Welcome to debain-user. And please feed the troll, our sanity mascot. Who wants ponies ... bleh. :) >> Here's an easy way for concurrent boot: >> >> command1 & command2 & command3; >> othercommand1 & othercommand2 & othercommand3; >> thirdsetofcommands1 & thirdsetofcommands2 & thirdsetofcommands3; > > Um, you do know pseudocode is not an actual, um, code. (and that ain't > pseudocode as we know it) Oh come on. Cut the troll some slack already! That looked like code to me, just missing the first line: #!/bin/bash Please! Programming is simple, especially for trolls, which is why we encourage such intelligent design. May the fittest program win. Prematurely aborted systemd experiments might decrease pro-choice init options, so let's not diplocratically eject options. > If you still have your job > tomorrow it'll be with instructions to post from a throwaway email > address - under strict supervision on a temporary contract. Bugger. Given the intelligence emanating from this guy (gal? wouldn't want to presume being sexist here :) , I was kind of hoping that it would not realise that more than the 3 current email addresses could be created for such high discourse. But I guess my hope is a little misplaced... > Now I'm bored (apologies to others who were already beyond boredom). Drat. I do love your dry humour ... although it's probably lost on the target, I'm sure many here enjoy it :) Cheers Zenaan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/caosgnst3ktf9c8ffqk-nhj7uz8+cdq_h1eoownwdctqvyh3...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Replacing systemd
On 04/03/14 02:50, Steve Litt wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I just checked with my local Linux group (GoLUG), and the opinions > there are that systemd is not a particularly good thing. I also heard > from our LUG's most vociferous proponent of Daemontools that Daemontools > wouldn't be a good replacement because it has no concept of running > things in a specific order. > > So let me ask you this: If I wanted to replace systemd on a future > Debian system, what would I replace it with, and how? openrc ? > > Note: This is a serious question about technology, not politics, so will > the multinamed screamer please stay out of this conversation? > > Thanks, > > SteveT > > Steve Litt* http://www.troubleshooters.com/ > Troubleshooting Training * Human Performance > > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53154375.7090...@rezozer.net
Re: Could russians maintain a traditional linux debian? Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
On 3/4/14, Arnold Bird wrote: > Russia is more traditionally minded these days, it looks like from the > outside. > USA is flip collar up, damn the consequences, individuals have no meaning > (collateral damage (aka reckless and willful murder)), fuck the past, kinda > asshole thinking. > > I hope russians would not wish to jump into a hole just to see how deep it > goes > but instead stay with tried and true methods. The idea of all the unfound > security > holes in systemd that one russian user brought up is something to think > about. Son: Hi ho, hi ho, o-ver the bridge we go! Look pa, what's that under the bridge? Pa: A red eyed troll son, a red eyed troll! Sounds rather crass and discourteous too son. Another 'persona' Mr Naturist Linux? My my, what assumptions I can make with anonymous angry posters ... what's your favourite bait? More swearing? Some Russian denigration? Or fuel you with American denigration? Such subtlety a mailing list has never known. I think you're rather feeble minded actually - seriously unable to hold a position without flaming and swearing. The very definition of an over-bearing troll. I suggest you learn to love yourself. Embrace your inner child - he might feel better. May you find peace, Zenaan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/caosgnsq0oysfyzs0kr7pn1ghf0uxmgnsnxfo5uudwkwjnok...@mail.gmail.com
Re: was Four people troll - now meandering off elsewhere
On 3/4/14, Arnold Bird wrote: > All bullsht. Notice how the system(c++) men always talk in corporate speak. > Says volumes. Your supposed contracts can go to hell. At least they're _men_. I prefer humans, with speaking. I also like yoda, me he encouraged my inner dyslexic to embrace. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CAOsGNSRL=fbkawdm8kbduszs+zw8-_px77wrg39xeltkzoj...@mail.gmail.com
Re: was Four people troll - now meandering off elsewhere - Systemd or the highway.
On 3/3/2014 8:40 PM, Arnold Bird wrote: So because systemd people won, now after 13 years I have to leave and find another distro. This is BS. The systemd people do this is every single distro they take over. It is their way or the highway. I absolutely hate you systemd people. As I said - I still haven't made up my mind. However, you can't seem to learn to respond properly to the list. And you haven't learned not to top post. and with your attitude, I think Debian is better off without out. And if everyone who's against systemd is like you, it must be a GOOD thing. Jerry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53154094.3010...@attglobal.net
Re: Words of Inspiration for a GOOD init
On 3/4/14, Arnold Bird wrote: > Free init: > *simple > *clean > *easy to use > > Visit OpenRC, or /etc/rc for your instant freedom from headaches. OK, just did that. But I'm still hearing you. Any other suggestions for my headache? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CAOsGNSQXo41yWW8db2H=3T1soUCwYLo06K8qP=8crvmr6tp...@mail.gmail.com
Re: was Four people troll
On 3/4/14, Arnold Bird wrote: > I wish I could do that with systemd but you people have > forced your way and now stand at the top of every > major linux distribution that exists. Mr Arnatural Linux Bird, > Yes, I fight to beable to pull my head out of the BS. > You are intent on not allowing anyone that freedom. Your subtlety is very fitting for the debian-user mailing list. You are clearly making a lot of friends. Also, it seems you are assuming disempowerment on your part (funny assumption in the Debian world), suppression of you and the good olde dayes by systemd proponents and Red Hat employees, bad faith on the part of almost everyone (since almost everyone disagrees with you), a right to be hypocritical, a right to impose very family-unfriendly foul language on the debian-user and other mailing lists, projection of blame on others, a right to ignore reality (Shuttleworth relatively gracefully conceding to the Debian TC vote and encouraging an efficient, speedy and supported move to systemd), and all manner of stuff that emanates from within. There have been some outstandingly good conversations and demonstrations of good faith and lengthy willingness to engage in communication and to allow extended discussion of every possible point - much of the technical points ignored since they are so overwhelmingly in favour of systemd, and yet you still project bad faith and troll around the net. Please stop. If you can't, show us your best! Raise those fists! Rattle the sabor! Cry wolf! Keep swearing on public family-friendly mailing lists and watch everyone convert to your minority opinion and hypocritically expressed beliefs. Oh, and hell just froze over, pigs are flying, and the world is about to end - get your post-apocalyptic supplies ready or YOU WILL be left out! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CAOsGNST2OJroSLKnqsqT1-b4wPzhaaX9tcDBxXwHmnUYC=1...@mail.gmail.com
Re: was Four people troll
On 3/4/14, Arnold Bird wrote: > I wish I could do that with systemd but you people have > forced your way and now stand at the top of every > major linux distribution that exists. Mr Arnatural Linux Bird, > Yes, I fight to beable to pull my head out of the BS. > You are intent on not allowing anyone that freedom. Your subtlety is very fitting for the debian-user mailing list. You are clearly making a lot of friends. Also, it seems you are assuming disempowerment on your part (funny assumption in the Debian world), suppression of you and the good olde dayes by systemd proponents and Red Hat employees, bad faith on the part of almost everyone (since almost everyone disagrees with you), a right to be hypocritical, a right to impose very family-unfriendly foul language on the debian-user and other mailing lists, projection of blame on others, a right to ignore reality (Shuttleworth relatively gracefully conceding to the Debian TC vote and encouraging an efficient, speedy and supported move to systemd), and all manner of stuff that emanates from within. There have been some outstandingly good conversations and demonstrations of good faith and lengthy willingness to engage in communication and to allow extended discussion of every possible point - much of the technical points ignored since they are so overwhelmingly in favour of systemd, and yet you still project bad faith and troll around the net. Please stop. If you can't, show us your best! Raise those fists! Rattle the sabor! Cry wolf! Keep swearing on public family-friendly mailing lists and watch everyone convert to your minority opinion and hypocritically expressed beliefs. Oh, and hell just froze over, pigs are flying, and the world is about to end - get your post-apocalyptic supplies ready or YOU WILL be left out! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CAOsGNSRmh1nhHj+sdzUer0kXkQ+xSd9cLnTf49TcL2c61CC2=a...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems - SysV is FINE. Systemd won, sysV/OpenRC/etc fans must leave
> --- dmcgarr...@optonline.net wrote: > From: Doug > To: debian-user@lists.debian.org > Subject: Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems - SysV is > FINE. > Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 19:27:23 -0500 > [...] > 1. Debian is *not* the universal operating system. After Windows and Mac > OsX, and maybe Unix, probably Ubuntu is. This is either trolling, or a serious misconception. Assuming good faith (i.e. the latter): Debian is "universal" because it runs on a huge range of architectures. The others you mentioned aren't, because they don't. Also, Debian is universal in a different sense: it's the upstream root of an enormous family of distros, of which Ubuntu is just one. Regards, Sam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/cad-jurjs1zc3bxgrznm8bg75y8oyfytvw4_e-t0sfrhdop3...@mail.gmail.com
Replacing systemd
Hi everyone, I just checked with my local Linux group (GoLUG), and the opinions there are that systemd is not a particularly good thing. I also heard from our LUG's most vociferous proponent of Daemontools that Daemontools wouldn't be a good replacement because it has no concept of running things in a specific order. So let me ask you this: If I wanted to replace systemd on a future Debian system, what would I replace it with, and how? Note: This is a serious question about technology, not politics, so will the multinamed screamer please stay out of this conversation? Thanks, SteveT Steve Litt* http://www.troubleshooters.com/ Troubleshooting Training * Human Performance -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303205009.61acc4e3@mydesk
Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems
Once again, you rant multiple lists whilst hiding who you are. I am Zenaan Harkness. I have some (not all) strongly held views. As an aside, I shall use systemd and have tried a few times now, but have a technical issue or two with my setup when using systemd, which I need to find time to solve first - I intend to use systemd as default init regardless of the outcome of any GR that may or may not happen - I really do read and appreciate the technical superiority of systemd, even though I have since a year now been unable to find time to solve the issue stopping me from using it. I don't hide behind a "persona" which is clearly political in its agenda - and you hypocritically accuse others of being political... OH the irony! On 3/3/14, Natural Linux wrote: > "Clearly such blatent politicking tarnishes that respect, and I'd imagine" > "this is becoming a popular point of view." > " > "Cheers," > " Paul" > > Says the systemd camp, which uses politics in every fight it wages Notwithstanding, your email is not politics? No name? A persona "Natural Linux" - makes me wonder if you're into nude bushwalking or something. > (and it usually wins). Using the tech-ctte to change the OS in a > fundamental way itself is an abuse of power, in an improper venue Abuse of power claimed, by an anonymous _you_, and AFTER the fact. Come on, you need to try a little harder for a truly good troll. Don't get me wrong - you might have some important views and you might have some significant contributions to make to the future of Debian, but you are doing a sterlingly poor job of marketing these views you hold. It might be that you are simply not aware of how bad you are presenting yourself. Firstly you need to cool down. Then, you need to be honest - go public (I'm sure many of us guess who you are, but hey, we ought assume you have good intentions) as in, don't hide behind your personas (and you really ought to avoid attaching other's personas when you yourself are using one - we call that hypocrisy, and really bad marketing too). > created to decide disagreements among package maintainers, not > to go around everyone's backs and make sweeping changes to the > core of debian linux. I think Ian even pointed out that the > technical committe was the improper venue. There must be avenues for proposing changes to the Debian structures, if process is lacking, invent it and propose that first. If you truly hold the beliefs you are less that successfully promoting, then hold a steady course ... and good luck. > Also I read all the emails, everyone said that a GR with more than > 50 percent vote should be able to override said decision. > Then systemd won 4 votes to 4, and now the systemd camp opposes > anyone holding a general resolution and is trying to stall and > not allow such a thing to be called. A classic case of FUD, preying on the lack of knowledge of (some of) your readers to assert (by implication) bad intentions and actions which are not possible. Again, really bad form if you have some good points in there somewhere. > Pulling the ladder up after you've achived your improper victory > (through politics). Note from whom the systemd camp derives their > salarys and income. More of the same. > But yea, anyone who stands up against systemd is a troll, or dissapointing. Baseless reverse-psychology assertions. > Four people get to decide what operating system debian is. > Four. And we have to accept that for some reason. Not four. Eight! They don't get to decide. They DID decide! If you think a GR will get up, stop hiding behind your persona and propose it. I highly doubt such a GR would get the votes though - make Debian a black sheep of the GNU/Linux world? Unlikely that 50%+1 DDs would vote for that, NOTWITHSTANDING all the technical reasons for the (apparent) superiority of systemd... I shall refrain from calling you a troll. I assume you have strongly held, yet fundamentally good, intentions, and are simply failing dismally to communicate effectively at this point in time. So good luck, and if you want respect, you might try toning it down a bit, Zenaan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/caosgnsrwj_e2-fe1zvochx8bwxmuwo3jjxvpjnzdmmk3a+0...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems - SysV is FINE. Systemd won, sysV/OpenRC/etc fans must leave
Can't do it all myself. Debian was created by 1000s of people. The systemd people take over. They then say all anti-systemd debate is trlling or spm, and that anyone that doesn't like systemd has to go make their own linux distribution by themselves, no matter the fact that they, the systemd people did not create debian, they just co-opted it by targeting the decision making positions. It's OK for the systemd people to use others. Anyone else has to go it alone, even if what they like is allready supported. "buh buy, we won, gtfo" Here's the door to bsd, etc. It's like getting kicked out of your own country. "Go create your own, we bought the politicians and thus control the passive army" --- dmcgarr...@optonline.net wrote: From: Doug To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems - SysV is FINE. Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 19:27:23 -0500 On 03/03/2014 07:02 PM, Arnold Bird wrote: > I myself do not like systemd either. > > Why don't I go use some other distro > since a vote was won on some corner > mailing list by a grand total of > 4 people infavor and 4 people against > about one week ago?? > > Well: > > Debian is the universal operating system. > I shouldn't have to. > > /snip/ I should not have to forgo all the packages of debian, all my experiance with debian (13 years), because four people deciced I and everyone of the thousands of debian developers and debian users should use systemd and that is it. The people who make debian are not beholden to gnome, systemd, redhat. The people on that committie might be. The people like me who are opensource programmers do not have to just accept the decision of the systemd backers. /snip/ Two comments: 1. Debian is *not* the universal operating system. After Windows and Mac OsX, and maybe Unix, probably Ubuntu is. 2. Since you are a programmer, and Linux is an open source system, why not modify the part that includes the undesired code and put back the desired code? You could then publish the revised version as "Good Linux" or whatever you decided to call it. (I am not a fan of Ubuntu, just saying. . . .) --doug -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53151deb.9010...@optonline.net _ Free e-mail, simple, clean and easy to use. Visit CosmicEmail.com for your instant free account. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303174511.529d9...@m0005296.ppops.net
Re: was Four people troll - now meandering off elsewhere - Systemd or the highway.
So because systemd people won, now after 13 years I have to leave and find another distro. This is BS. The systemd people do this is every single distro they take over. It is their way or the highway. I absolutely hate you systemd people. --- jstuc...@attglobal.net wrote: From: Jerry Stuckle To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: was Four people troll - now meandering off elsewhere - Corporate Speak Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 19:59:04 -0500 On 3/3/2014 5:12 PM, Arnold Bird wrote: > All bullshit. Notice how the systemd men always talk in corporate speak. > Says volumes. Your supposed contracts can go to hell. > So says the guy who can't even reply to the list properly (in multiple instances)... Note that I am not necessarily a fan of systemd (I'm still not decided). But I suggest you find another distro. Jerry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53152558.10...@attglobal.net _ Free e-mail, simple, clean and easy to use. Visit CosmicEmail.com for your instant free account. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303174028.529d9...@m0005296.ppops.net
Re: was Four people troll - now meandering off elsewhere - Corporate Speak
On 3/3/2014 5:12 PM, Arnold Bird wrote: All bullshit. Notice how the systemd men always talk in corporate speak. Says volumes. Your supposed contracts can go to hell. So says the guy who can't even reply to the list properly (in multiple instances)... Note that I am not necessarily a fan of systemd (I'm still not decided). But I suggest you find another distro. Jerry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53152558.10...@attglobal.net
Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems - SysV is FINE.
On 03/03/2014 07:02 PM, Arnold Bird wrote: I myself do not like systemd either. Why don't I go use some other distro since a vote was won on some corner mailing list by a grand total of 4 people infavor and 4 people against about one week ago?? Well: Debian is the universal operating system. I shouldn't have to. /snip/ I should not have to forgo all the packages of debian, all my experiance with debian (13 years), because four people deciced I and everyone of the thousands of debian developers and debian users should use systemd and that is it. The people who make debian are not beholden to gnome, systemd, redhat. The people on that committie might be. The people like me who are opensource programmers do not have to just accept the decision of the systemd backers. /snip/ Two comments: 1. Debian is *not* the universal operating system. After Windows and Mac OsX, and maybe Unix, probably Ubuntu is. 2. Since you are a programmer, and Linux is an open source system, why not modify the part that includes the undesired code and put back the desired code? You could then publish the revised version as "Good Linux" or whatever you decided to call it. (I am not a fan of Ubuntu, just saying. . . .) --doug -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53151deb.9010...@optonline.net
clean upgrade 32 -> 64?
I'm about to replace one of my old 32-bit x86 Debian boxes with a 64-bit; I'll actually just be moving the disk drives out of the old box into the new one and doing any minor configuration changes that'll be neede (which will be very minor). So, while I'm at it, I'm curious -- is there any clean way to do an update that will simply replace all the 32 bit packages with 64 (and do all the other necessary multiarch stuff)? I'm not actually doing anything with it that will require 64 bits; if the answer is "no" I'll simply continue to run it as a 32 bit machine. So, is it possible? Thanks, -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1btxbe3jwa@snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net
Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems - SysV is FINE.
On 04/03/14 11:02, Arnold Bird wrote: > I myself do not like systemd either. Bully for you. You've pointed that out, many times. Maybe using all those different names has further confused you - Fred Wilson, Natural Linux, NoStuffIdontUnderstand, etc, unless... it's all an act. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53151bfb.5080...@gmail.com
Mail server needs upgrade
My mail was duplicated 4 times due to random timings of mail. Sometimes they would go right away, some would lag for 60 min! Sorry for the duplicates. _ Free e-mail, simple, clean and easy to use. Visit CosmicEmail.com for your instant free account. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303160356.529de...@m0005296.ppops.net
Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems - SysV is FINE.
I myself do not like systemd either. Why don't I go use some other distro since a vote was won on some corner mailing list by a grand total of 4 people infavor and 4 people against about one week ago?? Well: Debian is the universal operating system. I shouldn't have to. Everyone, here it is again: "You do not like systemd, then get out" Simple mantra repeated by the systemd men and women. I should be able to chose my init system, just as I am able to chose my kernel, my window manager, my email client, everything. Linux IS about choice. Debian doubly so. Debian IS the universal operating system, and that is not just a slogan. Secondly, just about every upstream linux distro has been target by and has been caused to switch to systemd. All the rest of the distros are mostly derivatives of the 8 big ones. There is no choice anymore, practically Any dissent has been banned and purged from a number of them. I should not have to forgo all the packages of debian, all my experiance with debian (13 years), because four people deciced I and everyone of the thousands of debian developers and debian users should use systemd and that is it. The people who make debian are not beholden to gnome, systemd, redhat. The people on that committie might be. The people like me who are opensource programmers do not have to just accept the decision of the systemd backers. You keep pushing us and pushing us and conquering our community projects. This will have consequences. --- litt...@gmail.com wrote: From: "Steve Litt of Troubleshooters.Com" To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems - SysV is FINE. Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 17:21:09 -0500 On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 19:26:48 -0800 "Natural Linux" wrote: > System V is NOT hard to "maintain" > The scripts were written YEARS ago. They're fine. They do NOT need to > be changed. Debian SysV has concurrent boot aswell. Hey Natural Linux You and I are different. When I post, I put my real name because I'm proud of who I am, what I do, and I want people to know me. When I post to tech lists, I usually leave my rage about politics out of my post, unless the politics directly involves technologists, such as H1-B etc. Just like you, I sometimes get angry. But I try to leave anger out of my emails, because it ruins credibility. Just like you, I have my likes and dislikes, and sometimes I rant. Like about KDE and Kmail. But when I do, I don't go on a KDE list or Kmail list to rant about these things, because I long ago found found Xfce and Claws-Mail (or Mutt or Thunderbird) as substitutes. So, instead of yelling at the Kmail guys, on the Claws-Mail list I gloat about how much better Claws-Mail is than Kmail, and help Kmail refuges to transition to Claws-Mail. I don't waste of time telling Kmail fans how bad their product is. Life's too short, and I have a life. You don't like Debian's choice. That's cool. There are lots of distros out there. And it sounds to me like it might be doable to replace your distro's chosen initialization. Rather than tell Debian people how stupid the Debian choice was, why don't you just choose another distro? Why don't you just find a distro not using systemd, switch to it, join *their* list, and gloat how much better their distro is than Debian. Do that, and you can even use your real name proudly. SteveT Steve Litt* http://www.troubleshooters.com/ Troubleshooting Training * Human Performance -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303172109.7b255938@mydesk _ Free e-mail, simple, clean and easy to use. Visit CosmicEmail.com for your instant free account. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303160221.529de...@m0005296.ppops.net
Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
- Original Message - From: Celejar To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Sent: Tue, 4 Mar 2014 09:21:04 +1100 (EST) Subject: Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely On Mon, 3 Mar 2014 22:54:33 +0200 Andrei POPESCU wrote: > On Lu, 03 mar 14, 11:27:59, Celejar wrote: > > Andrei POPESCU wrote: > > > > > > Depending on RAM size and what you were running at the time you set your > > > computer to hibernate it may just take longer to resume (i.e. read the > > > stuff from slow storage) than to cold boot. This may have been solved in > > > > When you say longer than cold boot, do you really mean longer than cold > > booting plus starting all the stuff you had running in RAM and getting > > them to the state they were in? > > As I said, I have little practical experience with hibernate myself, > this is just what I picked up here on the list. Besides, I wouldn't > trust hibernate with unsaved files and I use lightweight apps as much as > possible, so for me the benefits are just not worth it. I, too, don't like trusting unsaved files to hibernate. But I also wouldn't trust all my individual applications autosaving of files (even where such exist). So when I need to power down the machine, I have two choices: halt and hibernate, and in any event, I'll want to save all important work first. So why would I reboot instead of hiberate? Celejar Because you're on solar power alone, no grid access and you're trying to live in a way that's a little more sustainable and set an example for others. By shutting down your machine and booting it up again when required makes you feel virtuous; or any of the above. Which are all good reasons. Charlie -- ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** Registered Linux User:- 329524 *** If you want to build a ship, do not drum up the men to gather wood, divide the work and give orders. Instead, teach them to yearn for the vast and endless sea. Antoine de Saint-Exupery *** Debian GNU/Linux - just the best way to create magic ___ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/3951657.159881393889023812.javamail.r...@mail.goipstar.com
Re: Troll and systemd FUD
It's a good suggestion since for some reason even though most users hate the idea. most system admins hate the idea. SystemC incremented by one is being pushed by American and European people who have taken over key positions in every major linux distro. Once they take over they offer for all of us to leave for BSD or for us to get out and create our own linux distro from scratch. No matter how much we programmed for opensource or helped this distro. We are not wanted if we are against system that is not C but one more. It is not fair and something should be done against this hostile takeover of every major linux distribution. What happened in arch linux is happening here in debian now too. The system something took over. Then anyone opposed was kicked out and banned. Now that censorship has been proposed by the victors here too on the tech ctte list. Anything against system(newshiny) is trll or spm. They abuse every process and every definition. They are just like the US federal goverment or any US prosecutor. Makes you wonder where they learned it from. _ Free e-mail, simple, clean and easy to use. Visit CosmicEmail.com for your instant free account. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303145241.529de...@m0005296.ppops.net
Re: Troll and systemd FUD
It's a good suggestion since for some reason even though most users hate the idea. most system admins hate the idea. SystemC incremented by one is being pushed by american and european people who have taken over key positions in every major linux distro. Once they take over they offer for all of us to leave for BSD or for us to get out and create our own linux distro from scratch. No matter how much we programmed for opensource or helped this distro. We are not wanted if we are against system that is not C but one more. It is not fair and something should be done against this hostile takeover of every major linux distribution. What happened in arch linux is happening here in debian now too. The system something took over. Then anyone opposed was kicked out and banned. Now that cencorship has been proposed by the victors here too on the tech-ctte list. Anything against system(newshiny) is troll or spam. They abuse every process and every definition. They are just like the US federal goverment or any US prosecutor. Makes you wonder where they learned it from. _ Free e-mail, simple, clean and easy to use. Visit CosmicEmail.com for your instant free account. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303144956.529de...@m0005296.ppops.net
Re: Troll and systemd FUD
It's a good suggestion since for some reason even though most users hate the idea. most system admins hate the idea. SystemC incremented by one is being pushed by american and european people who have taken over key positions in every major linux distro. Once they take over they offer for all of us to leave for BSD or for us to get out and create our own linux distro from scratch. No matter how much we programmed for opensource or helped this distro. We are not wanted if we are against system that is not C but one more. It is not fair and something should be done against this hostile takeover of every major linux distribution. What happened in arch linux is happening here in debian now too. The system something took over. Then anyone opposed was kicked out and banned. Now that cencorship has been proposed by the victors here too on the tech-ctte list. Anything against system(newshiny) is troll or spam. They abuse every process and every definition. They are just like the US federal goverment or any US prosecutor. Makes you wonder where they learned it from. _ Free e-mail, simple, clean and easy to use. Visit CosmicEmail.com for your instant free account. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303144955.529de...@m0005296.ppops.net
Re: Troll and systemd FUD
It's a good suggestion since for some reason even though most users hate the idea. most system admins hate the idea. SystemC incremented by one is being pushed by american and european people who have taken over key positions in every major linux distro. Once they take over they offer for all of us to leave for BSD or for us to get out and create our own linux distro from scratch. No matter how much we programmed for opensource or helped this distro. We are not wanted if we are against system that is not C but one more. It is not fair and something should be done against this hostile takeover of every major linux distribution. What happened in arch linux is happening here in debian now too. The system something took over. Then anyone opposed was kicked out and banned. Now that cencorship has been proposed by the victors here too on the tech-ctte list. Anything against system(newshiny) is troll or spam. They abuse every process and every definition. They are just like the US federal goverment or any US prosecutor. Makes you wonder where they learned it from. --- scott.ferguson.debian.u...@gmail.com wrote: From: Scott Ferguson To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Troll and systemd FUD Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2014 09:26:07 +1100 On 04/03/14 03:19, Gian Uberto Lauri wrote: > Arnold Bird/Fred Smith/Troll writes: > >> Would it be possible for russia to maintain a classic >> debian linux distribution > > It would support the kremvax architecture but have some *nietwork* > problems > Very punny! :D Kind regards -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5315017f.3080...@gmail.com _ Free e-mail, simple, clean and easy to use. Visit CosmicEmail.com for your instant free account. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303144815.529de...@m0005296.ppops.net
Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd fight
Is it not in the unfree repository? Alot of stuff was moved there. --- cele...@gmail.com wrote: From: Celejar To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd fight Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 11:36:13 -0500 On Mon, 3 Mar 2014 17:10:46 +0800 (WST) Bret Busby wrote: ... > Debian 6 apparently made most printers "paperweight" or "sopmetimes > works", in functionality. > > Something significant, changed between Debian Linux 5 and Debian Linux > 6, that reduced the functionality of the operating system. > > The device is a Samsung CLX3185FW, and it had drivers that worked with > Debian 5. > > The printer, and, from what I have seen, it equally applies to most > printers that were "Linux-compatible" is/are not compatible with Debian > Linux after Debian Linux v5. ?! I'm running amd64 Stable, and my Brother works just fine, with drivers provided by the manufacturer. I really don't think that "most printers" are no longer compatible with Debian. Celejar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303113613.810375e6111f56d6a1d4e...@gmail.com _ Free e-mail, simple, clean and easy to use. Visit CosmicEmail.com for your instant free account. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303143344.529de...@m0005296.ppops.net
Re: was Four people troll - now meandering off elsewhere
On 04/03/14 09:32, Miles Fidelman wrote: > Scott Ferguson wrote: >> On 04/03/14 08:41, Miles Fidelman wrote: >>> Scott Ferguson wrote: On 03/03/14 23:28, Fred Wilson wrote: > On Mon, 03 Mar 2014 12:52:40 +1100 Scott Ferguson > wrote: > >> >> We don't move to stable until it's been stable at least a year (so the >> move to Wheezy has only been recent, in many cases we still run >> old-stable) - anything less give insufficient time for testing. But the >> developers need at least two years lead time before we can even sit down >> and discuss support contracts that entail more substance than trying to >> nail snot to the wall. >> >> > > Well... just to be clear - we still run old_stable (and earlier) on a > lot of stuff. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" remains good practice. > I generally migrate stuff when security patches stop being available. Likewise - though I know many rely on testing and unstable for their needs (hardware and userland "requirements"). Personally I need a compelling argument to implement change - but there are more user-cases than I could possibly think of. Much of SME invest enormous amounts into their OS and userland will very low returns - public service for instance often sees less than 3 hours per day of actual work done on their systems (and that's not just time wasted on Ffffacebook, many consider private email a "right" - and often those "needs" determine OS capabilities leading to support contract goals that can never be met and SOE nightmares). > > Miles > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5315062b.5070...@gmail.com
Words of Inspiration for a GOOD init
Free init: *simple *clean *easy to use Visit OpenRC, or /etc/rc for your instant freedom from headaches. Even my email provider knows what is good in engineering and software, and what is bad. _ Free e-mail, simple, clean and easy to use. Visit CosmicEmail.com for your instant free account. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303144258.529de...@m0005296.ppops.net
Re: Troll and systemd FUD
On 04/03/14 03:19, Gian Uberto Lauri wrote: > Arnold Bird/Fred Smith/Troll writes: > >> Would it be possible for russia to maintain a classic >> debian linux distribution > > It would support the kremvax architecture but have some *nietwork* > problems > Very punny! :D Kind regards -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5315017f.3080...@gmail.com
Re: was Four people troll
I wish I could do that with systemd but you people have forced your way and now stand at the top of every major linux distribution that exists. Yes, I fight to beable to pull my head out of the BS. You are intent on not allowing anyone that freedom. --- scott.ferguson.debian.u...@gmail.com wrote: From: Scott Ferguson To: arnoldb...@cosmicemail.com Subject: Re: was Four people troll Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2014 09:30:53 +1100 On 04/03/14 09:12, Arnold Bird/Fred Smith/Troll on welfare wrote: > All b**lsh*t. If you don't like the smell, pull your head out. But I think you like the smell or you wouldn't spend *all* your time handling it. _ Free e-mail, simple, clean and easy to use. Visit CosmicEmail.com for your instant free account. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303143936.529de...@m0005296.ppops.net
Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
On Mon, 3 Mar 2014 22:54:33 +0200 Andrei POPESCU wrote: > On Lu, 03 mar 14, 11:27:59, Celejar wrote: > > Andrei POPESCU wrote: > > > > > > Depending on RAM size and what you were running at the time you set your > > > computer to hibernate it may just take longer to resume (i.e. read the > > > stuff from slow storage) than to cold boot. This may have been solved in > > > > When you say longer than cold boot, do you really mean longer than cold > > booting plus starting all the stuff you had running in RAM and getting > > them to the state they were in? > > As I said, I have little practical experience with hibernate myself, > this is just what I picked up here on the list. Besides, I wouldn't > trust hibernate with unsaved files and I use lightweight apps as much as > possible, so for me the benefits are just not worth it. I, too, don't like trusting unsaved files to hibernate. But I also wouldn't trust all my individual applications autosaving of files (even where such exist). So when I need to power down the machine, I have two choices: halt and hibernate, and in any event, I'll want to save all important work first. So why would I reboot instead of hiberate? Celejar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303172104.dbb5c61de4fdb7c257e37...@gmail.com
Re: Could russians maintain a traditional linux debian? Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
Russia is more traditionally minded these days, it looks like from the outside.
USA is flip collar up, da*n the consequences, individuals have no meaning
(collateral damage (aka reckless and willful murder)), f*k the past, kinda
as*h*le thinking.
I hope russians would not wish to jump into a hole just to see how deep it goes
but instead stay with tried and true methods. The idea of all the unfound
security
holes in system("c++") that one russian user brought up is something to think
about.
_
Free e-mail, simple, clean and easy to use. Visit CosmicEmail.com for your
instant free account.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303142014.529de...@m0005296.ppops.net
Re: was Four people troll - now meandering off elsewhere
Scott Ferguson wrote: On 04/03/14 08:41, Miles Fidelman wrote: Scott Ferguson wrote: On 03/03/14 23:28, Fred Wilson wrote: On Mon, 03 Mar 2014 12:52:40 +1100 Scott Ferguson wrote: Which is fine for you, and I can understand and appreciate that, for my own personal computers my sentiments are similar. However my business purposes involve meeting SLAs so reboots once or twice a year can cost a lot of money - so in those circumstances a few minutes makes a lot of difference. Perhaps that's not something you care about - or it's just convenient to ignore until your bank/phone/stockbroker/shopping is interrupted as a result. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service-level_agreement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_availability#Percentage_calculation When you pay for a five nines SLA, perhaps for your business web site hosting, or what your bank/business pays for their trading platform that means we must be offline a *total* of less than 5 and a half minutes *a year*. That's begin reboot to all services restarted. Failure to do so results in penalties that can *very* quickly exceed the annual support contract. While a great deal of effort and planning goes into *shifting loads* so that reboots don't affect production - things don't always work to plan, so good plans allow for that. Meaning systems must be designed to reboot in less than the allowed downtime - with a safety margin. If we can shave a few seconds off reboot time we can shave a large amount off the support contract price, with the possibility that those savings are passed on to the consumer. Anybody who is counting on a fast reboot to maintain a 5 nines SLA is simply nuts. Agreed. What do you call people who don't read what they reply to? The same thing you call people who "know" about areas of technology they have had no experience in? that's what redundancy and high-availability configurations are for. Yes. And they get tested, as do all the components. Which means rebooting is something that doesn't just happen on production systems. It all adds up to lost productivity. To paraphrase Oliphant "extrapolation is not a human strength" Personally, I'm a lot more worried about what's going to break when we move to Jessie and systemd - and all those things I might have to reconfigure. That involves serious time, effort, and dollars. And that's before the things that will break intermittently. I still shudder every time I think of the impact udev had on our operations, before we got the subtleties figure out. (Note: at the moment "we" = "me" and sleepless nights that impact other work.) Anybody who is counting on stability and not running stable is, I won't say nuts, but I would say "challenged", and sure to have an "interesting" time. :) That said your use cases are unlikely to be mine - and I don't know what I don't know, so I won't presume to dictate your needs. We don't move to stable until it's been stable at least a year (so the move to Wheezy has only been recent, in many cases we still run old-stable) - anything less give insufficient time for testing. But the developers need at least two years lead time before we can even sit down and discuss support contracts that entail more substance than trying to nail snot to the wall. Well... just to be clear - we still run old_stable (and earlier) on a lot of stuff. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" remains good practice. I generally migrate stuff when security patches stop being available. Miles -- In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. Yogi Berra -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5315030b.4030...@meetinghouse.net
Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems - SysV is FINE.
On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 19:26:48 -0800 "Natural Linux" wrote: > System V is NOT hard to "maintain" > The scripts were written YEARS ago. They're fine. They do NOT need to > be changed. Debian SysV has concurrent boot aswell. Hey Natural Linux You and I are different. When I post, I put my real name because I'm proud of who I am, what I do, and I want people to know me. When I post to tech lists, I usually leave my rage about politics out of my post, unless the politics directly involves technologists, such as H1-B etc. Just like you, I sometimes get angry. But I try to leave anger out of my emails, because it ruins credibility. Just like you, I have my likes and dislikes, and sometimes I rant. Like about KDE and Kmail. But when I do, I don't go on a KDE list or Kmail list to rant about these things, because I long ago found found Xfce and Claws-Mail (or Mutt or Thunderbird) as substitutes. So, instead of yelling at the Kmail guys, on the Claws-Mail list I gloat about how much better Claws-Mail is than Kmail, and help Kmail refuges to transition to Claws-Mail. I don't waste of time telling Kmail fans how bad their product is. Life's too short, and I have a life. You don't like Debian's choice. That's cool. There are lots of distros out there. And it sounds to me like it might be doable to replace your distro's chosen initialization. Rather than tell Debian people how stupid the Debian choice was, why don't you just choose another distro? Why don't you just find a distro not using systemd, switch to it, join *their* list, and gloat how much better their distro is than Debian. Do that, and you can even use your real name proudly. SteveT Steve Litt* http://www.troubleshooters.com/ Troubleshooting Training * Human Performance -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303172109.7b255938@mydesk
Re: Could russians maintain a traditional linux debian? Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
Russia is more traditionally minded these days, it looks like from the outside. USA is flip collar up, damn the consequences, individuals have no meaning (collateral damage (aka reckless and willful murder)), fuck the past, kinda asshole thinking. I hope russians would not wish to jump into a hole just to see how deep it goes but instead stay with tried and true methods. The idea of all the unfound security holes in systemd that one russian user brought up is something to think about. All I see from american posters is just an absolute disrespect for anyone not jumping on the bandwagon of New! It feels like an intelligence scheme to me. There is no substance to the systemd arguments, only demands that everyone shut up and the the decision has been made. And linux is not about choice. Very totalitarian. Americans and their european toy dogs should not be allowed to control the fate of all linux users and linux program developers by forcing the gargantuan root privleged backdoor known as systemd on everyone. They have done so via politics and lies, as is their tradition. They found weaknesses in the structures of distribution governances and exploited them. They put their people into key positions and have wone rigged votes. Debian needs to be forked. We cannot be forced into a systemd plantation. A general resolution is needed to make an official traditional distribution of debian, to compete with the overtaken distribution of debian. I have used and developed on debian for 13 years and see what has happened for what it is. --- recovery...@gmail.com wrote: From: Reco To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Could russians maintain a traditional linux debian? Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 20:50:04 +0400 On Mon, 3 Mar 2014 07:42:32 -0800 "Arnold Bird" wrote: > Would it be possible for russia to maintain a classic > debian linux distribution and let the american and their > controled european employees to waddle into the morass > of systemd? You're putting it wrong way. Everyone knows that in Soviet Russia Debian maintains people, not the other way around :) Reco -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303205004.beda9c0620f65f4d7f41d...@gmail.com _ Free e-mail, simple, clean and easy to use. Visit CosmicEmail.com for your instant free account. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303141031.529df...@m0005296.ppops.net
Re: Test
I also get this delays. Debian developers in the tech-ctte list were talking about deleting all anti-systemd mail as spam. Maybe they are going through the mails to make sure no more anti-systemd "trolling" gets through. They do not want anyone to question the victory. _ Free e-mail, simple, clean and easy to use. Visit CosmicEmail.com for your instant free account. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303143141.529de...@m0005296.ppops.net
Re: was Four people troll - now meandering off elsewhere
All bullsht. Notice how the system(c++) men always talk in corporate speak. Says volumes. Your supposed contracts can go to hell. --- scott.ferguson.debian.u...@gmail.com wrote: From: Scott Ferguson To: Debian-User Subject: Re: was Four people troll - now meandering off elsewhere Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2014 08:16:46 +1100 On 03/03/14 23:28, Fred Wilson wrote: > On Mon, 03 Mar 2014 12:52:40 +1100 > Scott Ferguson wrote: > >> Which is fine for you, and I can understand and appreciate that, for my >> own personal computers my sentiments are similar. However my business >> purposes involve meeting SLAs so reboots once or twice a year can cost a >> lot of money - so in those circumstances a few minutes makes a lot of >> difference. Perhaps that's not something you care about - or it's just >> convenient to ignore until your bank/phone/stockbroker/shopping is >> interrupted as a result. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service-level_agreement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_availability#Percentage_calculation When you pay for a five nines SLA, perhaps for your business web site hosting, or what your bank/business pays for their trading platform that means we must be offline a *total* of less than 5 and a half minutes *a year*. That's begin reboot to all services restarted. Failure to do so results in penalties that can *very* quickly exceed the annual support contract. While a great deal of effort and planning goes into shifting loads so that reboots don't affect production - things don't always work to plan, so good plans allow for that. Meaning systems must be designed to reboot in less than the allowed downtime - with a safety margin. If we can shave a few seconds off reboot time we can shave a large amount off the support contract price, with the possibility that those savings are passed on to the consumer. And no, ksplice isn't a suitable alternative to reboot (for security reasons). Nor does the "my server" (with 2 users, no NOC and mid-range to deal with) only reboots every 5 years is not comparing apples with apples. Server support does not drive user demands or determine development requirements - but the kernel must. That's just one example of why fast boot-time (and shutdown) 'can' be critical. In my experience most businesses that run Linux don't do so primarily to reduce TOC - but because it gives them a business advantage. Continual development of Linux is partially determined by how much money companies are prepared to spend on developing Linux to scratch their own itch. E.g. most kernel development is paid for by companies. Another example is embedded devices - fast boot times means longer battery life. There are other benefits to faster boot times for embedded devices - i.e. how long are you willing to wait for your phone to turn back on? Assuredly there are many other use cases I haven't considered - but I have considered uses beyond those of the hobbyist home computer user or the rare academic and business situation where support wags the dog. >> Perhaps you simply put your "needs" before >> those of others - assuredly inadvertently. >> >> Given the interest displayed by "home users", and those that develop for >> embedded platforms, in fast boot times, I suspect your needs aren't >> stereotypical of all the users that Debian The Universal Operating >> System seeks to support. > > I really don't see how 10 seconds or a minute more can hurt anyone. I've expanded on the relevant sections you either missed, didn't understand, or believe were irrelevant but failed to point out where. > If > you reboot more often, then it's different. Not necessarily. The determining factor is always going to be - how quick do you need the reboot to be. You fail to make a compelling argument for slow reboots. :) Though you can insert wait states into the init of you choice and pretend your new computer is a 286. :) > But boot time is minor > issue. But boot time is a minor issue *for me*. TFTFY ;) > On the other hands, we've already seen how companies are doing > it: first they are going to impress us with fast boot and then everyone > start using it, and then slowly they insert more and more crap into the > boot process, since not boot system is fast and it's no problem and > after a few years your system is again slow as before, unless you buy a > new machine. Um, that's a bit of a sweeping statement isn't it? Do you have some data I can see that supports it? How is does that relate to Debian? > And BTW looks like Moore's low is not as before and computers > are becoming more expensive. AFAIK Moore hasn't changed his law (the Intel cofounder, or do you mean another "Moore"?) - it remains as before. And, it never said anything about cost. "over the history of computing hardware, the number of transistors on integrated circuits doubles approximately every two years." Kind regards -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Tro
Re: was Four people troll - now meandering off elsewhere
On 04/03/14 08:41, Miles Fidelman wrote: > Scott Ferguson wrote: >> On 03/03/14 23:28, Fred Wilson wrote: >>> On Mon, 03 Mar 2014 12:52:40 +1100 Scott Ferguson >>> wrote: >>> Which is fine for you, and I can understand and appreciate that, for my own personal computers my sentiments are similar. However my business purposes involve meeting SLAs so reboots once or twice a year can cost a lot of money - so in those circumstances a few minutes makes a lot of difference. Perhaps that's not something you care about - or it's just convenient to ignore until your bank/phone/stockbroker/shopping is interrupted as a result. >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service-level_agreement >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_availability#Percentage_calculation >> >> >> >> >> When you pay for a five nines SLA, perhaps for your business web >> site hosting, or what your bank/business pays for their trading >> platform that means we must be offline a *total* of less than 5 >> and a half minutes *a year*. That's begin reboot to all services >> restarted. Failure to do so results in penalties that can *very* >> quickly exceed the annual support contract. While a great deal of >> effort and planning goes into *shifting loads* so that reboots >> don't affect production - things don't always work to plan, so good >> plans allow for that. Meaning systems must be designed to reboot in >> less than the allowed downtime - with a safety margin. If we can >> shave a few seconds off reboot time we can shave a large amount off >> the support contract price, with the possibility that those savings >> are passed on to the consumer. > > Anybody who is counting on a fast reboot to maintain a 5 nines SLA > is simply nuts. Agreed. What do you call people who don't read what they reply to? The same thing you call people who "know" about areas of technology they have had no experience in? > that's what redundancy and high-availability configurations are for. Yes. And they get tested, as do all the components. Which means rebooting is something that doesn't just happen on production systems. It all adds up to lost productivity. To paraphrase Oliphant "extrapolation is not a human strength" > > Personally, I'm a lot more worried about what's going to break when > we move to Jessie and systemd - and all those things I might have to > reconfigure. That involves serious time, effort, and dollars. And > that's before the things that will break intermittently. I still > shudder every time I think of the impact udev had on our operations, > before we got the subtleties figure out. (Note: at the moment "we" = > "me" and sleepless nights that impact other work.) Anybody who is counting on stability and not running stable is, I won't say nuts, but I would say "challenged", and sure to have an "interesting" time. :) That said your use cases are unlikely to be mine - and I don't know what I don't know, so I won't presume to dictate your needs. We don't move to stable until it's been stable at least a year (so the move to Wheezy has only been recent, in many cases we still run old-stable) - anything less give insufficient time for testing. But the developers need at least two years lead time before we can even sit down and discuss support contracts that entail more substance than trying to nail snot to the wall. > > Miles Fidelman > Kind regards -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5314fed7.2090...@gmail.com
Re: Four people troll and systemd FUD
On 04/03/14 00:40, Stephan Seitz wrote: > On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 12:52:40PM +1100, Scott Ferguson wrote: >> own personal computers my sentiments are similar. However my business >> purposes involve meeting SLAs so reboots once or twice a year can cost a >> lot of money - so in those circumstances a few minutes makes a lot of >> difference. Perhaps that's not something you care about - or it's just > > Sorry, I don’t buy this. That's fine, you don't have to. > If your systems are virtual machines then a > reboot is already fast. How fast? Under 6 seconds? Perhaps you confuse web hosting (for non-critical services) the only business application? (I've read your posts before - so I seriously doubt that). > Filesystem checks may delay the reboot, or > applications that need minutes to stop or start, but systemd doesn’t > help here either. Actually it can (and I'm sure you can do your own homework), but I'm not defending systemd - only Debian's right to choose it (for Linux). A. I don't have an opinion on systemd - yet[*1]. I've read all the arguments made by those in a position to know what they're talking about, but won't hold an opinion until I've seen the results of a lot of testing. B. Just because NOC and/or mid-range don't have their act together doesn't mean back-end gets a holiday. All the components within a system need to be optimised. [*1] from a business point of view any change is costly, and the gains from better service control and other features including faster reboots will have to be measured against the inherent cost of implementing the changes. And no system is perfect - from an engineering point of view ditching a system that 99% works in the hope that a new-from-scratch system will work 100% is um, optimistic - but that needs to be balanced against the reality that tacking new features onto something that 99% works (but lacked desired features) has very little chance of long-term success (maintenance and documentation quickly exceed any benefits). > > If your systems are real server hardware then your reboot is mainly > delayed by the BIOS. OK - you can stop there, come back when you've had your morning coffee and had a think about what all the computers around (like your phone) are not using. :) You're also missing the point about "all the components needing optimising - I can only presume you work in a non-competitive area, which history shows doesn't remain that way for long. Hint:- as far as I'm concerned systemd is in the future (maybe). Rarely, very rarely, in critical application support is Testing or Unstable put into production - by the time that happens it'll be on hardware that won't have a BIOS (that's the itch that the funding for Coreboot development scratches.) > Here any server (blade or normal) takes much longer > from BIOS to bootloader than from bootloader to login prompt. > >> Fast booting was not the sole criteria for which it was selected by >> Debian for the *Linux* kernel. > > True, but I don’t need any of the new features (never had any problems > with sysvinit). So why should I change? Agreed - though I don't know your use case. Why should you care if others don't agree? > > Shade and sweet water! > > Stephan > Kind regards -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5314fb50.8050...@gmail.com
Re: was Four people troll - now meandering off elsewhere
I tried disabling udev today. Mouse and keyboard didnt work in X.org after that. This wasn't the case years ago. Another bunch of cruft required. It sucks. --- mfidel...@meetinghouse.net wrote: From: Miles Fidelman To: Debian-User Subject: Re: was Four people troll - now meandering off elsewhere Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 16:41:06 -0500 Scott Ferguson wrote: > On 03/03/14 23:28, Fred Wilson wrote: >> On Mon, 03 Mar 2014 12:52:40 +1100 >> Scott Ferguson wrote: >> >>> Which is fine for you, and I can understand and appreciate that, for my >>> own personal computers my sentiments are similar. However my business >>> purposes involve meeting SLAs so reboots once or twice a year can cost a >>> lot of money - so in those circumstances a few minutes makes a lot of >>> difference. Perhaps that's not something you care about - or it's just >>> convenient to ignore until your bank/phone/stockbroker/shopping is >>> interrupted as a result. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service-level_agreement > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_availability#Percentage_calculation > > When you pay for a five nines SLA, perhaps for your business web site > hosting, or what your bank/business pays for their trading platform that > means we must be offline a *total* of less than 5 and a half minutes *a > year*. That's begin reboot to all services restarted. Failure to do so > results in penalties that can *very* quickly exceed the annual support > contract. While a great deal of effort and planning goes into shifting > loads so that reboots don't affect production - things don't always work > to plan, so good plans allow for that. Meaning systems must be designed > to reboot in less than the allowed downtime - with a safety margin. If > we can shave a few seconds off reboot time we can shave a large amount > off the support contract price, with the possibility that those savings > are passed on to the consumer. Anybody who is counting on a fast reboot to maintain a 5 nines SLA is simply nuts. that's what redundancy and high-availability configurations are for. Personally, I'm a lot more worried about what's going to break when we move to Jessie and systemd - and all those things I might have to reconfigure. That involves serious time, effort, and dollars. And that's before the things that will break intermittently. I still shudder every time I think of the impact udev had on our operations, before we got the subtleties figure out. (Note: at the moment "we" = "me" and sleepless nights that impact other work.) Miles Fidelman -- In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. Yogi Berra -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5314f6f2.7050...@meetinghouse.net _ Free e-mail, simple, clean and easy to use. Visit CosmicEmail.com for your instant free account. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303141358.529de...@m0005296.ppops.net
Re: was Four people troll - now meandering off elsewhere - Corporate Speak
All bullshit. Notice how the systemd men always talk in corporate speak. Says volumes. Your supposed contracts can go to hell. --- scott.ferguson.debian.u...@gmail.com wrote: From: Scott Ferguson To: Debian-User Subject: Re: was Four people troll - now meandering off elsewhere Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2014 08:16:46 +1100 On 03/03/14 23:28, Fred Wilson wrote: > On Mon, 03 Mar 2014 12:52:40 +1100 > Scott Ferguson wrote: > >> Which is fine for you, and I can understand and appreciate that, for my >> own personal computers my sentiments are similar. However my business >> purposes involve meeting SLAs so reboots once or twice a year can cost a >> lot of money - so in those circumstances a few minutes makes a lot of >> difference. Perhaps that's not something you care about - or it's just >> convenient to ignore until your bank/phone/stockbroker/shopping is >> interrupted as a result. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service-level_agreement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_availability#Percentage_calculation When you pay for a five nines SLA, perhaps for your business web site hosting, or what your bank/business pays for their trading platform that means we must be offline a *total* of less than 5 and a half minutes *a year*. That's begin reboot to all services restarted. Failure to do so results in penalties that can *very* quickly exceed the annual support contract. While a great deal of effort and planning goes into shifting loads so that reboots don't affect production - things don't always work to plan, so good plans allow for that. Meaning systems must be designed to reboot in less than the allowed downtime - with a safety margin. If we can shave a few seconds off reboot time we can shave a large amount off the support contract price, with the possibility that those savings are passed on to the consumer. And no, ksplice isn't a suitable alternative to reboot (for security reasons). Nor does the "my server" (with 2 users, no NOC and mid-range to deal with) only reboots every 5 years is not comparing apples with apples. Server support does not drive user demands or determine development requirements - but the kernel must. That's just one example of why fast boot-time (and shutdown) 'can' be critical. In my experience most businesses that run Linux don't do so primarily to reduce TOC - but because it gives them a business advantage. Continual development of Linux is partially determined by how much money companies are prepared to spend on developing Linux to scratch their own itch. E.g. most kernel development is paid for by companies. Another example is embedded devices - fast boot times means longer battery life. There are other benefits to faster boot times for embedded devices - i.e. how long are you willing to wait for your phone to turn back on? Assuredly there are many other use cases I haven't considered - but I have considered uses beyond those of the hobbyist home computer user or the rare academic and business situation where support wags the dog. >> Perhaps you simply put your "needs" before >> those of others - assuredly inadvertently. >> >> Given the interest displayed by "home users", and those that develop for >> embedded platforms, in fast boot times, I suspect your needs aren't >> stereotypical of all the users that Debian The Universal Operating >> System seeks to support. > > I really don't see how 10 seconds or a minute more can hurt anyone. I've expanded on the relevant sections you either missed, didn't understand, or believe were irrelevant but failed to point out where. > If > you reboot more often, then it's different. Not necessarily. The determining factor is always going to be - how quick do you need the reboot to be. You fail to make a compelling argument for slow reboots. :) Though you can insert wait states into the init of you choice and pretend your new computer is a 286. :) > But boot time is minor > issue. But boot time is a minor issue *for me*. TFTFY ;) > On the other hands, we've already seen how companies are doing > it: first they are going to impress us with fast boot and then everyone > start using it, and then slowly they insert more and more crap into the > boot process, since not boot system is fast and it's no problem and > after a few years your system is again slow as before, unless you buy a > new machine. Um, that's a bit of a sweeping statement isn't it? Do you have some data I can see that supports it? How is does that relate to Debian? > And BTW looks like Moore's low is not as before and computers > are becoming more expensive. AFAIK Moore hasn't changed his law (the Intel cofounder, or do you mean another "Moore"?) - it remains as before. And, it never said anything about cost. "over the history of computing hardware, the number of transistors on integrated circuits doubles approximately every two years." Kind regards -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble
Re: was Four people troll - now meandering off elsewhere
Scott Ferguson wrote: On 03/03/14 23:28, Fred Wilson wrote: On Mon, 03 Mar 2014 12:52:40 +1100 Scott Ferguson wrote: Which is fine for you, and I can understand and appreciate that, for my own personal computers my sentiments are similar. However my business purposes involve meeting SLAs so reboots once or twice a year can cost a lot of money - so in those circumstances a few minutes makes a lot of difference. Perhaps that's not something you care about - or it's just convenient to ignore until your bank/phone/stockbroker/shopping is interrupted as a result. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service-level_agreement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_availability#Percentage_calculation When you pay for a five nines SLA, perhaps for your business web site hosting, or what your bank/business pays for their trading platform that means we must be offline a *total* of less than 5 and a half minutes *a year*. That's begin reboot to all services restarted. Failure to do so results in penalties that can *very* quickly exceed the annual support contract. While a great deal of effort and planning goes into shifting loads so that reboots don't affect production - things don't always work to plan, so good plans allow for that. Meaning systems must be designed to reboot in less than the allowed downtime - with a safety margin. If we can shave a few seconds off reboot time we can shave a large amount off the support contract price, with the possibility that those savings are passed on to the consumer. Anybody who is counting on a fast reboot to maintain a 5 nines SLA is simply nuts. that's what redundancy and high-availability configurations are for. Personally, I'm a lot more worried about what's going to break when we move to Jessie and systemd - and all those things I might have to reconfigure. That involves serious time, effort, and dollars. And that's before the things that will break intermittently. I still shudder every time I think of the impact udev had on our operations, before we got the subtleties figure out. (Note: at the moment "we" = "me" and sleepless nights that impact other work.) Miles Fidelman -- In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. Yogi Berra -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5314f6f2.7050...@meetinghouse.net
Re: was Four people troll - now meandering off elsewhere
On 03/03/14 23:28, Fred Wilson wrote: > On Mon, 03 Mar 2014 12:52:40 +1100 > Scott Ferguson wrote: > >> Which is fine for you, and I can understand and appreciate that, for my >> own personal computers my sentiments are similar. However my business >> purposes involve meeting SLAs so reboots once or twice a year can cost a >> lot of money - so in those circumstances a few minutes makes a lot of >> difference. Perhaps that's not something you care about - or it's just >> convenient to ignore until your bank/phone/stockbroker/shopping is >> interrupted as a result. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service-level_agreement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_availability#Percentage_calculation When you pay for a five nines SLA, perhaps for your business web site hosting, or what your bank/business pays for their trading platform that means we must be offline a *total* of less than 5 and a half minutes *a year*. That's begin reboot to all services restarted. Failure to do so results in penalties that can *very* quickly exceed the annual support contract. While a great deal of effort and planning goes into shifting loads so that reboots don't affect production - things don't always work to plan, so good plans allow for that. Meaning systems must be designed to reboot in less than the allowed downtime - with a safety margin. If we can shave a few seconds off reboot time we can shave a large amount off the support contract price, with the possibility that those savings are passed on to the consumer. And no, ksplice isn't a suitable alternative to reboot (for security reasons). Nor does the "my server" (with 2 users, no NOC and mid-range to deal with) only reboots every 5 years is not comparing apples with apples. Server support does not drive user demands or determine development requirements - but the kernel must. That's just one example of why fast boot-time (and shutdown) 'can' be critical. In my experience most businesses that run Linux don't do so primarily to reduce TOC - but because it gives them a business advantage. Continual development of Linux is partially determined by how much money companies are prepared to spend on developing Linux to scratch their own itch. E.g. most kernel development is paid for by companies. Another example is embedded devices - fast boot times means longer battery life. There are other benefits to faster boot times for embedded devices - i.e. how long are you willing to wait for your phone to turn back on? Assuredly there are many other use cases I haven't considered - but I have considered uses beyond those of the hobbyist home computer user or the rare academic and business situation where support wags the dog. >> Perhaps you simply put your "needs" before >> those of others - assuredly inadvertently. >> >> Given the interest displayed by "home users", and those that develop for >> embedded platforms, in fast boot times, I suspect your needs aren't >> stereotypical of all the users that Debian The Universal Operating >> System seeks to support. > > I really don't see how 10 seconds or a minute more can hurt anyone. I've expanded on the relevant sections you either missed, didn't understand, or believe were irrelevant but failed to point out where. > If > you reboot more often, then it's different. Not necessarily. The determining factor is always going to be - how quick do you need the reboot to be. You fail to make a compelling argument for slow reboots. :) Though you can insert wait states into the init of you choice and pretend your new computer is a 286. :) > But boot time is minor > issue. But boot time is a minor issue *for me*. TFTFY ;) > On the other hands, we've already seen how companies are doing > it: first they are going to impress us with fast boot and then everyone > start using it, and then slowly they insert more and more crap into the > boot process, since not boot system is fast and it's no problem and > after a few years your system is again slow as before, unless you buy a > new machine. Um, that's a bit of a sweeping statement isn't it? Do you have some data I can see that supports it? How is does that relate to Debian? > And BTW looks like Moore's low is not as before and computers > are becoming more expensive. AFAIK Moore hasn't changed his law (the Intel cofounder, or do you mean another "Moore"?) - it remains as before. And, it never said anything about cost. "over the history of computing hardware, the number of transistors on integrated circuits doubles approximately every two years." Kind regards -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5314f13e.7000...@gmail.com
Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
On Lu, 03 mar 14, 11:27:59, Celejar wrote: > Andrei POPESCU wrote: > > > > Depending on RAM size and what you were running at the time you set your > > computer to hibernate it may just take longer to resume (i.e. read the > > stuff from slow storage) than to cold boot. This may have been solved in > > When you say longer than cold boot, do you really mean longer than cold > booting plus starting all the stuff you had running in RAM and getting > them to the state they were in? As I said, I have little practical experience with hibernate myself, this is just what I picked up here on the list. Besides, I wouldn't trust hibernate with unsaved files and I use lightweight apps as much as possible, so for me the benefits are just not worth it. Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic http://nuvreauspam.ro/gpg-transition.txt signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
On Lu, 03 mar 14, 13:04:07, Tanstaafl wrote: > On 3/3/2014 7:28 AM, Fred Wilson wrote: > >I really don't see how 10 seconds or a minute more can hurt anyone. If > >you reboot more often, then it's different. But boot time is minor > >issue. > > My understanding about the fast boot times argument is that it was > driven by Redhat and their work with virtualization. The Author claims otherwise http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/the-biggest-myths.html Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic http://nuvreauspam.ro/gpg-transition.txt signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
On 3/3/2014 7:28 AM, Fred Wilson wrote: I really don't see how 10 seconds or a minute more can hurt anyone. If you reboot more often, then it's different. But boot time is minor issue. My understanding about the fast boot times argument is that it was driven by Redhat and their work with virtualization. In highly virtualized environments, where VMs can be spun up and down quite often, fast startup times - and more importantly, the LOADS that these startups place on the underlying metal - become much more meaningful. Think Amazon Web Services, etc, and thousands and thousands of VMs all booting at the same time... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5314c417.5000...@libertytrek.org
Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
On 3/3/2014 7:30 AM, Fred Wilson wrote: Please look at what technical superiority of systemd consists of and then tell us if an ordinary user needs it. What systemd brings is something usefull only for companies that has money to pay for high-end servers, clusters, supercomputers and can get a clue who may some of them be. I made this very same argument a long time ago... but am not quite so adamant about it now as I once was. Much of the negative stuff about systemd going around is pure FUD. If mega-users want to use systemd and other mega-software let them, but let ordinary users use what suits them as well. I like and fully support this idea... but ianap, and don't have the money or resources to make sure it happens... do you? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5314c40f.5060...@libertytrek.org
Re: Help with GPT
On 03/03/14 10:33, ha wrote: Last few weekends I struggled with the GPT. I've tried to install debian 7.2 from live DVD (but booting from USB). However, at the end of installation I always receive the message "Grub-pc package failed to install into /target/", or something like that. Now, I'm aware that I can solve this by booting to rescue mode, doing grub-install, chroot into the instaled system and simply update grub. However, I'm getting really pissed of by this "post-installation tweaking", and my lack of knowledge on how to avoid it. So I must humbly ask If someone knows a way around this, i.e. how to persuade the debian installer to install grub. Or perhaps this just doesn't work, and I should go back to MBR? I've read somewhere that on newer kernels (3.3+, if I recall correctly) grub could become obsolete since there are some modules(?) to boot using UEFI, so perhaps this is an option - if someone could point me in the right direction? I believe that jessie could be mature enough for this. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/lf2dkb$a3u$1...@ger.gmane.org
Re: Could russians maintain a traditional linux debian? Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
On Mon, 3 Mar 2014 07:42:32 -0800 "Arnold Bird" wrote: > Would it be possible for russia to maintain a classic > debian linux distribution and let the american and their > controled european employees to waddle into the morass > of systemd? You're putting it wrong way. Everyone knows that in Soviet Russia Debian maintains people, not the other way around :) Reco -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303205004.beda9c0620f65f4d7f41d...@gmail.com
Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd fight
On Mon, 3 Mar 2014 17:10:46 +0800 (WST) Bret Busby wrote: ... > Debian 6 apparently made most printers "paperweight" or "sopmetimes > works", in functionality. > > Something significant, changed between Debian Linux 5 and Debian Linux > 6, that reduced the functionality of the operating system. > > The device is a Samsung CLX3185FW, and it had drivers that worked with > Debian 5. > > The printer, and, from what I have seen, it equally applies to most > printers that were "Linux-compatible" is/are not compatible with Debian > Linux after Debian Linux v5. ?! I'm running amd64 Stable, and my Brother works just fine, with drivers provided by the manufacturer. I really don't think that "most printers" are no longer compatible with Debian. Celejar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303113613.810375e6111f56d6a1d4e...@gmail.com
Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
On Mon, 3 Mar 2014 12:59:06 +0200 Andrei POPESCU wrote: > On Lu, 03 mar 14, 10:40:52, Gian Uberto Lauri wrote: > > Andrei POPESCU writes: ... > > > Hibernation has it's own set of problems, especially as RAM sizes go up. > > > > I am interested in this issue. Could you tell some more about this? > > Depending on RAM size and what you were running at the time you set your > computer to hibernate it may just take longer to resume (i.e. read the > stuff from slow storage) than to cold boot. This may have been solved in When you say longer than cold boot, do you really mean longer than cold booting plus starting all the stuff you had running in RAM and getting them to the state they were in? Celejar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303112759.dfc6326696783afe374a6...@gmail.com
Re: Help with GPT
On 03/03/14 14:40, Sven Hartge wrote: ha wrote: Last few weekends I struggled with the GPT. I've tried to install debian 7.2 from live DVD (but booting from USB). However, at the end of installation I always receive the message "Grub-pc package failed to install into /target/", or something like that. Now, I'm aware that I can solve this by booting to rescue mode, doing grub-install, chroot into the instaled system and simply update grub. However, I'm getting really pissed of by this "post-installation tweaking", and my lack of knowledge on how to avoid it. So I must humbly ask If someone knows a way around this, i.e. how to persuade the debian installer to install grub. With a GPT you _need_ to have a small partition (1MiB is enough) marked as "bios_grub" or "BIOS boot partition" of type EF02 to be able to install GRUB. This is needed because with a GPT there is no "hole" or free space after the MBR and the beginning of the first partition. Grüße, Sven. > Yes, I have a small partition on both disks around 2-4MiB. That didn't help. I did it using parted, something like: # parted /dev/sda (parted) unit MB (parted) mklabel gpt (parted) mkpart primary 0 2 From Gparted it was visible as "bios_grub" labelled partition, if I recall correctly. I could check for sure... But, after all, I manage to install grub manually, so it should be fine... I believe... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/lf2b9m$gvt$1...@ger.gmane.org
Could russians maintain a traditional linux debian? Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
Arnold Bird writes: > Would it be possible for russia to maintain a classic > debian linux distribution It would support the kremvax architecture but have some nietwork problems -- /\ ___Ubuntu: ancient /___/\_|_|\_|__|___Gian Uberto Lauri_ African word //--\| | \| | Integralista GNUslamicomeaning "I can \/ coltivatore diretto di software not install già sistemista a tempo (altrui) perso...Debian" Warning: gnome-config-daemon considered more dangerous than GOTO -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/21268.43925.541709.695...@mail.eng.it
Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
Andrei POPESCU writes:
> On Lu, 03 mar 14, 14:29:16, Gian Uberto Lauri wrote:
> > Andrei POPESCU writes:
> >
> > Systemd can help a bit in making a little easier to have tools that
> > satisfy the (not so) basic need "to have this device mounted here if
> > it is plugged, otherwise go ahead with the bootstrap" for the
> > completely tech-unsavy user, but you can achieve this with system V
> > init. If you want to do it.
>
> This shouldn't be necessary.
I meant that systemd may make things a little easier. But it will not
enable them. They are already possible, nobody cared to do it. IMHO!
> Exactly what I was trying to say. systemd may not "really" be necessary
> for us, but what about...
It seems that we disagree on many issues mostly due communication problems :).
I apologize for my poor English skills.
systemd could improve the experience of some users, i.e. by making the
boot faster.
Or the system may react better to runtime HW changes - even if I would
give the credit to udev.
> > > But, how am I going to do that for my
> > > father's laptop, which I *might* be able to access remotely?
> >
> > Excuse me, could you re-state this sentence. I am unable to understand
> > the point, sorry that is due my poor English skills.
>
> ... my father running Debian on his laptop? If he relocates to a foreign
> country, buys a 3G adapter and plugs it in what should happen?
Until there is a way to let TCP/IP packet flow, there is a solution
for this problem.
And I do not think that systemd will make the system more robust on
the long run. It could make it weaker on the short run, it is software
after all.
> > > This is a joke right? If I tell a daemon to restart I want it
> > > restarted. Now. Anything else is like the tail wagging the dog.
> >
> > Sorry, no, or I could equally say "I want an Aston Martin parked in
> > the company yard. Now and anything else is like the tail wagging the
> > dog".
>
> Actually not. As I see it the computer is a tool built to do what *I*
> say and *when* I say it, not to create more work for me. Especially if
> it's only a Simple Matter of Programming (which turns out to not be so
> simple, since it took so many years to do it).
Sorry Andrei, but there is not such thing as "Simple Matter of Programming".
Let me quote the my favourite entry from the Hacker Jargon File, v 4.0.0
:programming: /n./ 1. The art of debugging a blank sheet of
paper (or, in these days of on-line editing, the art of debugging
an empty file). "Bloody instructions which, being taught, return
to plague their inventor" ("Macbeth", Act 1, Scene 7) 2. A
pastime similar to banging one's head against a wall, but with
fewer opportunities for reward. 3. The most fun you can have with
your clothes on (although clothes are not mandatory).
> > And when you terminate a program you want to restart, you have to wait
> > for that program to be terminated to be sure all resources are
> > released.
>
> What if it doesn't do that and it just hangs?
If it hangs then it's time for the human brain to start working.
> > And in this systemd has no more power than a script. It has to issue
> > the stopping signal, wait for the process to die and let free the
> > resources it used, and finally start a new one.
>
> What if it just won't die? systemd's answer to that is cgroups.
Would be the automatic choice a good one? Maybe on a simple PC w/o
networked file systems...
> > And, AFAIK, if a process is not son of some other process then is son
> > of init by 'adoption'.
>
> But sysvinit is not actually used to manage processes, so this special
> power of PID 1 is wasted.
init is not meant to manage processes, just to bring the system up to the
required runlevel and to drive the shutdown.
I fear that overloading the init process with more responsabilities
would not be a good idea: more "pieces" involved, a less simple tool.
"Keep It Simple, Stupid" aka Kiss Principle. It is good in mechanic,
it is good in software.
> Debian is already late to the party. Just about every other major
> distribution/OS is already running something better than sysv-rc (and
> I'm including OpenRC in the "something better").
Frankly, at home we are almost perfectly happy with system v init, we
only feels it lacks explicit dependencies that may let do some partial
sorting on the services to start.
But is perfectly legitimate to have different opinions!
Best regards!
--
/\ ___Ubuntu: ancient
/___/\_|_|\_|__|___Gian Uberto Lauri_ African word
//--\| | \| | Integralista GNUslamicomeaning "I can
\/ coltivatore diretto di software not install
già sistemista a tempo (altrui) perso...Debian"
Re: Re: After moving root partition to ssd, debian boots directly to runlevel 0 (shutdown)
> On 27/02/14 15:37, Meier wrote: >> In my laptop there is a SSD which I decided to finally use. So I made >> one big partition out of it, and copied my root file system onto it (cp >> -ax, while / was mounted read-only). My root filesystem includes /var >> but not /home or /boot. I'm using the actual debian testing. >> I made all necessary changes to fstab and grub. >> The bootloader still resides on the HDD since for whatever reason my >> system doesn't support to boot from the SSD card. >> But now when I boot my system it boots correctly, but in the middle of >> the boot progress it shows me >> >> ... >> Setting up x sockets ... >> init: entering runlevel 0 >> ... >> >> and it starts stopping all services and at the end switches off the laptop. >> If I choose in the grub menu to boot into recovery mode (runlevel 1), >> and just press ctrl+D instead of entering the root password when being >> asked for it. It correctly boots to runlevel 2 and starts up the xserver >> and everything is working perfectly. It's also using the correct >> partitions and everything. >> I guessed it could be some kind of timing issue, so I passed the >> delayroot parameter to the kernel, but that didn't change anything. Also >> telling the kernel explicitly it should boot to runlevel 2 doesn't >> change anything. I guess there must be some service or something which >> forces the system (or kernel) to shutdown directly. >> In syslog I couldn't find anything helpful since it seems like it >> doesn't manage to write anything there before shutting down the laptop. >> So right now I've got no idea what the problem could be. >> I already changed root partitions/disks on a lot of systems. And never >> run into this problem. >> If anybody could give me a hint into the right direction would be great. >> >> thanks in advance :-) >> meier >> >> > >I'd check GRUB first and make sure it loads the correct modules and >looks in the right places for the kernel and fs /. > >At the GRUB boot prompt use the arrow keys, if necessary, to make the >selection the default boot (not the rescue boot) and press "e" to edit >and look at the lines:- >;insmod $someModule (should be multiple entries) >;set root='(dev/$someDevice,$someSliceN)' >;search $something --set-root $someRootUUID >;linux $something root=UUID$someKernelUUID > >Note $someModule/s $someDevice, $someSliceN, and the last four >characters of $someRootUUID and $someKernelUUID > >Then press F2 or Ctrl-c to open the GRUB shell. >At the "grub>" prompt type "halt" and press Enter (alternatively you can >enter "reboot"). thanks a lot for your reply. Meanwhile I found out what the problem was. I used kernel.nmi_watchdog = 0 as kernel parameter, which worked for several months. But for whatever reason it didn't work anymore once I changed the root partition, with the symptoms descriped above (doesn't make a lot of sense, but booting without this parameter makes everything working again). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/2149952.S49WK4eY8s@rmmbook
Could russians maintain a traditional linux debian? Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
Would it be possible for russia to maintain a classicdebian linux distribution and let the american and theircontroled european employees to waddle into the morassof systemd?Linus is half bought and paied for too, he uses fedora withall the mess. He was asked if he was asked to put in abackdoor into linux. He said no but nodded yes, so he obeyed the US government's order not to speak about itto some degree. Free e-mail, simple, clean and easy to use. Visit CosmicEmail.com for your instant free account. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303074232.529c2...@m0005296.ppops.net
Re: Test
On Sun 02 Mar 2014 at 15:12:01 +, Tom Furie wrote: > On Sun, Mar 02, 2014 at 12:24:26PM +, Brian wrote: > > > The interesting questions involve what is happening on bendel after a > > mail is accepted. > > > > 1. Why is any mail delayed for 15 minutes before onward transmission? > > Could be any of many reasons. System load, SMTP transmission failure, > routing problems... the list goes on. The mentioned delay interval has been in place for at least two years so the second two reasons appear very unlikely as a cause. Load balancing is possibilty. > > 2. Why do some users and not others experience this 15 minute delay? > > I haven't done any analysis, but I'd expect most if not all of us > experience delays from time to time. For the case in question, it's not These type of delays tend to be random and variable in time. > all of Ralf's messages that are being delayed, only those in the systemd > thread. In fact, it looks as if *all* messages in that thread were > delayed by roughly the same amount of time. My guess is extra processing > for particularly suspicious looking messages. It is all messages. I have no guesses why; none of the messages look particularly suspicious to me but the software knows best. :) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/03032014154724.af8ea7842...@desktop.copernicus.demon.co.uk
Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd fight
On Monday 03 March 2014 12:51:18 Brian wrote: > What rabbit do you expect Debian to pull out of the hat to fix a > closed source driver? You could always run your CLX3185FW with > Debian 5. :) Samsung does supply later drivers. Lisi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/201403031537.54021.lisi.re...@gmail.com
Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
On Lu, 03 mar 14, 14:29:16, Gian Uberto Lauri wrote: > Andrei POPESCU writes: > > Systemd can help a bit in making a little easier to have tools that > satisfy the (not so) basic need "to have this device mounted here if > it is plugged, otherwise go ahead with the bootstrap" for the > completely tech-unsavy user, but you can achieve this with system V > init. If you want to do it. This shouldn't be necessary. > > we (and by this I mean mostly debian-user subscribers) are tinkerers, > > otherwise we wouldn't be here. > > WARNING! If I got right your words, this is a damn narrow-sighted > point of view. If you stop a moment and and think, you may see how > many user of Debian GNU/Linux may exists that do not access this > mailing list. Or do not access any. Exactly what I was trying to say. systemd may not "really" be necessary for us, but what about... > > But, how am I going to do that for my > > father's laptop, which I *might* be able to access remotely? > > Excuse me, could you re-state this sentence. I am unable to understand > the point, sorry that is due my poor English skills. ... my father running Debian on his laptop? If he relocates to a foreign country, buys a 3G adapter and plugs it in what should happen? > > This is a joke right? If I tell a daemon to restart I want it > > restarted. Now. Anything else is like the tail wagging the dog. > > Sorry, no, or I could equally say "I want an Aston Martin parked in > the company yard. Now and anything else is like the tail wagging the > dog". Actually not. As I see it the computer is a tool built to do what *I* say and *when* I say it, not to create more work for me. Especially if it's only a Simple Matter of Programming (which turns out to not be so simple, since it took so many years to do it). > We agree that there are "some steps involved" between "wanting the > Astong Martin" and getting one. > > The same is for restarting a service (provided by a daemon). > > If you want a daemon to restart you either have a daemon that can > completely resets itself upon receiving, say, SIGHUP or you need to > terminate the previous instance and start a new one. > > And when you terminate a program you want to restart, you have to wait > for that program to be terminated to be sure all resources are > released. What if it doesn't do that and it just hangs? > And in this systemd has no more power than a script. It has to issue > the stopping signal, wait for the process to die and let free the > resources it used, and finally start a new one. What if it just won't die? systemd's answer to that is cgroups. Is this the "best" solution? I couldn't say. There's at least the problem that cgroups is Linux specific. AFAIU BSD jails could provide similar functionality, but chances of this ever being implemented in systemd are slim. Not so with OpenRC, which is much more modular and portable (which is why I think it *could* be the better solution in the long run). > And, AFAIK, if a process is not son of some other process then is son > of init by 'adoption'. But sysvinit is not actually used to manage processes, so this special power of PID 1 is wasted. > My opinion that the migration was too swift. I am almost sure that > a less "disruptive" way was possible provided some more time. > > systemd will be not as evil as I feared when I was first pointed to > some random document. It could add even some good in the long run. But > this too early migration will give some troubles to someone, I am in > this set. Debian is already late to the party. Just about every other major distribution/OS is already running something better than sysv-rc (and I'm including OpenRC in the "something better"). Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic http://nuvreauspam.ro/gpg-transition.txt signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
Fred Wilson writes: > What systemd brings is something usefull only for companies that has > money to pay for high-end servers, clusters, supercomputers I mostly disagree with this point of view, since these machine rarely stop. There could be some benefit in elastic provision ov VMs and if you choose to use green policies that require the shutdown of a physical machine. But again, hybernation could be a better choice. I see systemd as something that address more small system user-needs than big-iron user-needs. -- /\ ___Ubuntu: ancient /___/\_|_|\_|__|___Gian Uberto Lauri_ African word //--\| | \| | Integralista GNUslamicomeaning "I can \/ coltivatore diretto di software not install già sistemista a tempo (altrui) perso...Debian" Warning: gnome-config-daemon considered more dangerous than GOTO -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/21268.34704.640314.919...@mail.eng.it
Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 12:52:40PM +1100, Scott Ferguson wrote: own personal computers my sentiments are similar. However my business purposes involve meeting SLAs so reboots once or twice a year can cost a lot of money - so in those circumstances a few minutes makes a lot of difference. Perhaps that's not something you care about - or it's just Sorry, I don’t buy this. If your systems are virtual machines then a reboot is already fast. Filesystem checks may delay the reboot, or applications that need minutes to stop or start, but systemd doesn’t help here either. If your systems are real server hardware then your reboot is mainly delayed by the BIOS. Here any server (blade or normal) takes much longer from BIOS to bootloader than from bootloader to login prompt. Fast booting was not the sole criteria for which it was selected by Debian for the *Linux* kernel. True, but I don’t need any of the new features (never had any problems with sysvinit). So why should I change? Shade and sweet water! Stephan -- | Stephan Seitz E-Mail: s...@fsing.rootsland.net | | Public Keys: http://fsing.rootsland.net/~stse/keys.html | smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
Andrei POPESCU writes: > > I completely disagree. I had quite a nicely complex storage server > > with trunking and multipath things on, and it was sane and clean. > > Until one looks under the hood :( With "under the hood" you mean the assembler code? I did the configuration using the documentation and maybe a couple of suggestion from my wife... There was nothing mad. > > What was a bit 'magic' was iSCSI, but I doubt it was due init! > > > > On my laptop-used-as-a-desktop, I solved any problem quite sanely, > > even if it involved skills, skills that I borrowed from my wife (who > > "has any AIX certification IBM provided an exam for" :) :) :) :)): > > > > - my external, always plugged, HD is automatically mounted with LVM > > provided I see its id in lsusb output. > > > > - usb keys have their label. > > > > This is extremely sane. It is also a bit for tech savy not for end > > users. > > Which basically proves my point. "proving your point"? N, mine is a *very customized* machine, you can't do such a customization with standard issue stuff :) :) :) :). Maybe mine are a bit old-fashoned solutions, they are running this way since several years now. > This stuff should Just Work (tm). ...And the magic money gnomes bring the montly wages :) :) :) Systemd can help a bit in making a little easier to have tools that satisfy the (not so) basic need "to have this device mounted here if it is plugged, otherwise go ahead with the bootstrap" for the completely tech-unsavy user, but you can achieve this with system V init. If you want to do it. > we (and by this I mean mostly debian-user subscribers) are tinkerers, > otherwise we wouldn't be here. WARNING! If I got right your words, this is a damn narrow-sighted point of view. If you stop a moment and and think, you may see how many user of Debian GNU/Linux may exists that do not access this mailing list. Or do not access any. > But, how am I going to do that for my > father's laptop, which I *might* be able to access remotely? Excuse me, could you re-state this sentence. I am unable to understand the point, sorry that is due my poor English skills. Anywaty, if you have no access to a machine it's hard to work on it. But I was sysadmin in other's (spare|lost) time :), as I might have said before [and as my signature says in Italian]. I had a couple of rack under my controls, and the only times I had to move (3 hrs by high speed train) was when there were cables to remove and screws to unscrew... > > > If you don't believe me just do > > > > > > grep sleep /etc/init.d/* > > > > You should do a step further. Go and watch what each one does. > > > > The large majority of sleeps is used in restarting a daemon > > (/etc/init.d/some-devil restart), to wait that the kill has succeeded > > before restarting the daemon itself. > > This is a joke right? If I tell a daemon to restart I want it restarted. > Now. Anything else is like the tail wagging the dog. Sorry, no, or I could equally say "I want an Aston Martin parked in the company yard. Now and anything else is like the tail wagging the dog". We agree that there are "some steps involved" between "wanting the Astong Martin" and getting one. The same is for restarting a service (provided by a daemon). If you want a daemon to restart you either have a daemon that can completely resets itself upon receiving, say, SIGHUP or you need to terminate the previous instance and start a new one. And when you terminate a program you want to restart, you have to wait for that program to be terminated to be sure all resources are released. And in this systemd has no more power than a script. It has to issue the stopping signal, wait for the process to die and let free the resources it used, and finally start a new one. Code it with shell, code it with C, you have to code the instructions. > Rogue daemons, Could you introduce me some? Don't take this as a provocation. I know of daemons that do a "fire and forget" spawn of a process to serve a single request, then the process dies. And, AFAIK, if a process is not son of some other process then is son of init by 'adoption'. But I know I run a subset of Debian programs, so there are program I never run. > > And while 20 years ago I could have been on the "go systemd go" side, > > today I still think that there are things that could have done better > > with less problems given to the "server running" guys with no cost > > given to "pc running" guys except waiting a bit more. > > Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating systemd. I've followed the -ctte > debate quite closely and my own conclusions are: > > - sysv-rc and all the initscripts are a nightmare to maintain (and have > been for quite a while) The use of explicit dependencies is something really needed. Even if you do not have to handle all the possible scripts in a distribution
Re: Help with GPT
ha wrote: > Last few weekends I struggled with the GPT. I've tried to install > debian 7.2 from live DVD (but booting from USB). However, at the end > of installation I always receive the message "Grub-pc package failed > to install into /target/", or something like that. Now, I'm aware that > I can solve this by booting to rescue mode, doing grub-install, chroot > into the instaled system and simply update grub. However, I'm getting > really pissed of by this "post-installation tweaking", and my lack of > knowledge on how to avoid it. So I must humbly ask If someone knows a > way around this, i.e. how to persuade the debian installer to install > grub. With a GPT you _need_ to have a small partition (1MiB is enough) marked as "bios_grub" or "BIOS boot partition" of type EF02 to be able to install GRUB. This is needed because with a GPT there is no "hole" or free space after the MBR and the beginning of the first partition. Grüße, Sven. -- Sigmentation fault. Core dumped. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/0ag4lhk1m...@mids.svenhartge.de
Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd fight
On Lu, 03 mar 14, 19:02:09, Bret Busby wrote: > >> > >>Whilst the device had been able to work with Debian 5, it simply > >>does not work with Debian Linux after Debian 5, other than using a > >>printer driver for, I think the Samsung CL317x series. > > > >Did you try splix? > > Couldn't get splix to work. I'll stop here, there's just too much information missing to make any useful comment. Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic http://nuvreauspam.ro/gpg-transition.txt signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd fight
On Lu, 03 mar 14, 18:57:09, Bret Busby wrote: > > I think that it is unfortunate that we are apparently expected to > throw out all of our hardware (including printers and other such > accessories), and, replace it all, each time a new version of an > operating system, is released. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence (not implying this is the case here though) > The MFP thing, as far as I am aware (I have not yet been able to use > all of its functionality, due to the Debian policy regarding > firmware) [...] Assumptions. Please start a new thread about how to get your MFP running with recent Debian. > But, I had understood that the purpose of creating UNIX (and, Linux > IS supposed to be a "UNIX-like" operating system), was to have > available an operating system, upon which software would run without > requiring modification to adapt to the underlying platform. Well, according to Wikipedia Unix was designed on the PDP-11[1]. Surely things have changed since, don't you think? [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDP-11 > Thus, from what I understood, as a crude example, a program written > in "C", would include library and function calls, to standard > libraries, and could happily operate, if it was written in UNIX "C", > on any installation of UNIX, on any hardware platform. What if in the meantime it has been discovered those libraries and function calls are inefficient/buggy/etc. and better alternatives have been implemented? As programs move on to newer libraries and function calls the old ways just keep rotting because nobody is using them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_rot > That should be relatively simple - the preservation of the standard > libraries, and, the standard functions, with standard > functionalities, which could be expanded, if needed, but, at the > same time, preserving the standard functionalitites and libraries. If it would be simple it would have been done :) > I think that the problem that has occurred, is that, instead, > mutations have been imposed, so that functions and libraries, have > instead, been renamed or, replaced, in order to impose obsolescence, > rather than to maintain functionality. Not likely, not even for proprietary software. > It seems to be "Who needs functionality, when we have all of these > whistles and bells? They might not serve any useful purpose, but, > they catch your attention." "whistles and bells" also have their purpose, even if you (or me) disagree. > We are aware (I think, and, I believe) that Microsoft, in order to > force sales of its products, designs operating system and > application software, versions, that are not backward compatible, so > as to force sales, so that it can keep "squeezing blood out of a > stone", requiring people to be continually buying software that they > should not need. Hanlon's razor? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor I don't know and don't really care. Debian meets my needs on my home computers and at work (mostly a MS shop) I don't have much influence anyway. > But, Linux, and, the Linux community, should not have the same > objective; it should instead, be preserving the (that I believe to > be) primary objective of UNIX; that a programme that is written for > one version, can run on any version, unless it is harmful, in which > case, it gets blocked, and the user/administrator, notified. Just imagine that my IPTV device (BTW, AFAICT it runs Linux) would notify me that for security reasons it won't connect to the internet anymore. Or it just stops working because my ISP switched to IPv6 exclusively and it doesn't have support for that. Not very useful, isn't it? Of course, I could (still) switch back to old style TV, but then, I rather enjoy watching TV in FullHD and Dolby Digital 5.1 sound. And at some point providers will just shut down the old service, because there is not enough demand for it to justify the maintenance costs. I'd rather my IPTV provider keeps updating the software as needed and when this is not feasible anymore it offers me a good deal for an upgrade. Or even better, be able to watch IPTV with (e.g) Debian on one of my Raspberry Pis. Without any non-free firmware, of course. But unfortunately we are not there, *yet*. > If I write a FORTAN 4 program, I expect it to be able to run on a > FORTRAN 77 platform, or, a FORTRAN 90 platform (I do not know what > is the current latest ANSI standard version of FORTRAN - my FORTRAN > programming ended, when FORTRAN 90 was just a proposal), otherwise, > I would regard the subsequent platform on which it would not run, as > defective. > > Similarly, if I wrote a program in UNIX "C", I woud expect it to run > on any version of UNIX, and, hopefully, Linux, that was created at > or after the same time as the UNIC "C" development environment. I'm not a programmer, but as far as I understand FORTRAN is quite application specific, while C is general purpose. Aren't you comparing ap
Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd fight
On Mon 03 Mar 2014 at 19:04:20 +0800, Bret Busby wrote: > The responses that I got from Samsung, were that their printers are > not compatible with Debian Linux, after Debian Linux 5. > > I had contacted Samsung. Manufacturers neglecting to continue support for equipment is nothing new. You choose to use ( or in this case have no choice but to choose) the supplier's drivers. The responsibilty for reduced or non-existent scanning ability lies with them. 'not compatible' means they cannot be bothered to do anything about it. What rabbit do you expect Debian to pull out of the hat to fix a closed source driver? You could always run your CLX3185FW with Debian 5. :) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303125118.gc8...@copernicus.demon.co.uk
Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
On Sat, 01 Mar 2014 23:53:28 -0600 y...@marupa.net wrote: > Which probably demonstrates why there's no hidden agenda going on surrounding > systemd and there were legitimate reasons why it was finally chosen. Of course there were legitimate reasons, but only those reasons that are important for mega-organizations. > The trouble is, how effectively can the NSA hook itself into open source > software? How easily could they get backdoors into something without upstream > noticing? Might be effective getting hooks into something downstream, but I > don't see the NSA getting anything into something upstream without someone > noticing, since patches are generally reviewed before integration. > > To sum up my thought on that, the NSA needs cooperation from someone OUTSIDE > the NSA to get their hooks in. How likely is it a Debian package maintainer > would be compromised? Would someone else notice? Would the maintainer be > removed? > > I'm not saying it's implausible so much as it doesn't sound like it'd last > long if they could get something in. Could you perhaps give me some insight > into ways the NSA could do this? I just don't see most upstream people > cooperating. Can the NSA force anyone to actually put backdoors in their own > code? For systemd, they for sure don't need to hook anyting in. Such complex software like systemd, written in hurry can only have enormous number of security holes and it'll take a long time until they are reasonlaby fixed. Such tight integration with high-level software on one side and kernel/udev(hardware) on the other hand clearly shows how the attacker can easily penetrate the whole system. They just need to find they and take advantage of already existing bugs. And after that, they'll probably even report them to the free software community. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303122928.GA7025@cape
Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
On Sun, 02 Mar 2014 10:53:51 + Jack wrote: > On 02/03/2014 05:11, Eric Newcomb wrote: > > Technical issues aside, I went through the list of members of the > > tech-ctte, found here: https://www.debian.org/intro/organization. I > > searched each name on the list on Google, and I can't honestly find > > any evidence that the committee is "stacked" with Redhat and/or > > Canonical employees. I'd like to see some proof of these assertions > > before I'd give any credence to claims of conspiracy. > > I also disapprove of such claims. It's unfortunate that the CTTE split > in the way that it did. But I followed the discussion on bug 727708 with > considerable interest; it was a serious, open technical discussion. You > need proper evidence, not just suspicions, to start chucking around such > claims. You can see if people are capable for other opinions only when they are faced with real arguments that show they are wrong. And that happened from sysvinit supporters, and you can see how sysvinit supporters were treated. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303123120.GA7120@cape
Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
On Sat, 01 Mar 2014 19:30:08 -0600 y...@marupa.net wrote: > For example, initscripts are so VERY not portable. I am sorry to say this, > but > it is true. In theory they should be, as you state, according the UNIX > Philosophy they should be. But here comes the problem of that philosophy > assuming every UNIX/UNIX-like works the same and has the same tools. Since many distos went to systemd, now in fact it isn't so important to be portable, isn't it? On the other hand, initscripts are quite portable inside Debian, i.e. to alternative kernels (KFreeBSD, Hurd). > In a VM, you should try copying a Debian initscript into another SysV-using > Linux distribution. It doesn't work. Portable initscripts just don't happen. > Would be nice, but they don't. > Another reason this is good is notice how much time you'd have to take to > figure out what, exactly, the initscript is doing. Is it starting the daemon > yet? Or is it still laying the framework? Why is it doing things that way? > > While in unit files you may wonder what one option is, it's a quick man page > away, but initscripts will require good documented code and a reasonable > skill > at reading the language. That's because init scripts were from beginning written without real planning and every distro was taking into consideration only it's own situation. But besides this, it would be much simpler to fix this then make systemd. > Let's go over the fact it's a nightmare to debug initscripts and they still > frequently hit failures such as losing control of their associated daemon. > That's bad. Init script doesn't need any control of the associated daemon. If software crash, then you need to fix the software, and on other hand, it's simple to write monitoring shell scripts that will restart crashed processes, but it's dangerous because crash can disturb something and restarting your server after crash without analysis of the situration can make bad cosequences (data damage/loss, security holes...). > Systemd basically fixes some problems and also adds a few features I think > Linux has been in desperate need for: Concurrent dependency launch, reliable > process control, the journal, the udev merge makes sure that things services > need are available when they need them. It also provides ways to track the > states of all your units and even look into why they failed. Sadly, > initscripts usually chuck all errors into /dev/null, which isn't helpful. startpar already does concurent dependency launch, process control is quite reliable and only mega-users need something better, neither they need journal, udev makes you much problems, all you need is to find out what module to insert for your hardware and community orientation makes this information easily spread over the whole Linux community. > Oh, as for portability, the way systemd works means unit files are pretty > much > guaranteed to work no matter where they run provided of course their > associated software exists. Can't expect Apache to launch if Apache's not > installed. The only exceptions are probably in cases where a unit might call > a > script or something that presumes a specific configuration. Not only this, but similarly with shell scripts, dependancies may have different name in another distro. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303123049.GA7097@cape
Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 09:20:44 +0900 Joel Rees wrote: > You grow up. Technically inferior stuff always seems to get the money, > but you get to live in the results of your choices. On Sat, 01 Mar 2014 19:00:40 -0600 y...@marupa.net wrote: > > > Doesn't make the decision to drop SysV Init, a system even its own > > > maintainer says is a pile of garbage, in favor of systemd, any less > > > technically sound. > > flame away, flame away > > > > Call it a flame all you want, but it's still deprecated and it's not for no > reason Linux distributors are trying to get as far away from SysV as > possible. > And no, that reason isn't "Red Hat is trying to take over." Try actually > researching the actual technical reasons systemd exists for once. They are > almost innumerable. Please look at what technical superiority of systemd consists of and then tell us if an ordinary user needs it. What systemd brings is something usefull only for companies that has money to pay for high-end servers, clusters, supercomputers and can get a clue who may some of them be. For ordinary users and even enterprises, it can be really called useless because with much less lines of code all of that could have been implemented on top of sysvinit and shell scripts. We simpy must separate ordinary users from mega-users because their interests are simply totally different. If mega-users want to use systemd and other mega-software let them, but let ordinary users use what suits them as well. On Sun, 02 Mar 2014 12:30:57 -0600 y...@marupa.net wrote: > I responded with technical reasons. Shortsightedness has nothing to do with > it. The fact you disagree with it and call it a flame doesn't make my reasons > any less technical. You still haven't listed one TECHNICAL reason why systemd > is a bad idea. On Sat, 01 Mar 2014 19:00:40 -0600 y...@marupa.net wrote: > Oh, how will I ever live with a faster boot, more reliable process control, > unit files that are easier to write and maintain than initscripts, socket- > activated daemons, concurrently-launched dependency-based service startup, > the > fact that I use Archlinux and it actually went FROM a BSD-style init TO > systemd, a logger I can actually efficiently navigate with metadata, and a > more > unified device and configuration infrastructure? > > Life is so horrible for me thanks to how easy systemd makes maintaining my > system. I have seen the light! I'm sure you could find a way to use your computer without software like systemd. You will save some time, but you will lose your freedom. Bad trade for my preference. BTW, that's what Windows is doing. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303123022.GA7074@cape
Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
> I want to do number crunching, I don't want to be bothered by the boot > process. It works. If I have to go make coffee while the boot process > is happening, I'll go make coffee. While your invisible guests are doing somthing similar inside your computer? :D -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303122958.GA7051@cape
Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
On Mon, 03 Mar 2014 12:52:40 +1100 Scott Ferguson wrote: > Which is fine for you, and I can understand and appreciate that, for my > own personal computers my sentiments are similar. However my business > purposes involve meeting SLAs so reboots once or twice a year can cost a > lot of money - so in those circumstances a few minutes makes a lot of > difference. Perhaps that's not something you care about - or it's just > convenient to ignore until your bank/phone/stockbroker/shopping is > interrupted as a result. Perhaps you simply put your "needs" before > those of others - assuredly inadvertently. > > Given the interest displayed by "home users", and those that develop for > embedded platforms, in fast boot times, I suspect your needs aren't > stereotypical of all the users that Debian The Universal Operating > System seeks to support. I really don't see how 10 seconds or a minute more can hurt anyone. If you reboot more often, then it's different. But boot time is minor issue. On the other hands, we've already seen how companies are doing it: first they are going to impress us with fast boot and then everyone start using it, and then slowly they insert more and more crap into the boot process, since not boot system is fast and it's no problem and after a few years your system is again slow as before, unless you buy a new machine. And BTW looks like Moore's low is not as before and computers are becoming more expensive. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303122840.GA7002@cape
Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd fight
On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Bret Busby wrote: > [...] > But, Linux, and, the Linux community, should not have the same objective; it > should instead, be preserving the (that I believe to be) primary objective > of UNIX; that a programme that is written for one version, can run on any > version, unless it is harmful, in which case, it gets blocked, and the > user/administrator, notified. Welcome to the real world. I have sometimes been suspicious that Microsoft has deliberately acted to encourage the Linux community developers to get the featuritis disease, but I guess the devs have natural curiousity and itches they like to scratch. I agree that it's distressing that functionality gets left behind. > If I write a FORTAN 4 program, I expect it to be able to run on a FORTRAN 77 > platform, or, a FORTRAN 90 platform (I do not know what is the current > latest ANSI standard version of FORTRAN - my FORTRAN programming ended, > when FORTRAN 90 was just a proposal), otherwise, I would regard the > subsequent platform on which it would not run, as defective. My memory of F77 was that you had to use special switches to enable all the old ForTran IV stuff. Do you remember the three-way branches, by the way? (Or am I confusing ForTran IV with ForTran I or the assembly language of one of the small minis that we ran ForTran on in the sixties? -- we the community, that is. I never had access to the actual machines, just the books about fifteen years later in the college library.) > Similarly, if I wrote a program in UNIX "C", I woud expect it to run on any > version of UNIX, and, hopefully, Linux, that was created at or after the > same time as the UNIC "C" development environment. You are surely disappointed, then? Now, when I brushed off that old M6800 assembler I wrote for a college class in the '80s and compiled it on current Linux, I actually only had to fix a few minor things, bugs, really. A couple of places where I hadn't realized I was accessing a NULL pointer, that kind of stuff. Some of the other programs I wrote back then did not fare as well. > I have a photovoltaic inverter output data logging program, that is > apparently written for MS Windows XP (the only version of the particular > programme, of which I am aware). If that would not run on MS Windows version > 7 (from what I have seen of MS Windows 8, about the best analogy to MS > Windows 8, of which I can think, is that it reminds me of what we used to > shovel out of the yard, after the cows were milked, except, the stuff that > we used to shovel out of the yard, after the cows were milked, was useful, > and, out of it, coud grow, useful things), I would regard MS Windows 7, as > defective. > > If nothing else, MS Windows 7, in the case of the photovoltaic output data > logging software programme, and, similarly, Linux, in the case of drivers, > should be able to run an instance of the programme, in an emulation of the > earlier version of the operating system, on the curent version of the > operating system, in a virtual machine, or something, if it would not run > "natively" in the later version of the operating system. > > But, I see no reason why a later version of an operating system, should not > be able to natively run software written for an earlier version of the > operating system, with, if needed, protections inbuilt into the later > version of the operating system. > > The lack of that backward compatibility, is probably the cause of most of > the problems encountered with current operating systems - "This > functionality is gone! It does not work anymore!". Ideally, sure. But in the real world, we haven't figured out how to deal with evolving ABIs and properly emulating past ABIs. If you have, for instance, a drive train that works for square wheels, it probably won't work well for round ones. And a lot of what we do on computers, even these days, is like trying to use square wheels, just because we haven't figured out how to make the wheels round without destroying them. So t speak. This is very much an evolving technology. I'm not defending Microsoft, by the way. They go way too far. But computer technology is still very much evolving. -- Joel Rees Be careful where you see conspiracy. Look first in your own heart. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/caar43inwu6cbganw8fdk7uhyogfzqo3wgob_mrj2_wet2d6...@mail.gmail.com
scnner drivers -- Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd troll
On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Scott Ferguson wrote: > On 03/03/14 16:56, Bret Busby wrote: >> [...] >> >> As a single example, I have a multifunction printer, of which, the >> multifunctionality worked with Debian 5. Now, it is only a laser >> printer, running with Debian 6 - to use it to scan, I have to scan >> to a USB drive, and then copy the files to the computer, as Debian 6 >> (and, I believe, similarly, Debian 7) does not provide for the >> device to wotk with it, other than using a printer driver that is not >> for the particular model range, and, losing all other interfaced >> functionality. >> >> Surely, it must be possible, to provide backward compatibility, to >> allow software that ran on earlier versions of Debian, to run on a >> current stable version? A couple of years back, sane was deprecated in favor of making everyone use the "input from twain device" menu option from their favorite graphics software. I was using Fedora at the time, so I am not aware how things went here. Sanity has been restored a bit. But is sane a separate package? I seem to remember having installed that separately from CUPS. I suppose I could log into my admin account and check, but I thought I'd suggest Brett check whether sane is installed before I go off list for the night. > No, for the same reasons I stated in the previous sentence. However > that's not the problem, or solution in your case (x-y?). > You need software support for older hardware, not support for older > software. I'd be very surprised if that was not possible. > > That's a different subject and as such should be posted as a different > subject. Preferably with the appropriate information so your problem can > be resolved and so that it isn't just more irrelevant material clogging > the list with random, non-productive tangents. > >> >> -- Bret Busby Armadale West Australia .. >> >> "So once you do know what the question actually is, you'll know what >> the answer means." - Deep Thought, Chapter 28 of Book 1 of "The >> Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: A Trilogy In Four Parts", written >> by Douglas Adams, published by Pan Books, 1992 >> -- Joel Rees Be careful where you see conspiracy. Look first in your own heart. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/caar43im3kftu4h-xkengsooyvzejao_cwpke8drc-qvcxu5...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 9:41 PM, NoTo CTTE wrote: > Systemd is over 200,000 lines of ring0 running bullshit. > Regular inits are under 10k lines of code inclusive. > Some are 100 lines of code. > > Hmm which is easier to find exploits in. > SystemD. > > Notice how the [...] Just for the record, I consider this post to be a reverse shill, an attempt to get all arguments against systemd painted with the broad brush of fanatacism, misplaced fundamentalism, and sheer lunacy. -- Joel Rees Be careful where you see conspiracy. Look first in your own heart. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CAAr43iNZsC7TN=tzo5b7ktbb1xnxunviv8l7ommba0hpltg...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd fight
On Mon, 3 Mar 2014, Lisi Reisz wrote: Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 18:31:20 From: Lisi Reisz To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd fight Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 10:48:12 + (UTC) Resent-From: debian-user@lists.debian.org On Monday 03 March 2014 09:49:13 Andrei POPESCU wrote: I strongly advise that on your next buy (not necessarily MFPs) you also consider how well that device is supported with Linux. Bonus if the manufacturer contributes to that support. If enough of us are doing the same it might eventually open the eyes of manufacturers towards the benefits of FLOSS, etc. It has transpired that the AIO in question is a Samsung. Samsung are *very* good at supporting Linux. I recently had a lot of help because the suppiled driver for a Samsung AIO would not run correctly in Debian 7. As the chap who was helping said, there are a lot of version of a lot of distros. They cannot guarantee that a single driver will run with all. What they did do, was help and supply an alternative driver, and stay with me until it was running correctly on two machines. Lisi The responses that I got from Samsung, were that their printers are not compatible with Debian Linux, after Debian Linux 5. I had contacted Samsung. -- Bret Busby Armadale West Australia .. "So once you do know what the question actually is, you'll know what the answer means." - Deep Thought, Chapter 28 of Book 1 of "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: A Trilogy In Four Parts", written by Douglas Adams, published by Pan Books, 1992 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/alpine.deb.2.00.1403031902510.18...@bret-dd-workstation.busby.net
Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd fight
On Mon, 3 Mar 2014, Andrei POPESCU wrote: Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 19:01:10 From: Andrei POPESCU To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd fight On Lu, 03 mar 14, 17:10:46, Bret Busby wrote: Whilst the device had been able to work with Debian 5, it simply does not work with Debian Linux after Debian 5, other than using a printer driver for, I think the Samsung CL317x series. Did you try splix? Kind regards, Andrei -- Couldn't get splix to work. -- Bret Busby Armadale West Australia .. "So once you do know what the question actually is, you'll know what the answer means." - Deep Thought, Chapter 28 of Book 1 of "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: A Trilogy In Four Parts", written by Douglas Adams, published by Pan Books, 1992 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/alpine.deb.2.00.1403031901380.18...@bret-dd-workstation.busby.net
Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd fight
On Mon, 3 Mar 2014, Andrei POPESCU wrote: On Lu, 03 mar 14, 13:56:45, Bret Busby wrote: Apart from the systemd fight stuff, I am wondering, in the context of the above message content, why a spearate firmware distribution of Debian Linux, needs to exist, rather than the firmware being included in the offical Debian version. http://www.debian.org/social_contract Important are specifically point 1. (of course) and DFSG 2., since for most firmware the source is not available. Also, and I do not know how applicable this is, to what is happening, I wonder why Debian does not provide backward compatibility with previous versions of Debian; why provision is not made, to allow software that runs on Debian 5, to run on Debian 6 and Debian 7. Because this quickly becomes a maintenance nightmare. This is just my rough understanding, but I'm sure others will correct me if I'm wrong: 1. freeze the "base" system (system libraries and so) This is what Microsoft has been doing with XP. This seamed to work well for a while, except that at some point, no matter how many Service Packs they applied to it, the OS was simply not be able to cope with the changes around it. Eventually software programmers will want to use new features of their languages and libraries, but over time this becomes increasingly difficult and even impossible. And let's not forget about deep (possible security related) bugs in the underlying system that just can't be fixed by simple patches that don't affect the applications on top. 2. Keep multiple versions of libraries around Debian does that to some extent, but (depending on the library and how the upstream developers handle changes to it) it quickly becomes too difficult to maintain. The amount of maintenance work needed is likely to increase geometrically or even exponentially with the number of concurrent versions, and don't forget that the maintainer most likely already has 3 (three) versions to care about: oldstable, stable and testing/sid. 3. Extend the support times for a release This is not really a solution, because at some point you will just end up with 1., but if you're "lucky" this will give the developers of the old software to migrate to the newer libraries, or the need will just go away (as per your example below, the hardware gets replaced). I think that it is unfortunate that we are apparently expected to throw out all of our hardware (including printers and other such accessories), and, replace it all, each time a new version of an operating system, is released. The MFP thing, as far as I am aware (I have not yet been able to use all of its functionality, due to the Debian policy regarding firmware), is still all working okay (well, it scans and prints, as well as it can, with the limited functionality of the operating system. But, I had understood that the purpose of creating UNIX (and, Linux IS supposed to be a "UNIX-like" operating system), was to have available an operating system, upon which software would run without requiring modification to adapt to the underlying platform. Thus, from what I understood, as a crude example, a program written in "C", would include library and function calls, to standard libraries, and could happily operate, if it was written in UNIX "C", on any installation of UNIX, on any hardware platform. That should be relatively simple - the preservation of the standard libraries, and, the standard functions, with standard functionalities, which could be expanded, if needed, but, at the same time, preserving the standard functionalitites and libraries. I think that the problem that has occurred, is that, instead, mutations have been imposed, so that functions and libraries, have instead, been renamed or, replaced, in order to impose obsolescence, rather than to maintain functionality. It seems to be "Who needs functionality, when we have all of these whistles and bells? They might not serve any useful purpose, but, they catch your attention." We are aware (I think, and, I believe) that Microsoft, in order to force sales of its products, designs operating system and application software, versions, that are not backward compatible, so as to force sales, so that it can keep "squeezing blood out of a stone", requiring people to be continually buying software that they should not need. But, Linux, and, the Linux community, should not have the same objective; it should instead, be preserving the (that I believe to be) primary objective of UNIX; that a programme that is written for one version, can run on any version, unless it is harmful, in which case, it gets blocked, and the user/administrator, notified. If I write a FORTAN 4 program, I expect it to be able to run on a FORTRAN 77 platform, or, a FORTRAN 90 platform (I do not know what is the current latest ANSI standard version of FORTRAN - my FORTRAN programming ended, when FORTRAN 90 was just a proposal), otherwise, I would regard the
Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd fight
On Lu, 03 mar 14, 17:10:46, Bret Busby wrote: > > Whilst the device had been able to work with Debian 5, it simply > does not work with Debian Linux after Debian 5, other than using a > printer driver for, I think the Samsung CL317x series. Did you try splix? Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic http://nuvreauspam.ro/gpg-transition.txt signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
On Lu, 03 mar 14, 10:40:52, Gian Uberto Lauri wrote: > Andrei POPESCU writes: > > On Du, 02 mar 14, 18:09:46, ghaverla wrote: > > > > > > Systemd seems to have 2 proponents, people interested in fast booting, > > > and people interested in servers. The intersection of those two groups > > > is almost the NULL set. I think the answer to faster booting is > > > hibernation, and people have been playing with that for many years as > > > near as I can tell. To the people running servers who want faster > > > booting, I would suggest that they not turn the things off. > > > > Hibernation has it's own set of problems, especially as RAM sizes go up. > > I am interested in this issue. Could you tell some more about this? Depending on RAM size and what you were running at the time you set your computer to hibernate it may just take longer to resume (i.e. read the stuff from slow storage) than to cold boot. This may have been solved in the meantime (compression, optimisations, whatever), because I'm running sid hibernate is not really useful for me. > > > It isn't change is evil, the saying is if it isn't broken, don't fix it. > > > > But things *are* broken. Any computer with more than 1 (one) storage > > device (not hot pluggable please) and 1 (one) wired network connection > > (IPv4, not IPv6) with a static configuration and all other devices > > connected at boot needs more than sysvinit + sysv-rc can handle sanely. > > I completely disagree. I had quite a nicely complex storage server > with trunking and multipath things on, and it was sane and clean. Until one looks under the hood :( > What was a bit 'magic' was iSCSI, but I doubt it was due init! > > On my laptop-used-as-a-desktop, I solved any problem quite sanely, > even if it involved skills, skills that I borrowed from my wife (who > "has any AIX certification IBM provided an exam for" :) :) :) :)): > > - my external, always plugged, HD is automatically mounted with LVM > provided I see its id in lsusb output. > > - usb keys have their label. > > This is extremely sane. It is also a bit for tech savy not for end > users. Which basically proves my point. This stuff should Just Work (tm). Yes, we (and by this I mean mostly debian-user subscribers) are tinkerers, otherwise we wouldn't be here. But, how am I going to do that for my father's laptop, which I *might* be able to access remotely? > > If you don't believe me just do > > > > grep sleep /etc/init.d/* > > You should do a step further. Go and watch what each one does. > > The large majority of sleeps is used in restarting a daemon > (/etc/init.d/some-devil restart), to wait that the kill has succeeded > before restarting the daemon itself. This is a joke right? If I tell a daemon to restart I want it restarted. Now. Anything else is like the tail wagging the dog. > A DBUS system could indeed make things cleaner (I wolud like to know > the cost). > > But restart is never invoked by init in bootstrap or shutdown. > > Therefore I really can't see the issue with the use for sleep. True, > with messages that could be cleaner... > > Maybe. Easy example: write an event driven POP client and compare the > code with some other doing sleeps :). > > > And let's not forget about: remote shares, remote storage, encrypted > > storage, local hot-plugged devices (not limited to storage), dynamic > > network configuration (especially with IPv6), etc. > > Except storage, the other stuff is "personal pc stuff". What is good > on a personal pc may not be good on a server - and vice versa. They > look the same (for low end servers), but they are not. Rogue daemons, duplicated code (for the forking), etc. And no, "this could be done with (x)inetd/daemontools/whatever" is not an answer, because it hasn't been done. > And while 20 years ago I could have been on the "go systemd go" side, > today I still think that there are things that could have done better > with less problems given to the "server running" guys with no cost > given to "pc running" guys except waiting a bit more. Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating systemd. I've followed the -ctte debate quite closely and my own conclusions are: - sysv-rc and all the initscripts are a nightmare to maintain (and have been for quite a while) - systemd is the best we've got *at the moment* - OpenRC *could* be a great alternative If I had the skills I would be helping out with OpenRC development/integration/etc. I plan to test it as soon as some mechanism as simple as 'apt-get install openrc and set init=whatever' is available and documented. Right now I would have to remove sysv-rc, which I'm not prepared to do, even though I've been running with 'init=/bin/systemd' for quite a while. I believe the fact that the upstart maintainers did not include such an easy mechanism from the beginning (2006 in experimental and 2009 in unstable and testing) has contributed a lot to upstart ha
Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd fight
On Mon, 3 Mar 2014, Andrei POPESCU wrote: On Lu, 03 mar 14, 13:56:45, Bret Busby wrote: Apart from the systemd fight stuff, I am wondering, in the context of the above message content, why a spearate firmware distribution of Debian Linux, needs to exist, rather than the firmware being included in the offical Debian version. http://www.debian.org/social_contract Important are specifically point 1. (of course) and DFSG 2., since for most firmware the source is not available. Also, and I do not know how applicable this is, to what is happening, I wonder why Debian does not provide backward compatibility with previous versions of Debian; why provision is not made, to allow software that runs on Debian 5, to run on Debian 6 and Debian 7. Because this quickly becomes a maintenance nightmare. This is just my rough understanding, but I'm sure others will correct me if I'm wrong: 1. freeze the "base" system (system libraries and so) This is what Microsoft has been doing with XP. This seamed to work well for a while, except that at some point, no matter how many Service Packs they applied to it, the OS was simply not be able to cope with the changes around it. Eventually software programmers will want to use new features of their languages and libraries, but over time this becomes increasingly difficult and even impossible. And let's not forget about deep (possible security related) bugs in the underlying system that just can't be fixed by simple patches that don't affect the applications on top. 2. Keep multiple versions of libraries around Debian does that to some extent, but (depending on the library and how the upstream developers handle changes to it) it quickly becomes too difficult to maintain. The amount of maintenance work needed is likely to increase geometrically or even exponentially with the number of concurrent versions, and don't forget that the maintainer most likely already has 3 (three) versions to care about: oldstable, stable and testing/sid. 3. Extend the support times for a release This is not really a solution, because at some point you will just end up with 1., but if you're "lucky" this will give the developers of the old software to migrate to the newer libraries, or the need will just go away (as per your example below, the hardware gets replaced). As a single example, I have a multifunction printer, of which, the multifunctionality worked with Debian 5. Now, it is only a laser printer, running with Debian 6 - to use it to scan, I have to scan to a USB drive, and then copy the files to the computer, as Debian 6 (and, I believe, similarly, Debian 7) does not provide for the device to wotk with it, other than using a printer driver that is not for the particular model range, and, losing all other interfaced functionality. Based on this I'm guessing the MFP needs proprietary closed source software provided by the manufacturer, but not updated for current Linux releases. Of course, the manufacturer wants you to buy new hardware, not keep using the old one, even if it still suits your needs. Given enough cooperation by the manufacturer you would be using your printer with current software. Worst case you could hire someone to do it for you. I strongly advise that on your next buy (not necessarily MFPs) you also consider how well that device is supported with Linux. Bonus if the manufacturer contributes to that support. If enough of us are doing the same it might eventually open the eyes of manufacturers towards the benefits of FLOSS, etc. Hello. The MFP printer did have the print and scan fucntionality with Debian Linux 5; xsane could see it, apart from using thye manufacturer's driver. A problem had existed with the manufacturer's driver, which was an unfortunate shortcoming; it woul only see one printer at a time, regardless of which printers were connected. But, using xsane and (I think) the foomatic printer driver (there were two printer driver systems within Debian - foomatic and another, and, one worked better than the other, but I can not remember which - it was a while ago, now). But, support from printers and scanners, apperared to end in Debian Linux 6. In looking at the specifications for new printers, including the Samsung CLX-3185, when it was still available , new (I had to replace one, as it died while I was involved in a project), no (relatively) inexpensive multi-function printers, were available, that were shown to be compatible with Debian Linux, after Debian Linux version 5. Amnd, this applied also to similarly timed versions of other distributions; Ubuntu 10.x and the equivalent Red Hat (from memory). So, sothing changed in the Linux systems (kernel;s, or whatever), that apparently made Linux less interoperable with devices, from that time. It was apparently, not just a problem with Samsung laser printers, which I had been (re;latively) happily using with Debian Linus, for a while, but, it seemed to be a designed reducti
Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd fight
On Monday 03 March 2014 09:49:13 Andrei POPESCU wrote: > I strongly advise that on your next buy (not necessarily MFPs) you > also consider how well that device is supported with Linux. Bonus > if the manufacturer contributes to that support. If enough of us > are doing the same it might eventually open the eyes of > manufacturers towards the benefits of FLOSS, etc. It has transpired that the AIO in question is a Samsung. Samsung are *very* good at supporting Linux. I recently had a lot of help because the suppiled driver for a Samsung AIO would not run correctly in Debian 7. As the chap who was helping said, there are a lot of version of a lot of distros. They cannot guarantee that a single driver will run with all. What they did do, was help and supply an alternative driver, and stay with me until it was running correctly on two machines. Lisi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/201403031031.20241.lisi.re...@gmail.com
Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd troll
On Mon, 3 Mar 2014, Scott Ferguson wrote: On 03/03/14 16:56, Bret Busby wrote: On Sun, 2 Mar 2014, y...@marupa.net wrote: Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 03:05:20 From: y...@marupa.net To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith and other such complete fabrications likely Resent-Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2014 19:21:09 + (UTC) Resent-From: debian-user@lists.debian.org On Sunday, March 02, 2014 01:28:57 PM Doug wrote: On 03/02/2014 02:02 AM, Scott Ferguson wrote: On 02/03/14 16:53, y...@marupa.net wrote: On Sunday, March 02, 2014 04:25:13 PM Scott Ferguson wrote: On 02/03/14 11:28, Ralf Mardorf wrote: On Sun, 2014-03-02 at 10:55 +1100, Scott Ferguson wrote: why a spearate firmware distribution of Debian Linux, needs to exist, rather than the firmware being included in the offical Debian version. It is included, but not by default. This is IMO the right thing to do. Consider spam. By law you can opt-out of spam (at least in Australia). Which in effect means companies are free to spam you, until you tell them not to. That's not freedom. Debian is about freedom, so you *can* *opt-in* to licences that restrict it - if you choose. Firmware has restrictions placed on it's use, by the "firms". Those restrictions can restrict your freedom - by default Debian seeks to protect your freedom, as long as you choose to do so. When you install you are asked if you want to include the non-free and contrib repositories. non-free is what it says it, and contrib is packages required by non-free. So Debian *does* include firmware, (both "free" and "non-free"), and the choice is up to you whether you install it. By default you don't have it installed, only the main repostitory. You are free to install it at anytime by editing /etc/apt/sources.list and adding non-free and contrib to the appropriate repository lines. e.g.:- deb http://mirror.aarnet.edu.au/pub/debian/ wheezy main contrib non-free It is my understanding that firmware was excluded from the official Debian releases, a while ago. At http://raphaelhertzog.com/2011/03/14/missing-firmware-in-debian-learn-how-to-deal-with-the-problem/ is " Missing firmware in Debian? Learn how to deal with the problem March 14, 2011 by Raphaël Hertzog You know it already, since Debian 6.0 non-free firmware are no longer provided by a standard Debian installation. This will cause some troubles to users who need them. I’m thus going to do a small overview on the topic and teach you what you need to know to deal with the problem. " At http://blog.einval.com/2010/12/15 is " Wednesday, 15 December 2010 Debian CDs with firmware included We've just posted a news item about the removal of non-free firmware from Debian's Linux kernel packages. Kudos to the kernel team and others for the work involved to make this happen! " At https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/i386/ch06s04.html.en is " 6.4.1. Preparing a medium Official CD images do not include non-free firmware. The most common method to load such firmware is from some removable medium such as a USB stick. Alternatively, unofficial CD builds containing non-free firmware can be found at http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/unofficial/non-free/cd-including-firmware/. " Thus, officially, Debian states that firmware is not included in the official releases of Debioanm Linux, and that a person has to go looking for it. At https://wiki.debian.org/Firmware is " Firmware Translation(s): English - Français - Italiano Firmware refers to embedded software which controls electronic devices. Well-defined boundaries between firmware and software do not exist, as both terms cover some of the same code. Typically, the term firmware deals with low-level operations in a device, without which the device would be completely non-functional (read more on Wikipedia). Contents Devices/Drivers Firmware Firmware during the installation Location of the firmwares List of firmware in Linux kernel Computer Firmware Devices/Drivers Firmware Many devices require a firmware to operate. Historically, firmware were built-into the device's ROM or Flash memory, but more and more often, the firmware has to be loaded into the device by the driver during the device initialization. Some of these firmware are free and open-source, and some of them are non-free, which means that you need to add the non-free and contrib components to /etc/apt/sources.list; see sources.list(5) and Debian archive basics (Debian Reference) for more information. Firmware during the installation In some cases the installer detects the need for non-free firmware and prompts the user to make the firmware available to the installer to complete the installation, see ipw2200 for an example. In other cases, it does not (601475). Before starting the installation process on hardware unfamiliar to you, a suggestion is to download the firmware tarball for your installation and unpack it i
Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd fight
On Monday 03 March 2014 09:10:46 Bret Busby wrote: > The device is a Samsung CLX3185FW, and it had drivers that worked > with Debian 5. Contact Samsung. If you have difficulty in getting through to someone who speaks "Linux" mail me off-list and I'll give you a name. A client had bought a Samsung AIO because it claimed to run in Linux. The scanner didn't. The first line defence was no use - not because of lack of desire to help. They were very willing. But because of lack of knowledge. But when I was put through to someone who knew Linux, within a very short time the thing was working. They have various alternative drivers. Lisi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/201403031001.50981.lisi.re...@gmail.com
Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd troll
I agree with Scott completely (if this is not obvious from my own post), but I'd like to add: On Lu, 03 mar 14, 19:03:44, Scott Ferguson wrote: > > When you install you are asked if you want to include the non-free and > contrib repositories. non-free is what it says it, and contrib is > packages required by non-free. I think the question is only asked on expert install. > So Debian *does* include firmware, (both "free" and "non-free"), and the > choice is up to you whether you install it. By default you don't have it > installed, only the main repostitory. You are free to install it at > anytime by editing /etc/apt/sources.list and adding non-free and contrib > to the appropriate repository lines. e.g.:- > deb http://mirror.aarnet.edu.au/pub/debian/ wheezy main contrib non-free But this doesn't solve the need for firmware *during* the install, hence the non-free installer with firmware included as an additional option. Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic http://nuvreauspam.ro/gpg-transition.txt signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd fight
On Lu, 03 mar 14, 13:56:45, Bret Busby wrote: > > Apart from the systemd fight stuff, I am wondering, in the context > of the above message content, why a spearate firmware distribution > of Debian Linux, needs to exist, rather than the firmware being > included in the offical Debian version. http://www.debian.org/social_contract Important are specifically point 1. (of course) and DFSG 2., since for most firmware the source is not available. > Also, and I do not know how applicable this is, to what is > happening, I wonder why Debian does not provide backward > compatibility with previous versions of Debian; why provision is not > made, to allow software that runs on Debian 5, to run on Debian 6 > and Debian 7. Because this quickly becomes a maintenance nightmare. This is just my rough understanding, but I'm sure others will correct me if I'm wrong: 1. freeze the "base" system (system libraries and so) This is what Microsoft has been doing with XP. This seamed to work well for a while, except that at some point, no matter how many Service Packs they applied to it, the OS was simply not be able to cope with the changes around it. Eventually software programmers will want to use new features of their languages and libraries, but over time this becomes increasingly difficult and even impossible. And let's not forget about deep (possible security related) bugs in the underlying system that just can't be fixed by simple patches that don't affect the applications on top. 2. Keep multiple versions of libraries around Debian does that to some extent, but (depending on the library and how the upstream developers handle changes to it) it quickly becomes too difficult to maintain. The amount of maintenance work needed is likely to increase geometrically or even exponentially with the number of concurrent versions, and don't forget that the maintainer most likely already has 3 (three) versions to care about: oldstable, stable and testing/sid. 3. Extend the support times for a release This is not really a solution, because at some point you will just end up with 1., but if you're "lucky" this will give the developers of the old software to migrate to the newer libraries, or the need will just go away (as per your example below, the hardware gets replaced). > As a single example, I have a multifunction printer, of which, the > multifunctionality worked with Debian 5. Now, it is only a laser > printer, running with Debian 6 - to use it to scan, I have to scan > to a USB drive, and then copy the files to the computer, as Debian 6 > (and, I believe, similarly, Debian 7) does not provide for the > device to wotk with it, other than using a printer driver that is > not for the particular model range, and, losing all other interfaced > functionality. Based on this I'm guessing the MFP needs proprietary closed source software provided by the manufacturer, but not updated for current Linux releases. Of course, the manufacturer wants you to buy new hardware, not keep using the old one, even if it still suits your needs. Given enough cooperation by the manufacturer you would be using your printer with current software. Worst case you could hire someone to do it for you. I strongly advise that on your next buy (not necessarily MFPs) you also consider how well that device is supported with Linux. Bonus if the manufacturer contributes to that support. If enough of us are doing the same it might eventually open the eyes of manufacturers towards the benefits of FLOSS, etc. > Surely, it must be possible, to provide backward compatibility, to > allow software that ran on earlier versions of Debian, to run on a > current stable version? A chroot might be possible, but please start a new thread for this problem. Beware of the XY problem[1], i.e. I believe the correct question in your case is: How can I use the scan capabilities of device foo with recent Debian? [1] http://www.perlmonks.org/?node_id=542341 > "So once you do know what the question actually is, > you'll know what the answer means." > - Deep Thought, > Chapter 28 of Book 1 of > "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: > A Trilogy In Four Parts", > written by Douglas Adams, > published by Pan Books, 1992 Could you please reduce the number of lines in your .sig? Up to 4 lines would be nice. You could strip the chapter and book number as well as the publisher, these are not really useful/necessary. Besides, you can go for (slightly) longer lines, like e.g. 72 characters or so. Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic http://nuvreauspam.ro/gpg-transition.txt signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
Andrei POPESCU writes: > On Du, 02 mar 14, 18:09:46, ghaverla wrote: > > > > Systemd seems to have 2 proponents, people interested in fast booting, > > and people interested in servers. The intersection of those two groups > > is almost the NULL set. I think the answer to faster booting is > > hibernation, and people have been playing with that for many years as > > near as I can tell. To the people running servers who want faster > > booting, I would suggest that they not turn the things off. > > Hibernation has it's own set of problems, especially as RAM sizes go up. I am interested in this issue. Could you tell some more about this? > > It isn't change is evil, the saying is if it isn't broken, don't fix it. > > But things *are* broken. Any computer with more than 1 (one) storage > device (not hot pluggable please) and 1 (one) wired network connection > (IPv4, not IPv6) with a static configuration and all other devices > connected at boot needs more than sysvinit + sysv-rc can handle sanely. I completely disagree. I had quite a nicely complex storage server with trunking and multipath things on, and it was sane and clean. What was a bit 'magic' was iSCSI, but I doubt it was due init! On my laptop-used-as-a-desktop, I solved any problem quite sanely, even if it involved skills, skills that I borrowed from my wife (who "has any AIX certification IBM provided an exam for" :) :) :) :)): - my external, always plugged, HD is automatically mounted with LVM provided I see its id in lsusb output. - usb keys have their label. This is extremely sane. It is also a bit for tech savy not for end users. > If you don't believe me just do > > grep sleep /etc/init.d/* You should do a step further. Go and watch what each one does. The large majority of sleeps is used in restarting a daemon (/etc/init.d/some-devil restart), to wait that the kill has succeeded before restarting the daemon itself. A DBUS system could indeed make things cleaner (I wolud like to know the cost). But restart is never invoked by init in bootstrap or shutdown. Therefore I really can't see the issue with the use for sleep. True, with messages that could be cleaner... Maybe. Easy example: write an event driven POP client and compare the code with some other doing sleeps :). > And let's not forget about: remote shares, remote storage, encrypted > storage, local hot-plugged devices (not limited to storage), dynamic > network configuration (especially with IPv6), etc. Except storage, the other stuff is "personal pc stuff". What is good on a personal pc may not be good on a server - and vice versa. They look the same (for low end servers), but they are not. And while 20 years ago I could have been on the "go systemd go" side, today I still think that there are things that could have done better with less problems given to the "server running" guys with no cost given to "pc running" guys except waiting a bit more. -- /\ ___Ubuntu: ancient /___/\_|_|\_|__|___Gian Uberto Lauri_ African word //--\| | \| | Integralista GNUslamicomeaning "I can \/ coltivatore diretto di software not install già sistemista a tempo (altrui) perso...Debian" Warning: gnome-config-daemon considered more dangerous than GOTO -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/21268.20004.679370.910...@mail.eng.it
Re: Firmware stuff - was systemd fight
On Mon, 3 Mar 2014, Doug wrote: On 03/03/2014 12:56 AM, Bret Busby wrote:Debian; why provision is not made, to allow software that runs on Debian 5, to run on Debian 6 and Debian 7. As a single example, I have a multifunction printer, of which, the multifunctionality worked with Debian 5. Now, it is only a laser printer, running with Debian 6 - to use it to scan, I have to scan to a USB drive, and then copy the files to the computer, as Debian 6 (and, I believe, similarly, Debian 7) does not provide for the device to wotk with it, other than using a printer driver that is not for the particular model range, and, losing all other interfaced functionality. Surely, it must be possible, to provide backward compatibility, to allow software that ran on earlier versions of Debian, to run on a current stable version? -- Bret Busby Armadale West Australia .. I'm not running Debian at the moment, but do you have XSane available to you? It would seem that XSane is smart enough to scan without any other drivers--at least it seems to do so with my Epson WP-4530 all-in-one. I'm pretty sure that I didn't install the Epson driver for it, but it scans fine. --doug xsane simply says "no devices found" or somesuch similar message. Whilst the device had been able to work with Debian 5, it simply does not work with Debian Linux after Debian 5, other than using a printer driver for, I think the Samsung CL317x series. Debian 6 apparently made most printers "paperweight" or "sopmetimes works", in functionality. Something significant, changed between Debian Linux 5 and Debian Linux 6, that reduced the functionality of the operating system. The device is a Samsung CLX3185FW, and it had drivers that worked with Debian 5. The printer, and, from what I have seen, it equally applies to most printers that were "Linux-compatible" is/are not compatible with Debian Linux after Debian Linux v5. -- Bret Busby Armadale West Australia .. "So once you do know what the question actually is, you'll know what the answer means." - Deep Thought, Chapter 28 of Book 1 of "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: A Trilogy In Four Parts", written by Douglas Adams, published by Pan Books, 1992 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/alpine.deb.2.00.1403031703430.18...@bret-dd-workstation.busby.net
Re: Zimbra mail........
Am Freitag, 17. Januar 2014, 09:38:17 schrieb Charlie: > From my Keyboard: > > Just a quick question. Does anyone use Zimbra mail and know something > about setting it up. Have changed to a new ISP and they us Zimbra > mail. They set up the default account without too much trouble other > than I had to use Authentication in claws-mail to send emails. > > I set up a second account the same as the default, and it gives me > error messages about authentication: > > [09:28:38] POP3< +OK mail.goipstar.com Zimbra POP3 server ready > > [09:28:38] POP3> USER s...@ipstarmail.com.au > > [09:28:39] POP3< +OK hello s...@ipstarmail.com.au, please enter your > password > > [09:28:39] POP3> PASS > > [09:28:39] POP3< -ERR invalid username/password > > *** error occurred on authentication > > *** Authentication failed. > > I have checked and rechecked the password etc., etc., > > Their techs set up the second account from their end and it still fails? > > I tried a simple password for test but it won't allow it? > > Anyone know anything about Zimbra mail? We had a Zimbra groupware server in company and it just worked about right. We had a perdition proxy to access it, but whether I accessed it directly from the internal network (using a different port, cause the other port is reserved for the proxy connection) or from extern, it just worked. As to the exact credentials required, I suggest you ask your ISP. I think I had the full mail address as passwort, but I am not entirely sure. If the ISP is not willing to help you to setup with at least one widely known MTA – maby icedove aka thunderbird – I would choose a different one. Still, not Zimbra to blame for any incompetence on the side of the ISP. -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/2167875.8bvUkk41Gd@merkaba
Help with GPT
Last few weekends I struggled with the GPT. I've tried to install debian 7.2 from live DVD (but booting from USB). However, at the end of installation I always receive the message "Grub-pc package failed to install into /target/", or something like that. Now, I'm aware that I can solve this by booting to rescue mode, doing grub-install, chroot into the instaled system and simply update grub. However, I'm getting really pissed of by this "post-installation tweaking", and my lack of knowledge on how to avoid it. So I must humbly ask If someone knows a way around this, i.e. how to persuade the debian installer to install grub. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/lf1hvl$pve$1...@ger.gmane.org
Re: Four people decided the fate of debian with systemd. Bad faith likely
On Sun, Mar 02, 2014 at 06:09:46PM -0700, ghaverla wrote: [BIG snip] > With Respect To boot times, I would think moving to a specialised shell > that had no interactive capability (such as Gnu Readline) might be a > place to start. That the "shell" often had to invoke subshells to do > things, to me might be a reason to try Perl to boot a system. Just as > a trial, Perl is big. But once you get it up and running, it doesn't > need to invoke inferior processes for many tasks, and is capable of > starting binaries with calculated arguments. This has (at least partly) been achieved by making the default shell "dash", rather than "bash". dash is significantly faster, and (as far as I can see) a drop-in replacement. This is not an attempt to claim that no futher improvements are wanted - but the difference dash made was significant. -- Karl E. Jorgensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140303085729.GA12793@hawking
