Actually, it says that it cannot connect to the Wicd daemon, or something
to that effect.
Sorry,
Marc
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020, 9:52 PM Marc Shapiro wrote:
> Yes, that solved the issue. I installed elogind and libpam-elogind,
> rebooted and X now starts up for all three users.
>
> There is only
Yes, that solved the issue. I installed elogind and libpam-elogind,
rebooted and X now starts up for all three users.
There is only one issue. For only ONE of the three users, after X
starts, my dughter's login gets a popup that says the Wicd client cannot
be started, make sure the user is
On Sat, 19 Sep 2020 23:55:46 +0200
Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> ..devuan to the rescue? Norwegian ISP "Get" is ditching their email
> service and pointing their clients to a paid service, which again is
> pointing them to Gmail's ad laden services, drawing due scorn. [1]
To be brief;
It
Hi,
..devuan to the rescue? Norwegian ISP "Get" is ditching their email
service and pointing their clients to a paid service, which again is
pointing them to Gmail's ad laden services, drawing due scorn. [1]
..since we can do better, I'm thinking "Devuan Email Server Flavor"
sort of distro
il devuanizzato Marc Shapiro via Dng il 22-09-20 16:43:42
ha scritto:
I do use startx from a terminal login, so this sounds like it could be
the problem. I'll check it out when I get home, tonight and pass the
results to the list.
I installed xserver-xorg-legacy then:
chmod +s
Rick Moen [22.09.2020 20:11]:
>> I worry about a different kind of portability. If I ever have to switch
>> to BSD (and this remains a possibility, unfortunately), /bin/* shebangs
>> will not work except for /bin/sh, and /bin/sh is always ash. That is
>> because on BSD everything not in the core
Quoting Ian Zimmerman (i...@very.loosely.org):
> I worry about a different kind of portability. If I ever have to switch
> to BSD (and this remains a possibility, unfortunately), /bin/* shebangs
> will not work except for /bin/sh, and /bin/sh is always ash. That is
> because on BSD everything not
Quoting Peter Duffy (pe...@pwduffy.org.uk):
> With respect, I'd tend to disagree with that to some extent. The /bin/sh
> symlink is built in, and is there from the point that the system is
> installed.
That was a _second_ if lesser blunder (in that bash was, even at the
inception of Linux, a
On 2020-09-22 17:25, Antony Stone wrote:
> If you're writing portable scripts you don't want to rely on symlinks
> pointing to the same targets on everything.
>
> If your scripts aren't (intended to be) portable, then it really
> doesn't matter - do what you like in the privacy of your own
On 2020-09-22 11:21, Steve Litt wrote:
> I would never use Bash in a shellscript.
I think that's a bit too strong. Some scripting situations are a perfect
fit for the shell with the exception of one or two little features
missing in the POSIX shell but present in bash. My top examples would be
On 2020-09-22 11:10, Steve Litt wrote:
> Second, a more security-respecting solution is there might be a group,
> which your users can belong, that allows them to run X. Perhaps
> group video ??? I just looked at /usr/bin/Xorg on my Void box and it's
> not suid anything. I performed some ls
On Tuesday 22 September 2020 at 17:21:25, Steve Litt wrote:
> I would never use Bash in a shellscript. Therefore, do you think my
> shebang should just go straight to #!/bin/dash instead of #!/bin/sh ?
> That would certainly take the ambiguity out of it.
Yes.
If you're writing portable scripts
On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 10:53:15 +0100
Peter Duffy wrote:
> On Mon, 2020-09-21 at 18:07 -0700, Rick Moen wrote:
> > Quoting marc (marc...@welz.org.za):
> >
> > > Hmm - that might require some background: I'd venture that most of
> > > these scripts were written when sh was just a symlink to bash,
On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 10:33:12 +0100
Peter Duffy wrote:
> My main feeling was one of frustration: bash's new features were
> introduced as an improvement, not as a deliberate violation of
> standards. Ubuntu/Debian's defaulting to dash just seemed like an act
> of puritanism.
I wouldn't call it
On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 07:43:42 -0700
Marc Shapiro via Dng wrote:
> I do use startx from a terminal login
Me too, and usually without problems. However, I have always had to
add
needs_root_rights=yes
to /etc/X11/Xwrapper.config
And lately I cannot startx on three beowulf/xfce4 desktops, I
On Mon, 21 Sep 2020 19:36:33 -0700
Marc Shapiro via Dng wrote:
> Boot and login went fine. Starting Xorg, not so well. Tried all
> three users with no luck. This worked before the upgrade. Tried as
> root. Success! So root can start Xorg, but not an ordinary user.
> Any ideas what might be
I do use startx from a terminal login, so this sounds like it could be
the problem. I'll check it out when I get home, tonight and pass the
results to the list.
Thanks.
Marc
On 9/21/20 11:16 PM, wirelessduck--- via Dng wrote:
On 22 Sep 2020, at 12:36, Marc Shapiro via Dng
wrote:
I
On Mon, 2020-09-21 at 18:07 -0700, Rick Moen wrote:
> Quoting marc (marc...@welz.org.za):
>
> > Hmm - that might require some background: I'd venture that most of
> > these scripts were written when sh was just a symlink to bash, and
> > dash didn't exist, nevermind as a debian package.
>
> But
On Tue, 2020-09-22 at 02:20 +0200, marc wrote:
> > One thing about this which strikes me as a bit ironic is debian's use of
> > the dash shell, made to be POSIX-compliant, and so causing endless
> > problems for scripts using bash's additional non-POSIX functionality,
> > but not specifying bash
> On 22 Sep 2020, at 12:36, Marc Shapiro via Dng wrote:
>
> I have pretty much decided that there is no way to upgrade my Debian system
> to Buster and keep it usable without systemd. Since I am set up for
> multiboot, including Devuan Ascii, I decided to upgrade that to Beowulf and
> see
20 matches
Mail list logo
