Suspicious "invoice" email?
Dear List, I received the following today from (Jerry Henley at) Ella White . I suspect fraud here, so have not opened the invoice he/she attached. Can you possibly tell me whether the message is legitimate? Thanks for your time! Peter Armstrong Greetings! customer, I hope you're doing well. Thank you for your valued business. Attached is invoice statement #265753517 as requested. Invoice Amount: $697.56 Due Date: 2024-05-17 For any inquiries or additional assistance, feel free to reach out. We're here to help. Appreciatively Jerry Henley 888-632-2898
Partitioning an SSD?
Dear Debian, I'm preparing to install Debian 11.5.0 on a new computer. Its drives are SSDs, not the HDDs I've been accustomed to and have always fastidiously *partitioned*. With my file groupings already well differentiated c/o directory-tree layout, is there any further advantage to be had in partitioning *these* drives? (I do understand somewhat the difference between the drive types -- e.g., that SSDs don't assign functional space. I'm just not sure what other issue may apply.) Thanks in advance for your time! Best regards, Peter Armstrong
Subscription
Dear Gurus, Please reinstate my Debian forum subscriptions! My ISP, Eskimo North, just disabled its new spam filter, which had proved to be bouncing way more legitimate email than spam. My apologies on EN's behalf for the inconvenience. Thanks, PMA -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4fb82132.2060...@aya.yale.edu
Re: [OT] Posting styles
Andrei POPESCU wrote: On Du, 08 apr 12, 12:15:49, PMA wrote: P.S. I may as well add here, that it would help me -- in opening a Debian list email -- *not* to see blank lines at the top of the message (like the two at top here). They're what I have to fight, as they beckon, Now y'all just scribble right in here. Vim puts the cursor at the top too for mails, but I like it there, it's the best position to start trimming :) but I do agree on the two blank lines. Kind regards, Andrei I suppose you're right (best position to start trimming) but I'll keep mine down here now per Scott's and Lisi's suggestion, to hedge against my antediluvian reflexes. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f85b486.3040...@aya.yale.edu
Re: [OT] Posting styles
Scott Ferguson wrote: Hopefully ending this thread, and providing reading material for others with similar queries and concerns. Amen. Icedove = Toolbar = Account Settings = Composition and Addressing Tick Automatically quote the original message when replying and select then start my reply below the quote. Thanks, Done! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f82ec2b.7070...@aya.yale.edu
Re: [OT] Posting styles
Chris Bannister wrote: [Please trim your posts on this mailing list] On Sat, Apr 07, 2012 at 10:14:34AM -0400, PMA wrote: I'm not sure utterly is quite the word. Nobody in signing thinks a signature is needed to identify him. You're not confusing the cryptographic signature with the normal email signature, are you? I was, yes. And I am still not clear as to how this topic relates to the typed-in as opposed to the auto-append. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f818a99.20...@aya.yale.edu
Re: [OT] Posting styles
Scott Ferguson wrote: ... I take that you are unable to defend your assertion that signing has a point without having to validate the sender. ie. it demonstrates that the email from an unverified sender is verified. Almost. I was caught up thinking how a personal signature -- choosing in a given instance to enter it or not -- can affect a message's import, separately from the issue of verification. (And I realize I might better have kept this to myself.) There's a community convention which people adopt to get along with each other. You are free to ignore it and expect people to read you posts twice. We have filters. I have no wish to ignore the convention. My memory's failing some. I'll attune better to *which* posting convention (list) I find myself in. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f8198ac.6060...@aya.yale.edu
Re: [OT] Posting styles
Scott Ferguson wrote: On 08/04/12 23:54, PMA wrote: snipped I was caught up thinking how a personal signature -- choosing in a given instance to enter it or not -- can affect a message's import, separately from the issue of verification. Oh good - I couldn't get my head around it when applied to a digital signature used to show the post had not been modified since sending, and was sent by the person claiming to have sent it. I sense I'm willfully misunderstood, but in any case am dropping this issue. ... I have no wish to ignore the convention. My memory's failing some. I'll attune better to *which* posting convention (list) I find myself in. My bad - I'd mistaken you for someone trolling the it's not a rule let's vote on it line :-( That was *not* trolling. The LilyPond list (a digital-music-scoring site) had been debating just this top/bottom posting-style issue, and had fielded exactly this suggestion -- a vote among the list members. It struck especially as potentially helpful in the thread here. If my style in offering it was inappropriately cavalier, I apologize for that. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f81a164.2000...@aya.yale.edu
Re: [OT] Posting styles
Scott Ferguson wrote: ... Which part of my bad - I'd mistaken you for someone trolling did you not understand? You're too quick to claim offence. I know this last is true. If caught in it I've offended you 'too', I'm sorry. The LilyPond list (a digital-music-scoring site) had been debating just this top/bottom posting-style issue, and had fielded exactly this suggestion -- a vote among the list members. Maybe on that site the list votes on how the list is run. Though it sounds like the tail wagging the dog... On Debian it's usually developers who vote As I recall, the suggestion was meant to improve the developers' sense of membership preference (to consider in making a developer decision). People are still free to post as they wish - but I don't remember the last time I saw a useful response from anyone who didn't have a preference for interleaved posting style (even if sometimes they refer to it as bottom posting, with a straight face) For the record, I've always preferred interleaved (relative bottom?) style. But, retired now after 16 years in a mandatory top-post work environment, I fight my reflex with every email (if I remember) to do differently. P.S. I may as well add here, that it would help me -- in opening a Debian list email -- *not* to see blank lines at the top of the message (like the two at top here). They're what I have to fight, as they beckon, Now y'all just scribble right in here. Best regards, Pete -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f81b9b5.7050...@aya.yale.edu
Re: [OT] Posting styles
Lisi wrote: On Sunday 08 April 2012 17:15:49 PMA wrote: P.S. I may as well add here, that it would help me -- in opening a Debian list email -- *not* to see blank lines at the top of the message (like the two at top here). They're what I have to fight, as they beckon, Now y'all just scribble right in here. That is your email client, not the list. I see no such blank lines. And anyway, I would have said that what says to most of us start to write here is the position of the cursor, and that is attributable to you and your email client. Lisi Aha! Got it *here* now. Thanks. Pete -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f81cace.40...@aya.yale.edu
Re: [OT] Posting styles
For the record on this issue, here is my opinion. 1) A reply should be entered immediately below the text to which it specifically responds; 2) a signature, of whatever kind, should be no longer than needed to verify sender identity. I will not defend these assertions, and hope to say no more on the topic. Pete -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f8234a5.5020...@aya.yale.edu
Re: [OT] Posting styles
I'm not sure utterly is quite the word. Nobody in signing thinks a signature is needed to identify him. Scott Ferguson wrote: On 07/04/12 18:16, Mika Suomalainen wrote: On 07.04.2012 01:02, Walter Hurry wrote: On Fri, 06 Apr 2012 22:23:07 +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote: snipped SIGNATURE- How utterly ridiculous and pointless to sign messages posted to mailing lists. I agree with Chris Bannister. Likewise :-( In case you haven't noticed, there are other people who are signing messages, which are sent to mailing lists. Some of those people do so to authenticate that they have the authority they claim, others are w*nkers and/or just ill-informed. Do you think that it would be better if people spoofed my email Is that something you expect? That's a rhetorical question :-) For the purposes of intelligent discussion let's pretend that a spoofed email *could* be published:- PGP won't stop that - *even if you knew how to sign post properly*[*1]. It's maths not magic. All it guarantees is that the message has not been altered. How do we know who you are? Without a chain of trust your key is worthless in establishing your identification. The real Mika Suomalainen may be someone whose reputation you wish to tarnish. No more unlikely than the scenario that you propose your *invalid* digital signatures would protect against. What's to stop you, or someone claiming to be you, from posting unsigned messages - then claiming it's not you because it wasn't signed with the same key? How do we know you control your computer and your private key? [*1] if you believe people should copy, paste and edit your post, and download you key - in the misguided belief it'll validate something... you're mistaken. Note that Thunderbird and Enigmail are available for Android - and they will correctly sign posts so that they will validate. Kind regards (and Happy Religious Festival) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f804bca.3020...@aya.yale.edu
Re: [OT] Posting styles
Does signing in-line specifically mean typing my name into a given email, or does it include also whatever signature text I've told my email program to append automatically? Lisi wrote: On Saturday 07 April 2012 20:44:43 Joey Hess wrote: If you're at least some of the time sending mail that is important to be reliably attributed to you, it *absolutely* makes sense to sign that mail. If you're signing some mail, you might as well sign all of it, as this will habituate people to expect your mail to be signed, and avoid you needing to decide what's important enough to sign. It also acts as a nice signal that you can handle encrypted mail, which needs to be used more widely. Yes, but not everyone signs in-line. You don't, for example. Lisi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f80ae10.40...@aya.yale.edu
Re: [OT] Posting styles
Scott Ferguson wrote: Please don't top-post. How hard is it to move the cursor? On 08/04/12 00:14, PMA wrote: snipped Nobody in signing thinks a signature is needed to identify him. Nobody? Are you serious? snipped Kind regards Not hard whatsoever. I'm afraid that, hearing so much talk here to the effect that there is no rule, I missed the apparently actual rule against top-posting! Your regards are *not* kind. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f80dc1f.10...@aya.yale.edu
Re: [OT] Posting styles -- Top vs Bottom
Camaleón wrote: On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 21:08:19 -0400, Celejar wrote: On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 17:55:31 +0200 Tony van der Hofft...@vanderhoff.org wrote: ... Before you started posting here, the polite thing to do would have been to read the list guidelines, and apply them. Seeing as you appear too intellectually challenged to find them for yourself, here is the link: http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMailingLists#Posting_Rules.2C_Guidelines.2C_and_Tips Under the heading Posting Rules, Guidelines, and Tips you'll see the entry: Respond in Interleaved style. Unnecessary quotes should be trimmed and a question should precede an answer. Isn't that adequately clear? It isn't a question of individual preferences, or your religious leanings, it's a list rule, to be obeyed by all correspondents, which exists for the elucication of all. To quote: Why all these rules? Busy people spend valuable time monitoring lists and responding to questions. The recommended practices make these activities more efficient and pleasant. I'm not sure who writes these rules, and what their exact authority is, but the page itself acknowledges that it does not constitute official information, and as others have noted, the official code of conduct does not specify posting style. Those rules (I prefer to see them as tips for good guidance) are written by all of us, people like you or me, that is, people who participate in the mailing lists. Should someone wants (again) to open the debate about the proper way of posting in a mailing list, I'd suggest doing a poll to see what the majority of the participants have to say about the matter. I will be more than happy to stick to what the most of the people wants. Greetings, Yes, and I'd suggest sending any future new subscriber a direct link to the rules/tips agreed to -- or even the actual document -- rather than insulting his intelligence later for not finding for himself. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f7863e9.6010...@aya.yale.edu
Re: [OT] Posting styles -- Top vs Bottom
Camaleón wrote: On Sun, 01 Apr 2012 10:19:21 -0400, PMA wrote: Camaleón wrote: On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 21:08:19 -0400, Celejar wrote: (...) I'm not sure who writes these rules, and what their exact authority is, but the page itself acknowledges that it does not constitute official information, and as others have noted, the official code of conduct does not specify posting style. Those rules (I prefer to see them as tips for good guidance) are written by all of us, people like you or me, that is, people who participate in the mailing lists. Should someone wants (again) to open the debate about the proper way of posting in a mailing list, I'd suggest doing a poll to see what the majority of the participants have to say about the matter. I will be more than happy to stick to what the most of the people wants. Yes, and I'd suggest sending any future new subscriber a direct link to the rules/tips agreed to -- or even the actual document -- rather than insulting his intelligence later for not finding for himself. Nobody has been insulted :-? Granted, no-one has screamed. I saw, BTW, only an unattributed quote, so don't know whose it was. I don't know what kind of information a user receives when is subscribed to the lists because I'm not subscribed, I just follow them, read and post (this is an open list, no need for subscription). Anyway, it's normal for mailing list newcomers to be unaware of these conventions, that's why I usually politely note that html formatted messages need to be avoided and also top-posting when I see a bad formatted post. Worth to remember that common sense is the best of the rules. Greetings, -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f78773e.20...@aya.yale.edu
Re: [OT] Posting styles -- Top vs Bottom
Fair enough -- mea culpa. Lisi wrote: On Sunday 01 April 2012 16:41:50 PMA wrote: Nobody has been insulted :-? Granted, no-one has screamed. I saw, BTW, only an unattributed quote, so don't know whose it was. In this case (as often!) you needed to have read the thread rather than reacting to an out of context quote. We have all, of course, done the latter. ;-) Lisi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f78830f.9090...@aya.yale.edu
Re: [OT] Posting styles -- Top vs Bottom
I've seen passionate debate on this issue, based mainly on disrupted expectation (as the Bottom guy opens the Top guy's email). Seems to me the important thing is for a given list to adopt one or the other style as standard *for the list*. Take a vote, asking, Which is more important: seeing the current message immediately (Top), or keeping the flow in one-direction (Bottom)? PMA P.S. ...unless, of course, a resolution would be less fun than the debate. Claudius Hubig wrote: Hello Mika, Mika Suomalainenmika.henrik.mai...@hotmail.com wrote: On 31.03.2012 12:04, Mihamina Rakotomandimby wrote: Especially when inline responding (bottom) and your loosy style is mixed? I already changed to bottom posting in Iceweasel and K9 mail. Thanks. Though one should also take the time to trim the previous mail to the parts one actually responds to. But isn't posting HTML also forbidden? Yes, although it is less of a problem for (most!) people, as their clients either display the text-only or the HTML version, so adding an HTML version ‘only’ increases the size of the email (by about 150%). Bad quoting styles, however, are always visible. Did I mention that asking for a return receipt for a mailing list post is kind of…strange? That is, do you really want all30k subscribed users to acknowledge the receipt of your post? Best regards, Claudius -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f771758.4030...@aya.yale.edu
Re: When will Debian 7.0 with Linux Kernel 3.x be Released?
amen Andrei POPESCU wrote: On Vi, 30 mar 12, 13:17:16, Teo En Ming (Zhang Enming) wrote: On 28/03/2012 16:04, Keith McKenzie wrote: On 28/03/12 01:37, Teo En Ming (Zhang Enming) wrote: I prize bleeding edge technology above stability and reliability. But of course I still want stability and reliability. The two are incompatible! Who says so. Experience :) Bleeding edge technology is not stable and reliable because humans don't design stuff that works perfectly the first time and by the time they have found the bugs the technology is not bleeding edge anymore. Kind regards, Andrei -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f75a7e8.8070...@aya.yale.edu
Re: Strange kernel issue with DVD drive -- or CD/CDR?
Hi List. This reminds me to ask: has Squeeze any history of disabling CD/CDR drives? The first time I tried mine after (some weeks after) installing Squeeze, one drive sounded bump and blinked -- as thought trying to eject -- but couldn't open, and then gave up. Now both drives act that way. Of course, they could just be shot, but I thought I'd field this question before ordering replacements. Thanks for any response. Pete Brad Alexander wrote: I recently upgraded my hardware from a Core2Duo to a Phenom II X4, with new mobo, RAM, video card, etc. I also reinstalled Debian, going from amd64 kernel with i386 userland to pure amd64. Everything is fine except for one thing I have noticed in my logs. I played a dvd in the drive early last week, and ever since, I have been seeing intermittent entries such as: Jan 19 07:56:02 defiant kernel: : [385376.894378] quiet_error: 7709 callbacks suppressed Jan 19 07:56:02 defiant kernel: : [385376.894380] Buffer I/O error on device sr0, logical block 183820 At the present (and when these errors were generated), there was no disk in the drive. This is the same DVD-RW drive and cable that I had in the old setup. It is IDE with an 80-wire cable, and there is such a slot on the motherboard. I had considered swapping out the cable, but it is in good shape. Does anyone have any other suggestions? There were no errors in playback on the DVD, so I'm not sure what this is. Ideas? --b -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f1aeee3.8020...@aya.yale.edu
Re: Csound5.15 ?
Andrei, My apologies! In some-or-other mental cranny I knew well that one can't just plunk new .deb packages into a Stable release. Meanwhile, I see that Squeeze's Csound version is 5.13, which will serve fine for awhile. No need for back- port (especially, burdening someone else with it). And I may well upgrade soon to Testing. Thanks for your feedback! Pete Andrei Popescu wrote: On Jo, 05 ian 12, 16:23:52, PMA wrote: Hi List. I see the Csound .deb is at version 5.12. Is an upgrade to 5.15 projected? Thanks, PMA Hi PMA, The only method for Debian stable to get newer versions is via backports (http://backports.debian.org), but only versions available in testing are considered (currently 5.14). If this is new enough for you you can try writing a message to debian-backports (CCing the maintainers at csound@p.d.o) and ask if someone is interested in providing and maintaining a backport. It helps if you can provide good reasons for the backport (e.g. what important features the newer version brings compared to the one in stable) or you are even prepared to do the backporting yourself. Another option would be to try to install the version from testing (with all possible problems) or even use testing completely. Kind regards, Andrei -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f0717c4.8010...@aya.yale.edu
Csound5.15 ?
Hi List. I see the Csound .deb is at version 5.12. Is an upgrade to 5.15 projected? Thanks, PMA -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f0614e8.3030...@aya.yale.edu
Re: OT programming languages/ systems for advanced applications on Linux
Yes, specifically at http://www.jsoftware.com/stable.htm, though I'd recommend linking from Getting Started on the Home page -- for overview, docs, labs Joel Rees wrote: On 12/25/11, PMApeterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu wrote: Rather than APL itself -- value judgement aside -- you might consider its successor and superset, *J* ( http://www.jsoftware.com/ ). Is there a package for that? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ef740dc.8010...@aya.yale.edu
Re: OT programming languages/ systems for advanced applications on Linux
Rather than APL itself -- value judgement aside -- you might consider its successor and superset, *J* ( http://www.jsoftware.com/ ). Miles Fidelman wrote: David Christensen wrote: Any other comments/ suggestions regarding programming languages/ systems for advanced applications on Linux? Lisp Smalltalk Erlang Haskell Caml/OCaml APL - if you're crazy or want to be; or you could go all the way to Brainfuck (http://esolangs.org/wiki/Brainfuck) for that matter, Ada, if you're writing mission-critical/safety-critical systems If you're really interested in programming languages: http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ef602f3.50...@aya.yale.edu
Fwd: Re: OT programming languages/ systems for advanced applications on Linux
Original Message Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Debian Forum comparing J to Brainf* Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2011 14:09:31 -0500 From: Marshall Lochbaum mwlochb...@gmail.com To: Programming forum programm...@jsoftware.com, peterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu Well, I'm not tired of this stuff quite yet, so here goes: Brainfuck and APL/J/K get compared a lot on account of being obfuscated. This is a bit unfair. The correct terms are, respectively, contorted and terse. There is one thing that the two languages share: they are each an attempt to get to the root of programming and SIMPLIFY the discipline. Each can be fully specified in a few pages, if you disregard the vocabulary used in an array language. However, the two have markedly difficult results. Coding in Brainfuck ends in long strings of or + , and true automation is impossible. On the other hand, J code is very compact, in part because it makes assignment very simple--no distinction is made between primitive and user-defined functions. Nonetheless, people complain that J or Brainfuck code is particularly complicated. Note the distinction between the language and code here. Brainfuck is a simple language with complicated code. We can't refer to the language as obfuscated, since that word refers to the addition of unnecessary detail, and Brainfuck does the opposite. However, the code is often obfuscated in the sense that it fails to abstract away details, and thus hinders a higher-level view of the program. Array languages do not suffer from this difficulty. In fact they are far more extensible than procedural languages, because they also allow functional manipulation. I think the word you are in fact looking for to describe these two languages is unfamiliar. This word places the blame where it lies--not on the language, but on the programmer! Given the functional languages in the list, I won't accuse you of being completely unknown to programming outside of the C paradigm, but most of the time when I hear similar complaints they're from people who think a piece of text is a program if and only if it contains the phrase for (int i=0; il; i++). Okay, J doesn't have a lot of words in it. Neither does ((-b) + sqrt(b^2-4*a*c))/(2*a). I submit that within a month of actual use, J code will seem clearer, better designed, and more useful than any other programming language, mathematical nomenclature included. I once had a friend tell me that if (x20) return true; else return false; was clearer than the J equivalent 20. I hope you can see past the unfamiliar syntax enough to know that that's false, and I hope you are open-minded enough to not make the same mistake about APL/J/K before knowing any of the language. Marshall On 12/24/2011 06:44 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote Any other comments/ suggestions regarding programming languages/ systems for advanced applications on Linux? Lisp Smalltalk Erlang Haskell Caml/OCaml APL - if you're crazy or want to be; or you could go all the way to Brainfuck (http://esolangs.org/wiki/Brainfuck) for that matter, Ada, if you're writing mission-critical/safety-critical systems -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ef6a04c.5040...@aya.yale.edu
Re: [OT] Re: Please kill the noise
Speaking for myself -- Sometimes an off-topic email perks my interest so powerfully that, defying all reason of course, I neglect to disassociate the off-topic from the topic that it was off. I shall try harder now in such situations to discipline my response. PA Weaver wrote: On Sat, 08 Oct 2011 17:26:24 -0500 Stan Hoeppners...@hardwarefreak.com wrote: On 10/8/2011 4:59 PM, Weaver wrote: It's a pity that's not the case, as I sometimes have a question regarding firewalls, etc and take it to the firewall list, yet the number of questions regarding firewalls I have seen on 'debian-user' probably far out-number those on 'firewall'. This probably means that the answer to a searcher's question exists, but they have been looking where the answer isn't. Since you are apparently unable to discern on your own what is and is not on topic, do you require someone to write a detailed list of everything possibly discussed on this planet, with a little star next to each that is on topic? I think the best answer to that is just to let it stand as it is. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e921bd4.9020...@aya.yale.edu
Re: Defending yourself
For hopefully my last remark on this thread, I urge that anybody's decision (to whom to reply) err rather on the side of courtesy than on its dismissal. Otherwise, for starters, your message will reduce to the power you feel in being untrustworthy. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4dcdc62d.2070...@aya.yale.edu
Re: Defending yourself
Actually Re: Posting Style (nevermind a new thread): It seems to me that bottom-posting is for people who want to read in one direction, while top-posting is for people who want to see the current message immediately. I am wedded to the latter by profession, game in any case for either, and willing to abide by a given list's rule, if it exists, for using which. PA It's hard to see a humble opinion (IMHO) in this, flatly denying the rule. Said the user that replied in a top-posting styled format -that I had to correct- while flagrantgly bypassing the last two points of the said rules. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4dcc79ab.3040...@aya.yale.edu
Re: Defending yourself
Sorry, i did not cc to the list: Chris Brennan wrote: On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 8:22 PM, PMApeterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu wrote: Actually Re: Posting Style (nevermind a new thread): It seems to me that bottom-posting is for people who want to read in one direction, while top-posting is for people who want to see the current message immediately. I am wedded to the latter by profession, game in any case for either, and willing to abide by a given list's rule, if it exists, for using which. PA This list and many others policy is to bottom-post. Regardless, can we please let this thread die in peace? Hear hear! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4dcc7f31.8020...@aya.yale.edu
Re: Fwd: Re: [OT] Re: Defending yourself
It's hard to see a humble opinion (IMHO) in this, flatly denying the rule. Camaleón wrote: On Wed, 11 May 2011 11:55:48 -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote: Lisi wrote: Do not quote messages that were sent to you by other people in private mail, unless agreed beforehand. IMHO, that rule lacks the following preface: Should a user states his/ her desire to keep a private conversation... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4dcb25c3.5090...@aya.yale.edu
Re: file systems
I'm missing a detail here. Was the assertion re FSCK specifically that XFS doesn't call this exec during boot, or was it that under XFS, FSCK can't be called at all? (And -- for whichever -- why so?) Ron Johnson wrote: On 04/26/2011 04:44 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote: Ron Johnson put forth on 4/26/2011 9:29 AM: On 04/26/2011 02:41 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote: I'm CC'ing back to debian-user as I believe others may find this information useful. Ron Johnson put forth on 4/25/2011 11:15 PM: Stan: Thus moving to EXT4 gains you nothing on a 32 bit machine, Ron: It gives me the ability to do a fsck! Only on rare occasions should one _need_ to run xfs_check or xfs_repair. Only one rare occasions should one *need* to change a tire. Yet we still carry one in the trunk/boot. [snip] The reason why you use a 32 bit system is irrelevant to me. Though up to this point I assumed we were discussing a server. Regardless, use 'xfs_repair -n instead of xfs_check and you should be good to go, again, assuming 'xfs_repair -n' doesn't run out of memory on your machine. As I expect storage capacity to do nothing but grow, I'm not going to take that chance. It seems strange to me that you're so adamant WRT ditching XFS on a whim due to a well known problem WRT which you seem to have performed little or zero basic research of your own. Silly me took for granted that you can fsck your fs. This is odd for someone who apparently uses a given piece of software in production, and such a critical piece at that. People don't normally chuck production filesystems, especially the best Linux filesystem, on a whim without at least doing some basic research into a problem. Don't ass-u-me. Business isn't the only reason that people have really large filesystems. Think HTPC. [snip] The first I recall seeing you mention this issue was in rebuttal to my evangelism of XFS. Strange, that. This saga likely prompts people to wonder about your motivations in this thread, and the validity of the information you've provided and claims you've made. My motivation is full disclosure. I originally created my two big file systems as xfs because I've seen many benchmarks showing how well it performs w/ big files. And it does. Really, Really Well. But not being able to fsck the fs that I just created is unacceptable. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4db75f4d.8060...@aya.yale.edu
Re: file systems
But just in point of fact if possible: What *is* XFS's position re FSCK -- just that it is excluded from the boot process, or that it can never be run? And for whichever, does XFS documentation offer a reason? (I'm not insensitive to this thread's mounting frustration; merely deranged enough to enjoy that.) Heddle Weaver wrote: On 27 April 2011 10:11, PMApeterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu wrote: I'm missing a detail here. Was the assertion re FSCK specifically that XFS doesn't call this exec during boot, or was it that under XFS, FSCK can't be called at all? (And -- for whichever -- why so?) No, it's because somebody asked advice concerning which filesystem was better and why. After that, Stan the Baptist emerged from the desert and required all of us to convert to XFS immediately. Unfortunately, some of us are free-thinkers and other heretics, but the luxury of putting us up against the wall and shooting us, after suitable torture techniques have been indulged in (which would be subject matter enough for another thread), has not, as yet, been approved of by the almighty and we are stuck with opposing points of view rather than eradicating them as in accordance with the aura of grace which some of us possess (I do not lay claim to this commodity for myself. I'm one of the advocates of free-will heresy). We are, instead, forced into the position of having to debate the situation and be guided by the element of informed free-will, rather than the dictates of modern concepts of theocracy. About sums it up. Welcome! Regards, Weaver. Ron Johnson wrote: On 04/26/2011 04:44 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote: Ron Johnson put forth on 4/26/2011 9:29 AM: On 04/26/2011 02:41 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote: I'm CC'ing back to debian-user as I believe others may find this information useful. Ron Johnson put forth on 4/25/2011 11:15 PM: Stan: Thus moving to EXT4 gains you nothing on a 32 bit machine, Ron: It gives me the ability to do a fsck! Only on rare occasions should one _need_ to run xfs_check or xfs_repair. Only one rare occasions should one *need* to change a tire. Yet we still carry one in the trunk/boot. [snip] The reason why you use a 32 bit system is irrelevant to me. Though up to this point I assumed we were discussing a server. Regardless, use 'xfs_repair -n instead of xfs_check and you should be good to go, again, assuming 'xfs_repair -n' doesn't run out of memory on your machine. As I expect storage capacity to do nothing but grow, I'm not going to take that chance. It seems strange to me that you're so adamant WRT ditching XFS on a whim due to a well known problem WRT which you seem to have performed little or zero basic research of your own. Silly me took for granted that you can fsck your fs. This is odd for someone who apparently uses a given piece of software in production, and such a critical piece at that. People don't normally chuck production filesystems, especially the best Linux filesystem, on a whim without at least doing some basic research into a problem. Don't ass-u-me. Business isn't the only reason that people have really large filesystems. Think HTPC. [snip] The first I recall seeing you mention this issue was in rebuttal to my evangelism of XFS. Strange, that. This saga likely prompts people to wonder about your motivations in this thread, and the validity of the information you've provided and claims you've made. My motivation is full disclosure. I originally created my two big file systems as xfs because I've seen many benchmarks showing how well it performs w/ big files. And it does. Really, Really Well. But not being able to fsck the fs that I just created is unacceptable. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4db75f4d.8060...@aya.yale.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4db76f2c.5010...@aya.yale.edu
Re: file systems
Wonder if Reiser's FS inspired his decision where to stash his wife. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4db17eb1.6030...@aya.yale.edu
Re: file systems
hmm. nevermind. Ron Johnson wrote: On 04/22/2011 08:12 AM, PMA wrote: Wonder if Reiser's FS inspired his decision where to stash his wife. In a tree? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4db1adac.2000...@aya.yale.edu
Fwd: Re: changing my e-mail address
Dear List, My cat, much enjoying this thread, would like to know: What please, referencing particular persons, is a 'git'? Thank you. P.A. Original Message Subject: Re: changing my e-mail address Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 19:48:55 + (UTC) Resent-From: debian-user@lists.debian.org Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 05:48:39 +1000 From: Heddle Weaver weaver2wo...@gmail.com To: Debian-User list debian-user@lists.debian.org On 18 April 2011 05:34, Jonathan Matthews cont...@jpluscplusm.com wrote: On 16 April 2011 18:39, Pierre Frenkiel pierre.frenk...@laposte.net wrote: On Sat, 16 Apr 2011, Lisi wrote: quote To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. /quote Have you tried this? You don't mention it. And did you read my post? The question was not how to unsubcribe?, but how to modify my address without doing unsubscribe/subscribe? What difference do you think there is between those 2 operations? Hint: none at all. It's curious that I got 5 replys, all about the PS, but not a single answer to my question ! Your question was boring as you self-answered in your original mail. Just do the damn unsubscribe/subscribe dance. If it causes you problems, please reconsider the wisdom of owning a complex bit of kit like your computer. Also, learn how to respond to people trying to help you with your questions whilst /not/ sounding like a git. If this is a secondary-language thing, hence you didn't otherwise realise it: your email, above, made you sound like a git. Stop that. Agreed! It carries on like an attention deficit disorder and qualifies as noise pollution. That's all I can see. The 'Newbie' tag others are attaching to it simply doesn't fit with its references to Ubuntu lists etc. It knows what the deal is. Do it. Anything that might have remotely resembled a valid question was answered some time ago, politely. If he chooses to persist in lunacy, it's time for the other. Sounds like the kind of idiot that would use toilet paper and then complain that it was soiled. Regards, Weaver. -- Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. — Lucius Annæus Seneca. Terrorism, the new religion. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4dab4b6d.7050...@aya.yale.edu
New Printer
Hi List. How soon may there be a Debian driver for the recently released Epson Stylus R3000? Thanks, Pete -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d951227.5020...@aya.yale.edu
Re: Lenny-to-Squeeze: ... and no net. (Sorry, reSending)
Andrei Popescu wrote: On Lu, 21 feb 11, 10:01:42, PMA wrote: I gather from docs that the problem was my ISDN connection which, after the reboot following install -udev, Squeeze simply disabled. I'm not sure what you mean here. httpd://www.debian.org/releases/stable/i386/ch02s01.en, just before Sec 2.1.6.1, says ISDN is supported, but not during the installation. So I've now on another box downloaded debian-6.0.0-i386-DVD-1-iso and cat'd it to a usb stick; then on my half-upgraded box mounted the stick on /media/usbdisk and edited /etc/apt/sources.list to say just deb file:/media/usbdisk stable main contrib And now I've run apt-get update, which responds Get:1 file: stable Release 900B [though] Ign file: ... [the specified components] At this point, can I safely proceed with apt-get dist-upgrade (the upgrade-doc's first command (4.4.6) after that reboot)? It's difficult to say, because I don't know if the first DVD has all the needed packages to upgrade your box to squeeze. Maybe you should post here the output of 'apt-get dist-upgrade -s' (-s means simulate). The DVD need only go far enough to re-establish net access. Once the install process finished, I'd continue via the net as originally intended. But in any case, I have switched tracks here: saved aside all my stuff, wiped the system disk clean, installed Squeeze from scratch via the stick, brought my stuff back -- and Voila!, everything works. It's tempting to think that this strategy -- where feasible, of course -- would also be preferable for anyone. Or maybe I was just lucky. Thanks for your caution. Pete Hope this helps, Andrei -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d6953d9.3020...@aya.yale.edu
Need to confirm re 'fstab', before rebooting my Squeeze
Hi List. I have installed Squeeze from scratch using a USB stick. The installer regarded that stick as /dev/sda. So the /etc/fstab that it installed lists my system disk (til now always /dev/sda) as /dev/sdb, and similarly my 2nd disk (til now /dev/sdb) as /dev/sdc. If I now run 'mount' (with USB stick removed), it names these devices as I had originally -- system disk '/dev/sda', secondary '/dev/sdb'. Meanwhile, /etc/fstab is specifying each device, not as either of those names, but as a mile-long UUID number. So my question: When I rebooting, can I safely assume that, because fstab is using UUIDs and not /dev/...(s), the system won't get confused? Thanks, Pete -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d696263.4040...@aya.yale.edu
Re: Need to confirm re 'fstab', before rebooting my Squeeze
Well, I've rebooted and come out alive. So the Squeeze installer's suggested GRUB destination, which I happily accepted, must have been /dev/sdb. Lucky me. For next time, thanks for this alert! Brian wrote: On Sat 26 Feb 2011 at 15:28:19 -0500, PMA wrote: So my question: When I rebooting, can I safely assume that, because fstab is using UUIDs and not /dev/...(s), the system won't get confused? One possible gotcha. When GRUB was installed where was it installed to? If it's to /dev/sda you may have a little remedial work to do! This caught me out a couple of times when I forgot to remove the USB stick at that stage of the install. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d69a6b6.9060...@aya.yale.edu
Re: Need to confirm re 'fstab', before rebooting my Squeeze
I have similar behaviour from a third disk, external USB, that gets auto-mounted on /media. Its partitions aren't named, and their order is messed up, so I just umount them all and call a little script that remounts them else- where on orderly named directories. Slicky Johnson wrote: On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 23:21:19 + Briana...@cityscape.co.uk wrote: On Sat 26 Feb 2011 at 15:28:19 -0500, PMA wrote: So my question: When I rebooting, can I safely assume that, because fstab is using UUIDs and not /dev/...(s), the system won't get confused? One possible gotcha. When GRUB was installed where was it installed to? If it's to /dev/sda you may have a little remedial work to do! This caught me out a couple of times when I forgot to remove the USB stick at that stage of the install. I didn't run into that. The installer correctly identified the root partition, MBR etc. I only was burned by the fact it listed /dev/sdb1 as a cdrom device in fstab, but /dev/sdb1 was basically behaving like one. So when a thumb was plugged in after the install had completed, it would fail to auto mount on my desktop as expected. Suppose a udev rule was confused. Mounting the device to a mount point by hand worked fine. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d69a8a4@aya.yale.edu
Re: Lenny-to-Squeeze: ... and no net. (Sorry, reSending)
On Sun, 2011-02-13 at 13:04 +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote: On Sb, 12 feb 11, 20:43:55, armst...@eskimo.com wrote: Hi List. In the midst of upgrading Lenny to Squeeze - specifically, upon reboot after installing the new kernel and udev - I find that: 1) My external hard drive, whose partitions Lenny had always happily mounted with fstab lines like /dev/sdc1 /mnt/u/0 auto rw,user,noauto 0 0, gets no mounts at all. Is this copy-pasted from fstab? FYI: the drive isn't completely ignored, as a kern.log line lists all its partitions; and I am able to mount each manually using the old syntax. Could you please post the relevant log lines and exact comand line that works Does Squeeze require upgraded fstab-entry parameters (in addition to the new device specification)? Or -- what else should I be asking? Device names may change from hda to sda and so, I'm not aware of other changes. 2) There is no net connection. (So I'm writing this from another computer.) And dmesg.0 now mentions Tigon3. Does this mean that I need to append contrib non-free after main in /etc/sources.list, and then re-execute apt-get upgrade? And then re-install both the new kernel and udev? This lacks a lot of information to be able to start guessing what's wrong and it would be better to start a separate thread about it. - MY APOLOGIES FOR RESENDING. Iceweasel mishandled a lot of my mail -- maybe this, maybe your reply. If you have responded already, please resend as well. (I've got Iceape Mail instead now, working ok.) Hi again, Andrei. I gather from docs that the problem was my ISDN connection which, after the reboot following install -udev, Squeeze simply disabled. So I've now on another box downloaded debian-6.0.0-i386-DVD-1-iso and cat'd it to a usb stick; then on my half-upgraded box mounted the stick on /media/usbdisk and edited /etc/apt/sources.list to say just deb file:/media/usbdisk stable main contrib And now I've run apt-get update, which responds Get:1 file: stable Release 900B [though] Ign file: ... [the specified components] At this point, can I safely proceed with apt-get dist-upgrade (the upgrade-doc's first command (4.4.6) after that reboot)? Thanks again for your time. Pete P.S. The missing mounts issue (stupid mistake of mine) is fixed. Please include at a minimum your /etc/network/interfaces (or mention if you use network-manager), the relevant lspci line, the relevant lines in dmesg and the output of 'ifconfig -a' and 'uname -a'. Regards, Andrei -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d627e56.3080...@aya.yale.edu
Re: the new apt-get recommendation
I have often read advice to the effect that it is best to choose *ONE* package-handling strategy (dpkg OR apt-get OR aptitude OR synaptic) and stick to it -- if only to ensure a consistent system representation of my package installations history. In preparing to install a given package, what would alert me that my strategy of choice -- whichever from above -- is NOT a good idea? Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 10:22:23AM -0500, Kete wrote: Hello, why have the authors of the Debian 6 release notes chosen to recommend apt-get? Just a few months ago, I read some other official documentation recommend aptitude. Why is Debian flip flopping? Now, I have to learn apt's commands, and already, an apt-cache search doesn't tell me which packages are installed. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201102051022.24027.k...@suddenlink.net Follow the instructions given for upgrades in the release notes and you should be fine. Crucially, you may need to upgrade kernel/dpkg/apt/aptitude _FIRST_ or do certain steps in order. That's normally how it goes. This may depend on appropriate dependency resolution and which of apt / aptitude resolves dependencies best or behaves best in a dist-upgrade situation. This doesn't mean that you have to use apt ever after, though you will find that both apt and aptitude now share common databases and play nicely together. Oh, and did I mention to read the release notes and follow them ? :) Hope this helps, AndyC -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d4d8a73.9020...@aya.yale.edu
Oh no, not partitioning again!
Hi List. I plan to install Squeeze pretty soon, and am reviewing my old decisions re disk partitioning. I will mainly resize proportionally to my 'df -k' output's Used column. But two items puzzle me: /srvI gather this is important to have, but I have yet to find anything *in* it. Will Squeeze put stuff in there if I haven't expressly told it too? /tmp As a rule of thumb -- i.e., special considerations notwithstanding -- what do you think of making this the same size as /var? Thanks in advance for your time! Regards, Pete -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d4b5737.4060...@aya.yale.edu
