Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Tom H]

On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 8:15 PM, Miroslav Rovis
 wrote:
> On 161229-05:13-0500, Tom H wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 1:53 PM, lee  wrote:
>> > Neil Bothwick  writes:

>> There are two ways to ensure that you always have the kernel's names:
>>
>> 1) Add "net.ifnames=0" to the kernel cmdline
>
> I use that all the time.
>
> Of course, I don't use the below, no poetterware in my machine:
>
>> 2) Override "NamePolicy=..." in "/lib/systemd/network/99-default.link"
>> with "NamePolicy=kernel" in "/etc/systemd/network/99-default.link".
>
> But I respect if anybody else wants it, let them have it, just, allow
> free speech, as you, _mostly_, do, id est, to tell people unintrusively
> what that SystemDisaster is...

It's too bad that the eudev maintainers didn't see fit to keep the
".link" units (they could've moved them to "/{etc,lib}/udev/network/"
if having "systemd" in a path's a no-no") because they make renaming a
NIC simpler.

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Rich Freeman]

On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 8:15 PM, Miroslav Rovis
 wrote:
>
> Thanks again to our developers who keep to the matchless Unix tradition,
> and allow such great choice in Gentoo (also to the other, poetterware
> side, as in choice, if you will)!
>

Well, the intent is to allow as much choice either way, though
sometimes upstream constraints get in the way of that.  As long as
somebody is willing to do the work necessary to keep a choice
reasonably viable we're not going to turn it away.  While we differ in
our preferences this is what ultimately unites us the most, IMO.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Miroslav Rovis]

On 161229-05:13-0500, Tom H wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 1:53 PM, lee  wrote:
> > Neil Bothwick  writes:
> >>
> There are two ways to ensure that you always have the kernel's names:
> 
> 1) Add "net.ifnames=0" to the kernel cmdline
I use that all the time.

Of course, I don't use the below, no poetterware in my machine:
> 2) Override "NamePolicy=..." in "/lib/systemd/network/99-default.link"
> with "NamePolicy=kernel" in "/etc/systemd/network/99-default.link".
> 

But I respect if anybody else wants it, let them have it, just, allow
free speech, as you, _mostly_, do, id est, to tell people unintrusively
what that SystemDisaster is...

And, I've been following this discussion, and firmly on the side which
wants to keep Gentoo in the beautiful Unix tradition, but...

I was wondering, since to get a reply about the original question is
pretty difficult
(
not all being open and available to know about it? Mozilla itself
actually uncertain about alsa/pulse in its future? whatever, cannot
spend anymore time on it, I moved, see below...
)
, and maybe 3 percent of the text in the thread was on topic
(
which is still:
from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0
)
and the rest was about other matters...

I was wondering why hasn't anybody finally changed that subject line. Some of
the emails of the thread are fine information, but like this, they are
completely misplaced on principle which is, the principle: the subject
line should be what the emails in a thread are about... And in this
thread they are not well over 90% of the emails!

(
I changed the subject line
when I departed, and the threat of imposition of Pulseaudio to Linux
users of Firefox has resulted in Pale Moon having a happy users and a
supporter, Mozilla, you should not have insisted on that stupid
impositions!...

My split thread subject lines are:
Reading the (SSL) traffic with Pale Moon
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gentoo/user/320799
( Message-ID: <20161218055009.GA11155@g0n.xdwgrp> )
and
Pale Moon Air-Gapped portage EAPI 6 Install
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gentoo/user/321074
( Message-ID: <20161223043823.GA9835@g0n.xdwgrp> )
)

Thanks again to our developers who keep to the matchless Unix tradition,
and allow such great choice in Gentoo (also to the other, poetterware
side, as in choice, if you will)!

-- 
Miroslav Rovis
Zagreb, Croatia
http://www.CroatiaFidelis.hr


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Tom H]

On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 1:53 PM, lee  wrote:
> Neil Bothwick  writes:
>>
>> There is nothing wrong with wanting things to work as you do, but it
>> requires input to do so. It you have to start editing files to make
>> it work properly, there is little point in making it the default.
>
> Right, and it could work without editing files manually. A
> configuration file assigning editable names to the annoying names
> could be created automatically and filled by assigning the name an
> interface already has to it (because when it has a name, the name is
> known, which is easier than trying to make up all possible names in
> advance). Then only if you wanted you would edit the configuration
> file to assign the name(s) of your choosing, and if you don't want to
> do that, you simply get the names you get now. There would be no
> change to how the names are now, only an additional option.
>
> That would also have the advantage that when the annoying name of an
> interface changes, you can choose to either adjust all configuration
> files in which you have specified a particular interface or simply
> adjust the one configuration file that assigns the names.

There are two ways to ensure that you always have the kernel's names:

1) Add "net.ifnames=0" to the kernel cmdline

2) Override "NamePolicy=..." in "/lib/systemd/network/99-default.link"
with "NamePolicy=kernel" in "/etc/systemd/network/99-default.link".

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Tom H]

On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 3:01 PM, lee  wrote:
> Tom H  writes:
>> AFAIK, you have three possibilities.
>>
>> 1) If you're renaming a NIC via its MAC address, you have to edit the
>> config file thatlinks the NIC's names and its MAC address.
>>
>> 2) If you're using udev's predictable names, the NIC'll have the same
>> (more or less complex) name if you use the same slot.
>>
>> 3) If you're using the kernel names, you have no guarantee that ethX
>> will be assigned to the same NIC at every bot.
>
> So there's no good option because names may change unless you make and
> maintain an assignment.  I wonder why that isn't the default ...

Because udev upstream chose to default to a setup without having to
edit config files for NIC names.

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Tom H]

On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 1:35 PM, lee  wrote:
> Tom H  writes:
>> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 9:07 PM, lee  wrote:
>>>
>>> How is that more reliable?
>>
>> It's more reliable than using the kernel's names because the names
>> won't change UNLESS there's kernel/driver/firmware change for that
>> NIC. I doubt that these changes occur that often. Perhaps someone else
>> knows.
>
> What happens more often: That a network card is replaced with a
> different one or that the software changes?

In my experience the former. But it's just my experience...

I've also not come across a kernel//driver/firmware change on a system.

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Tom H]

On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 3:48 AM, Jorge Almeida  wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 12:39 AM, Neil Bothwick  wrote:
>> On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 02:26:05 -0500, Tom H wrote:
>>>
>>> It's the best thing that the systemd developers have produced!
>>
>> Except they didn't produce it. They assimilated gummiboot, which I was
>> already using, into the systemd collective!
>
> Wasn't gummiboot the brain child of a certain systemd developer who
> got kicked off the kernel due to attitude issues?

AFAICT, Kay's last kernel submission was one year before Linus had
"that" rant about merging his code.

I'd also have been surprised if Kay had submitted something a few
months later and Linus had rejected it ; especially since Linus gave
himself an out by saying something like "until his attitude changes"
or something along these lines.

Re: mailer "module" for 'eselect news' (Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No)

[Neil Bothwick]

On Wed, 28 Dec 2016 17:20:50 +0100, lee wrote:

> > #!/bin/sh
> >
> > if [ $( eselect news count new ) != "0" ]; then
> >eselect news list | mail y...@wherever.you.are
> >fi  
> 
> Thanks!  To actually read the news as email, I wrote this:
> 
> #!/usr/bin/perl
[massive snip]

What does this actually do? Does it separate each news item into a
separate mail, which sounds a neat idea. If you just want all the news
news items, you could replace "list" with "read new" in my
script^H^H^H^H^^Hhack.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

 ... We are Dyslexics of Borg. Your ass will be laminated.


pgpXBwLN8pnIA.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

mailer "module" for 'eselect news' (Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No)

[lee]

Neil Bothwick  writes:

> On Tue, 27 Dec 2016 20:21:19 +0100, lee wrote:
>
>> >  Even more reasonable:
>> >
>> >  eselect news read new
>> >
>> > will only come up with the latest as yet unread news, rather than a
>> > long list which could have accumulated over the years.  
>> 
>> It seems to be clearing out the list automatically.
>> 
>> [1] says the mailer module of eselect was removed.  Is there a better
>> way to read them than with eselect?
>
> Put this script in /etc/portage/postsync.d and make it executable
>
> #!/bin/sh
>
> if [ $( eselect news count new ) != "0" ]; then
>eselect news list | mail y...@wherever.you.are
>fi

Thanks!  To actually read the news as email, I wrote this:


#!/usr/bin/perl
#
#
# This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
# it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
# the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
# (at your option) any later version.
#
# This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
# WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
# MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the GNU
# General Public License for more details.
#
# You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
# along with this program.  If not, see .
#
#
# You may need to emerge dev-perl/Email-MIME and dev-perl/Email-Sender
# for this to work.
#

use strict;
use warnings;
use Email::MIME;
use Email::Sender::Simple qw(sendmail);


 configure this 

my @rcpt = ('l...@yagibdah.de');
my $from = 'r...@yagibdah.de';
my $subj = 'eselect news';
#
# you can set this to 0 to get an email for every news item
#
my $msglen = 65536;

#
# set to 1 to get only items listed as new
#
my $only_new = 1;

 / configure this ###


my @list = qx/eselect news list/;
my @numbers = $only_new ? map(m/\A\s*\[(\d+)\]\s*N\s*\d/, @list) : map(m/\A\s*\[(\d+)\]/, @list);
my $content = join('', @list) . "\n" . ('#' x 70) . "\n\n";
undef @list;

foreach (@numbers) {
  my $do = "eselect news read $_";
  $content .= qx/$do/;
  $content .= "\n" . ('#' x 70) . "\n\n";

  if (length($content) > $msglen) {
my $message = Email::MIME->create(
  header_str => [
		 From=> $from,
		 To  => @rcpt,
		 Subject => $subj
		],
  attributes => {
		 encoding => 'quoted-printable',
		 charset  => 'UTF-8'
		},
  body_str => $content
 );
sendmail($message);

$content = '';
  }
}

if (length($content)) {
  my $message = Email::MIME->create(
header_str => [
		   From=> $from,
		   To  => @rcpt,
		   Subject => $subj
		  ],
attributes => {
		   encoding => 'quoted-printable',
		   charset  => 'UTF-8'
		  },
body_str => $content
   );
  sendmail($message);
}


exit 0;

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Kai Peter]

On 2016-12-27 21:31, Neil Bothwick wrote:


Put this script in /etc/portage/postsync.d and make it executable

#!/bin/sh

if [ $( eselect news count new ) != "0" ]; then
   eselect news list | mail y...@wherever.you.are
   fi


Nice hint, really. I did a similar thing in my emerge wrapper script, 
but this looks more efficient. Thanks.

(Btw, knowing all about portage/emerge isn't a high priority by me ;))

--
Sent with eQmail-1.10-dev

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Neil Bothwick]

On Tue, 27 Dec 2016 19:53:47 +0100, lee wrote:

> > I would imagine because it cannot be used without some initial
> > configuration. The default provides the greatest reliability out of
> > the box, at the expense of less readable (which is not the same as
> > unrecognisable, a value judgement you are imposing on the names)
> > names.  
> 
> I call them unrecognisable because they are hard to recognise, as in
> hard to read and impossible to remember.  I find that annoying.  I can
> call them "annoying names" if you prefer that :)

I do, or "difficult to remember" or "cryptic", but they are not
unrecognisable - except to those that wish them to be.
 
> > There is nothing wrong with wanting things to work as you do, but it
> > requires input to do so. It you have to start editing files to make it
> > work properly, there is little point in making it the default.  
> 
> Right, and it could work without editing files manually.  A
> configuration file assigning editable names to the annoying names could
> be created automatically and filled by assigning the name an interface
> already has to it (because when it has a name, the name is known, which
> is easier than trying to make up all possible names in advance).  Then
> only if you wanted you would edit the configuration file to assign the
> name(s) of your choosing, and if you don't want to do that, you simply
> get the names you get now.  There would be no change to how the names
> are now, only an additional option.
> 
> That would also have the advantage that when the annoying name of an
> interface changes, you can choose to either adjust all configuration
> files in which you have specified a particular interface or simply
> adjust the one configuration file that assigns the names.
> 
> I actually wonder why they didn't virtualise the names.  It makes too
> much sense for not to do it, and you could do likewise with other
> devices (especially disks).

That's a reasonable approach, and you could have the ebuild set it up
with a USE flag. All it takes is for someone that cares enough about it
to do something.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

I have seen the truth, and it makes no sense.


pgpi_cPQaXuTe.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Neil Bothwick]

On Tue, 27 Dec 2016 20:21:19 +0100, lee wrote:

> >  Even more reasonable:
> >
> >  eselect news read new
> >
> > will only come up with the latest as yet unread news, rather than a
> > long list which could have accumulated over the years.  
> 
> It seems to be clearing out the list automatically.
> 
> [1] says the mailer module of eselect was removed.  Is there a better
> way to read them than with eselect?

Put this script in /etc/portage/postsync.d and make it executable

#!/bin/sh

if [ $( eselect news count new ) != "0" ]; then
   eselect news list | mail y...@wherever.you.are
   fi


-- 
Neil Bothwick

To most people solutions mean finding the answers.  But to chemists
solutions are things that are still all mixed up.


pgp_SE676b14D.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Mick]

On Tuesday 27 Dec 2016 20:21:19 lee wrote:
> Mick  writes:
> > On Tuesday 27 Dec 2016 08:21:53 lee wrote:
> >> Rich Freeman  writes:
> >> > On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 5:47 PM, lee  wrote:
> >> >> Yes, and that doesn't show me news before I sync, or does it?
> >> > 
> >> > Correct.
> >> > 
> >> > The order to do this in is:
> >> > 
> >> > Sync
> >> > Read news.
> >> > Apply updates.
> >> 
> >> sounds reasonable
> > 
> > Even more reasonable:
> >  eselect news read new
> > 
> > will only come up with the latest as yet unread news, rather than a long
> > list which could have accumulated over the years.
> 
> It seems to be clearing out the list automatically.
> 
> [1] says the mailer module of eselect was removed.  Is there a better
> way to read them than with eselect?
> 
> 
> [1]: https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/eselect.git/plain/NEWS

Unless you're running some script to sync portage and emerge, when you 
synchronise portage manually with emerge --sync, it will let you know if there 
are any new news items before you start emerging any packages.  You could get 
portage to email you all elogs, but I am not sure if this will also email you 
any news items - I've never used this feature.  It may require your own script 
to do it.
-- 
Regards,
Mick

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[lee]

Alan McKinnon  writes:

> On 27/12/2016 01:02, lee wrote:
>> Alan McKinnon  writes:
>> 
>>> On 26/12/2016 21:42, lee wrote:
 Well, I guess you haven't realised yet that reality doesn't exist.
 Bubbles are a self-imposed limit for those who believe in reality.
 You probably hit that wall and now try hard to remain confined.

 Unfortunately, this won't make sense to you until you come to realise.
>>>
>>>
>>> I *strongly* recommend you cease insulting people's intelligence on this
>>> list.
>> 
>> It was not my intention to do that, and if I did, I apologize.
>> 
>> Different people realise different things.  There are many things I will
>> never realise and others I have.  There are things I won't understand
>> before I have realised what is necessary to realise to understand them.
>> Finding that someone won't understand something before they have
>> realised something doesn't insult anyones intelligence.
>
>
> OK.
>
> I think you need to step back a little and apply the above to this
> situation. By that I mean how you are interacting with others, not the
> various questions about systemd, how many NICs a board has in general
> and so on.
>
> The results you are getting are far from optimum - you may eventually
> get an answer that satisfies you but in general it is involving long
> winding threads that frustrate others.
>
> So I suggest you apply reason and investigation to determine why that
> might be so.
>
> One highly workable method is when you find yourself taking a contrary
> position and about to explain why you think what you think, then reverse
> it. Instead, state that you disagree, that you think something else and
> invite the other to explain why they are saying what they are saying.
> This method has high success in revealing to you what it is you have to
> realise first, as you mention above)
>
>
>> 
>> 
>>> This list (gentoo-user) contains the brightest minds, widest range of
>>> experience (both CS-related and just generally in life), most articulate
>>> and surprisingly, most tolerant, bunch of people I have ever come across
>>> online; and I've been here for 10 years and doing online for 20+ years
>>> and the above is not meant idly.
>>>
>>> I can't watch you type and I can't get in your headspace but based just
>>> on what I read from you, your communications say something that is
>>> frankly, very insulting to those individuals. There is no need to
>>> disparage someone else just because their frame of reference differs
>>> from yours.
>>>
>>> Alan
>>>
>>> p.s. You have a very long way to go still before you begin to match
>>> Dale's contributions here.
>> 
>> So this is supposed to be a competition?
>
> No, it's about people and how people communicate concepts and ideas.
> It's about how Dale is a long term contributor and people generally
> think well of him and how statistically he is right more often than he
> is wrong. He's worth paying attention to.

I see what you mean.  Dale must be pretty annoyed by me.

Sorry, Dale.

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[lee]

Neil Bothwick  writes:

> On Mon, 26 Dec 2016 21:01:22 +0100, lee wrote:
>
>> > AFAIK, you have three possibilities.
>> >
>> > 1) If you're renaming a NIC via its MAC address, you have to edit the
>> > config file thatlinks the NIC's names and its MAC address.
>> >
>> > 2) If you're using udev's predictable names, the NIC'll have the same
>> > (more or less complex) name if you use the same slot.
>> >
>> > 3) If you're using the kernel names, you have no guarantee that ethX
>> > will be assigned to the same NIC at every bot.  
>> 
>> So there's no good option because names may change unless you make and
>> maintain an assignment.  I wonder why that isn't the default ...
>
> I would imagine because it cannot be used without some initial
> configuration. The default provides the greatest reliability out of the
> box, at the expense of less readable (which is not the same as
> unrecognisable, a value judgement you are imposing on the names) names.

I call them unrecognisable because they are hard to recognise, as in
hard to read and impossible to remember.  I find that annoying.  I can
call them "annoying names" if you prefer that :)

> There is nothing wrong with wanting things to work as you do, but it
> requires input to do so. It you have to start editing files to make it
> work properly, there is little point in making it the default.

Right, and it could work without editing files manually.  A
configuration file assigning editable names to the annoying names could
be created automatically and filled by assigning the name an interface
already has to it (because when it has a name, the name is known, which
is easier than trying to make up all possible names in advance).  Then
only if you wanted you would edit the configuration file to assign the
name(s) of your choosing, and if you don't want to do that, you simply
get the names you get now.  There would be no change to how the names
are now, only an additional option.

That would also have the advantage that when the annoying name of an
interface changes, you can choose to either adjust all configuration
files in which you have specified a particular interface or simply
adjust the one configuration file that assigns the names.

I actually wonder why they didn't virtualise the names.  It makes too
much sense for not to do it, and you could do likewise with other
devices (especially disks).

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[lee]

Mick  writes:

> On Tuesday 27 Dec 2016 08:21:53 lee wrote:
>> Rich Freeman  writes:
>> > On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 5:47 PM, lee  wrote:
>> >> Yes, and that doesn't show me news before I sync, or does it?
>> > 
>> > Correct.
>> > 
>> > The order to do this in is:
>> > 
>> > Sync
>> > Read news.
>> > Apply updates.
>> 
>> sounds reasonable
>
> Even more reasonable:
>
>  eselect news read new
>
> will only come up with the latest as yet unread news, rather than a long list 
> which could have accumulated over the years.

It seems to be clearing out the list automatically.

[1] says the mailer module of eselect was removed.  Is there a better
way to read them than with eselect?


[1]: https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/eselect.git/plain/NEWS

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Neil Bothwick]

On Mon, 26 Dec 2016 21:01:22 +0100, lee wrote:

> > AFAIK, you have three possibilities.
> >
> > 1) If you're renaming a NIC via its MAC address, you have to edit the
> > config file thatlinks the NIC's names and its MAC address.
> >
> > 2) If you're using udev's predictable names, the NIC'll have the same
> > (more or less complex) name if you use the same slot.
> >
> > 3) If you're using the kernel names, you have no guarantee that ethX
> > will be assigned to the same NIC at every bot.  
> 
> So there's no good option because names may change unless you make and
> maintain an assignment.  I wonder why that isn't the default ...

I would imagine because it cannot be used without some initial
configuration. The default provides the greatest reliability out of the
box, at the expense of less readable (which is not the same as
unrecognisable, a value judgement you are imposing on the names) names.

There is nothing wrong with wanting things to work as you do, but it
requires input to do so. It you have to start editing files to make it
work properly, there is little point in making it the default.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

GOTO: (n.) an efficient and general way of controlling a program, much
despised by academics and others whose brains have been ruined by
overexposure to Pascal.


pgp5fSFWYrnWV.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Mick]

On Tuesday 27 Dec 2016 08:21:53 lee wrote:
> Rich Freeman  writes:
> > On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 5:47 PM, lee  wrote:
> >> Yes, and that doesn't show me news before I sync, or does it?
> > 
> > Correct.
> > 
> > The order to do this in is:
> > 
> > Sync
> > Read news.
> > Apply updates.
> 
> sounds reasonable

Even more reasonable:

 eselect news read new

will only come up with the latest as yet unread news, rather than a long list 
which could have accumulated over the years.

-- 
Regards,
Mick

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Alan McKinnon]

On 27/12/2016 01:02, lee wrote:
> Alan McKinnon  writes:
> 
>> On 26/12/2016 21:42, lee wrote:
>>> Well, I guess you haven't realised yet that reality doesn't exist.
>>> Bubbles are a self-imposed limit for those who believe in reality.
>>> You probably hit that wall and now try hard to remain confined.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, this won't make sense to you until you come to realise.
>>
>>
>> I *strongly* recommend you cease insulting people's intelligence on this
>> list.
> 
> It was not my intention to do that, and if I did, I apologize.
> 
> Different people realise different things.  There are many things I will
> never realise and others I have.  There are things I won't understand
> before I have realised what is necessary to realise to understand them.
> Finding that someone won't understand something before they have
> realised something doesn't insult anyones intelligence.


OK.

I think you need to step back a little and apply the above to this
situation. By that I mean how you are interacting with others, not the
various questions about systemd, how many NICs a board has in general
and so on.

The results you are getting are far from optimum - you may eventually
get an answer that satisfies you but in general it is involving long
winding threads that frustrate others.

So I suggest you apply reason and investigation to determine why that
might be so.

One highly workable method is when you find yourself taking a contrary
position and about to explain why you think what you think, then reverse
it. Instead, state that you disagree, that you think something else and
invite the other to explain why they are saying what they are saying.
This method has high success in revealing to you what it is you have to
realise first, as you mention above)


> 
> 
>> This list (gentoo-user) contains the brightest minds, widest range of
>> experience (both CS-related and just generally in life), most articulate
>> and surprisingly, most tolerant, bunch of people I have ever come across
>> online; and I've been here for 10 years and doing online for 20+ years
>> and the above is not meant idly.
>>
>> I can't watch you type and I can't get in your headspace but based just
>> on what I read from you, your communications say something that is
>> frankly, very insulting to those individuals. There is no need to
>> disparage someone else just because their frame of reference differs
>> from yours.
>>
>> Alan
>>
>> p.s. You have a very long way to go still before you begin to match
>> Dale's contributions here.
> 
> So this is supposed to be a competition?

No, it's about people and how people communicate concepts and ideas.
It's about how Dale is a long term contributor and people generally
think well of him and how statistically he is right more often than he
is wrong. He's worth paying attention to.

-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[lee]

Alan McKinnon  writes:

> On 26/12/2016 20:35, lee wrote:
>> Tom H  writes:
>> 
>>> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 9:07 PM, lee  wrote:
 Tom H  writes:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Daniel Frey  wrote:
>>
>> It is even more frustrating that these so-called predictable network
>> names actually can change on a reboot, it's happened to me more than
>> once when multiple network cards are detected in a different order.
>
> >From Kay Sievers in [1]:
>
> 
> Btw, predictable means it will not change between reboots, that names
> will not depend on enumeration order within the same setup. It does
> not mean or promise, that added kernel/driver/firmware features will
> not result in different names. That is expected behavior.
> 
>
> [1] 
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2015-October/034614.html

 So the names will not change when rebooting and are to be expected to
 possibly change at any time.

 How is that more reliable?
>>>
>>> It's more reliable than using the kernel's names because the names
>>> won't change UNLESS there's kernel/driver/firmware change for that
>>> NIC. I doubt that these changes occur that often. Perhaps someone else
>>> knows.
>> 
>> What happens more often:  That a network card is replaced with a
>> different one or that the software changes?
>> 
>
>
> OK, let me try explain this again.
>
> NIC names are tricky, several posters (myself included) have laid out
> various methods and options by which it can be done. Experience shows
> that in real life the simple traditional names are easy to remember but
> prone to changing and (worse) prone to race conditions. Other methods
> change less often in reality but the names are somewhat trickier to
> remember.
>
> Opinions on these things differ; experience on these things differ and
> people's use cases on these things differ greatly. A coder working in
> this area has to decide what sort of cases they want to support, what
> problems they want to attempt to solve and what new features they want
> to introduce; then they have to write the code.
>
> Once the code is written, the coder then has to decide what nomenclature
> to use when describing the software and the effects it has. In this case
> centered around systemd a word was chosen: "reliable".
>
> Some will think it's a good name, some don't care, some will think it's
> a bad name; and all of those things are basically irrelevant because the
> name doesn't tell you much abut what the software will do. Reading the
> fine manual will tell you that. It's all a part of being human because
> our languages are imprecise, heavily overloaded and hugely redundant. So
> are our spellings. But we are stuck with it because that's the general
> emergent behaviour of a homo sapiens brain.
>
> Arguing abut this is about as nonsensical as arguing about whether "lee"
> is a good handle on a forum or not. To a pedant it's a bad name, one
> can't tell if you are male, female or if it's actually an Asian family
> name
>
> Or one could do what most folk do, and not see a problem with 3 letters

I agree.

What I don't agree with is that unrecognisable names generally make
things easier (though they can, depending on the circumstances).

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[lee]

Rich Freeman  writes:

> On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 5:47 PM, lee  wrote:
>>
>> Yes, and that doesn't show me news before I sync, or does it?
>>
>
> Correct.
>
> The order to do this in is:
>
> Sync
> Read news.
> Apply updates.

sounds reasonable

> Syncing doesn't affect anything other than /usr/portage (or wherever
> you're keeping it).

Well, kinda?  When you emerge something after syncing, a newer version
might be picked than otherwise?

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Rich Freeman]

On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 5:47 PM, lee  wrote:
>
> Yes, and that doesn't show me news before I sync, or does it?
>

Correct.

The order to do this in is:

Sync
Read news.
Apply updates.

Syncing doesn't affect anything other than /usr/portage (or wherever
you're keeping it).

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[lee]

Alan McKinnon  writes:

> On 26/12/2016 20:24, lee wrote:
>> Rich Freeman  writes:
>> 
>>> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 8:52 PM, lee  wrote:

 I didn't see portage or anything else give me any instructions or
 warnings about this.  The names just suddenly changed, and that screwed
 things up.

>>>
>>> https://www.gentoo.org/support/news-items/2013-03-29-udev-upgrade.html
>>>
>>> This shows up in eselect news list (and so on), and portage will tell
>> 
>> I never use that because I find it very awkward.  Why doesn't portage
>> just send me the news by email?
>
> It will if you set it up that way.

Oh I should do that then.

> It's not a default because portage
> doesn't know your email address (unless you want to deliver mail locally
> to root's mbox)

It could simply ask me.  Now I need to figure out how to make it send
mails.

>>> you when you have unread news items.  Note that it only shows up if
>>> you have >>
>>> Generally you want to read those BEFORE you go installing packages,
>>> since it may pertain to a package you're about to update.
>> 
>> Updating usually affects over 200 packages.  What's a good way to read
>> the news in advance?
>
> I think you are conflating news with something else, perhaps elogs. Rich
> means to run "eselect news list".

Yes, and that doesn't show me news before I sync, or does it?

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[lee]

Alan McKinnon  writes:

> On 26/12/2016 21:42, lee wrote:
>> Well, I guess you haven't realised yet that reality doesn't exist.
>> Bubbles are a self-imposed limit for those who believe in reality.
>> You probably hit that wall and now try hard to remain confined.
>> 
>> Unfortunately, this won't make sense to you until you come to realise.
>
>
> I *strongly* recommend you cease insulting people's intelligence on this
> list.

It was not my intention to do that, and if I did, I apologize.

Different people realise different things.  There are many things I will
never realise and others I have.  There are things I won't understand
before I have realised what is necessary to realise to understand them.
Finding that someone won't understand something before they have
realised something doesn't insult anyones intelligence.


> This list (gentoo-user) contains the brightest minds, widest range of
> experience (both CS-related and just generally in life), most articulate
> and surprisingly, most tolerant, bunch of people I have ever come across
> online; and I've been here for 10 years and doing online for 20+ years
> and the above is not meant idly.
>
> I can't watch you type and I can't get in your headspace but based just
> on what I read from you, your communications say something that is
> frankly, very insulting to those individuals. There is no need to
> disparage someone else just because their frame of reference differs
> from yours.
>
> Alan
>
> p.s. You have a very long way to go still before you begin to match
> Dale's contributions here.

So this is supposed to be a competition?

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Dale]

lee wrote:
> Dale  writes:
>
>> lee wrote:
>>> Dale  writes:
>>>
 lee wrote:

>>> Well, I guess you haven't realised yet that reality doesn't exist.
>>> Bubbles are a self-imposed limit for those who believe in reality.
>>> You probably hit that wall and now try hard to remain confined.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, this won't make sense to you until you come to realise.
>>>
>>>
>> So, because you THINK two ports is the default, then it is even when you
>> can't post a single thing to back it up?  Keep in mind, I researched
>> this and posted how I did it.  That research does NOT support what you
>> THINK.  The sooner you realize that just because you think something is
>> the default doesn't make it so, the better for you it will be.  As I
>> also pointed out, I'm not the only one who says you are wrong.  To this
>> point, no one else has posted to support your claim either. 
>>
>> To put it bluntly, two ports is NOT the default and never has been
>> either.  Based on the research I did, it isn't even going to be the
>> default anytime soon.  You are wrong, period.  Until you can post a fact
>> that backs up your claim, you are wrong.  I've said it, others have said
>> it and yet you are still posting something as fact even when proven to
>> be wrong. 
>>
>> Whether you call it a bubble or call it cow crap, you are not posting
>> facts or even a informed opinion.  I call it BS.  Let me know when you
>> can post some facts to back up your claim. 
> Like I said, it doesn't make sense to you.
>
>


Because it isn't true or accurate.  It only makes sense if you want to
ignore facts and what is really out in the world being sold and used. 
Again, it is not just me that says this.  Others have posted the same as
me.  It's you who needs to use some sense. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Alan McKinnon]

On 26/12/2016 20:35, lee wrote:
> Tom H  writes:
> 
>> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 9:07 PM, lee  wrote:
>>> Tom H  writes:
 On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Daniel Frey  wrote:
>
> It is even more frustrating that these so-called predictable network
> names actually can change on a reboot, it's happened to me more than
> once when multiple network cards are detected in a different order.

 >From Kay Sievers in [1]:

 
 Btw, predictable means it will not change between reboots, that names
 will not depend on enumeration order within the same setup. It does
 not mean or promise, that added kernel/driver/firmware features will
 not result in different names. That is expected behavior.
 

 [1] 
 https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2015-October/034614.html
>>>
>>> So the names will not change when rebooting and are to be expected to
>>> possibly change at any time.
>>>
>>> How is that more reliable?
>>
>> It's more reliable than using the kernel's names because the names
>> won't change UNLESS there's kernel/driver/firmware change for that
>> NIC. I doubt that these changes occur that often. Perhaps someone else
>> knows.
> 
> What happens more often:  That a network card is replaced with a
> different one or that the software changes?
> 


OK, let me try explain this again.

NIC names are tricky, several posters (myself included) have laid out
various methods and options by which it can be done. Experience shows
that in real life the simple traditional names are easy to remember but
prone to changing and (worse) prone to race conditions. Other methods
change less often in reality but the names are somewhat trickier to
remember.

Opinions on these things differ; experience on these things differ and
people's use cases on these things differ greatly. A coder working in
this area has to decide what sort of cases they want to support, what
problems they want to attempt to solve and what new features they want
to introduce; then they have to write the code.

Once the code is written, the coder then has to decide what nomenclature
to use when describing the software and the effects it has. In this case
centered around systemd a word was chosen: "reliable".

Some will think it's a good name, some don't care, some will think it's
a bad name; and all of those things are basically irrelevant because the
name doesn't tell you much abut what the software will do. Reading the
fine manual will tell you that. It's all a part of being human because
our languages are imprecise, heavily overloaded and hugely redundant. So
are our spellings. But we are stuck with it because that's the general
emergent behaviour of a homo sapiens brain.

Arguing abut this is about as nonsensical as arguing about whether "lee"
is a good handle on a forum or not. To a pedant it's a bad name, one
can't tell if you are male, female or if it's actually an Asian family
name

Or one could do what most folk do, and not see a problem with 3 letters

-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[lee]

Dale  writes:

> lee wrote:
>> Dale  writes:
>>
>>> lee wrote:
 Dale  writes:

> lee wrote:
>> Dale  writes:
>>
>>> lee wrote:
 Dale  writes:

 I didn't go look at boards I had around here.  I went to a major
 computer supplier, newegg, and looked at what they had.  Go back and
 read again what I did and maybe read it more carefully. 

 Might I also add, it's more than just me that has pointed out that you
 are not correct on this.  It's a few others as well.  You ever stop to
 think that what you observe is not the normal and certainly not the
 default?  If what you claim was even remotely accurate, newegg would
 have had a lot larger number of boards with two ports on it.  Thing is,
 they didn't.  Kai pointed out that the same is true in Europe.  
 Why would I assume that what someone else observes is a default?
 Besides, I don't see what problem you're having with this.


>>> Then why would what you observe also be claimed to be the default?   As
>>> I also pointed out, it's not just what I observe, it's what I and others
>>> have observed as well.  So far, you are the only person claiming that
>>> two ports on a home user board is the default.  I have not seen anyone
>>> else post that you are correct.  Others have posted that you are not
>>> correct tho. 
>>>
>>> The problem is, you claim that having two ports is the default.  It is
>>> not the default.  I've said it, even researched it and explained how I
>>> researched it, others have also posted the same point.  Just because you
>>> have boards with two ports does not mean it is a default.  Given the
>>> research I did, it isn't even close.  Boards with two ports for a home
>>> user is not only not the default, it's somewhat rare.  Out of the top 72
>>> boards I checked, only a couple or so had two ports.  That is far from
>>> being the default.  That is quite rare.  Even if it was 5 boards, that
>>> would be under 10%.  That is hardly something to call a default.  If it
>>> were say 50%, then one could at least argue that the default is moving
>>> to having two ports.  It's just not the case. 
>>>
>>> The sooner you figure that out the better for you. 
>> And eating rice is the default because so many people do it ...
>>
>> .
>>
> You can claim that having two ports is the default but that isn't
> supported by a single fact.  As I said, the only person who thinks it is
> a default is you.  The default would be set by the manufacturers.  Since
> what is manufactured has to be sold, one good way to find out what the
> default is, go look at what is being sold.  When you see something that
> is common, like say four USB ports, then that is the default.  Another
> example, if most all boards have five PCI-e slots, then that is the
> default.  If you want six slots, seven slots or more, then you are
> likely going to pay extra and have fewer buying options because that is
> not the default. 
>
> Using your logic, no one eats rice since so much of it is grown and
> sold.  If rice was not grown and not sold, then your logic would work. 
> So, your post doesn't even make sense.  The manufacturers of boards by a
> large margin puts one ethernet port on a home use board and even most
> office computers only need one port.  If one goes and looks at what is
> being manufactured and sold, they would be able to see that.  Of course,
> some people can't see it even when several people post the facts.  It
> seems some will never get the idea. 
 Rice is not eaten much around here, so it's not the default type of
 food.

 Besides, people buy what is being manufactured.  If all boards were
 manufactured with 4 ports, it wouldn't stop ppl from buying them, and if
 no rice was grown, it wouldn't stop ppl from eating (if sufficient
 quantities of other types of food were available).


>>> Rice isn't eaten much around here either.  That IS NOT the point tho. 
>> By way of your argumentation, it's still the default food.  You're
>> saying you aren't eating it much.  I would have to conclude that you're
>> living in a bubble outside of reality.
>>
>> Or I could simply acknowledge that you have a different default.
>>
>>> The point is that having two ports is not the default.  As I said
>>> before, if what you claim were even remotely true, then board sellers
>>> would be listing boards with two ports by huge numbers.  They are not. 
>>> It is rare even.  Well under 10%, likely less than 5%.  That is FAR from
>>> being a default.  Anyone claiming otherwise is delusional. 
>>>
>>> Given your other posts, I've 

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Alan McKinnon]

On 26/12/2016 21:42, lee wrote:
> Well, I guess you haven't realised yet that reality doesn't exist.
> Bubbles are a self-imposed limit for those who believe in reality.
> You probably hit that wall and now try hard to remain confined.
> 
> Unfortunately, this won't make sense to you until you come to realise.


I *strongly* recommend you cease insulting people's intelligence on this
list.

This list (gentoo-user) contains the brightest minds, widest range of
experience (both CS-related and just generally in life), most articulate
and surprisingly, most tolerant, bunch of people I have ever come across
online; and I've been here for 10 years and doing online for 20+ years
and the above is not meant idly.

I can't watch you type and I can't get in your headspace but based just
on what I read from you, your communications say something that is
frankly, very insulting to those individuals. There is no need to
disparage someone else just because their frame of reference differs
from yours.

Alan

p.s. You have a very long way to go still before you begin to match
Dale's contributions here.

-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Alan McKinnon]

On 26/12/2016 20:24, lee wrote:
> Rich Freeman  writes:
> 
>> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 8:52 PM, lee  wrote:
>>>
>>> I didn't see portage or anything else give me any instructions or
>>> warnings about this.  The names just suddenly changed, and that screwed
>>> things up.
>>>
>>
>> https://www.gentoo.org/support/news-items/2013-03-29-udev-upgrade.html
>>
>> This shows up in eselect news list (and so on), and portage will tell
> 
> I never use that because I find it very awkward.  Why doesn't portage
> just send me the news by email?

It will if you set it up that way. It's not a default because portage
doesn't know your email address (unless you want to deliver mail locally
to root's mbox)

>> you when you have unread news items.  Note that it only shows up if
>> you have >
>> Generally you want to read those BEFORE you go installing packages,
>> since it may pertain to a package you're about to update.
> 
> Updating usually affects over 200 packages.  What's a good way to read
> the news in advance?

I think you are conflating news with something else, perhaps elogs. Rich
means to run "eselect news list".


-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Dale]

lee wrote:
> Dale  writes:
>
>> lee wrote:
>>> Dale  writes:
>>>
 lee wrote:
> Dale  writes:
>
>> lee wrote:
>>> Dale  writes:
>>>
>>> I didn't go look at boards I had around here.  I went to a major
>>> computer supplier, newegg, and looked at what they had.  Go back and
>>> read again what I did and maybe read it more carefully. 
>>>
>>> Might I also add, it's more than just me that has pointed out that you
>>> are not correct on this.  It's a few others as well.  You ever stop to
>>> think that what you observe is not the normal and certainly not the
>>> default?  If what you claim was even remotely accurate, newegg would
>>> have had a lot larger number of boards with two ports on it.  Thing is,
>>> they didn't.  Kai pointed out that the same is true in Europe.  
>>> Why would I assume that what someone else observes is a default?
>>> Besides, I don't see what problem you're having with this.
>>>
>>>
>> Then why would what you observe also be claimed to be the default?   As
>> I also pointed out, it's not just what I observe, it's what I and others
>> have observed as well.  So far, you are the only person claiming that
>> two ports on a home user board is the default.  I have not seen anyone
>> else post that you are correct.  Others have posted that you are not
>> correct tho. 
>>
>> The problem is, you claim that having two ports is the default.  It is
>> not the default.  I've said it, even researched it and explained how I
>> researched it, others have also posted the same point.  Just because you
>> have boards with two ports does not mean it is a default.  Given the
>> research I did, it isn't even close.  Boards with two ports for a home
>> user is not only not the default, it's somewhat rare.  Out of the top 72
>> boards I checked, only a couple or so had two ports.  That is far from
>> being the default.  That is quite rare.  Even if it was 5 boards, that
>> would be under 10%.  That is hardly something to call a default.  If it
>> were say 50%, then one could at least argue that the default is moving
>> to having two ports.  It's just not the case. 
>>
>> The sooner you figure that out the better for you. 
> And eating rice is the default because so many people do it ...
>
> .
>
 You can claim that having two ports is the default but that isn't
 supported by a single fact.  As I said, the only person who thinks it is
 a default is you.  The default would be set by the manufacturers.  Since
 what is manufactured has to be sold, one good way to find out what the
 default is, go look at what is being sold.  When you see something that
 is common, like say four USB ports, then that is the default.  Another
 example, if most all boards have five PCI-e slots, then that is the
 default.  If you want six slots, seven slots or more, then you are
 likely going to pay extra and have fewer buying options because that is
 not the default. 

 Using your logic, no one eats rice since so much of it is grown and
 sold.  If rice was not grown and not sold, then your logic would work. 
 So, your post doesn't even make sense.  The manufacturers of boards by a
 large margin puts one ethernet port on a home use board and even most
 office computers only need one port.  If one goes and looks at what is
 being manufactured and sold, they would be able to see that.  Of course,
 some people can't see it even when several people post the facts.  It
 seems some will never get the idea. 
>>> Rice is not eaten much around here, so it's not the default type of
>>> food.
>>>
>>> Besides, people buy what is being manufactured.  If all boards were
>>> manufactured with 4 ports, it wouldn't stop ppl from buying them, and if
>>> no rice was grown, it wouldn't stop ppl from eating (if sufficient
>>> quantities of other types of food were available).
>>>
>>>
>> Rice isn't eaten much around here either.  That IS NOT the point tho. 
> By way of your argumentation, it's still the default food.  You're
> saying you aren't eating it much.  I would have to conclude that you're
> living in a bubble outside of reality.
>
> Or I could simply acknowledge that you have a different default.
>
>> The point is that having two ports is not the default.  As I said
>> before, if what you claim were even remotely true, then board sellers
>> would be listing boards with two ports by huge numbers.  They are not. 
>> It is rare even.  Well under 10%, likely less than 5%.  That is FAR from
>> being a default.  Anyone claiming otherwise is delusional. 
>>
>> Given your other posts, I've come to the conclusion that you are truly
>> living in a world that is not based on reality.  You live is some bubble
>> that you 

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[lee]

Dale  writes:

> lee wrote:
>> Dale  writes:
>>
>>> lee wrote:
 Dale  writes:

> lee wrote:
>> Dale  writes:
>>
>> I didn't go look at boards I had around here.  I went to a major
>> computer supplier, newegg, and looked at what they had.  Go back and
>> read again what I did and maybe read it more carefully. 
>>
>> Might I also add, it's more than just me that has pointed out that you
>> are not correct on this.  It's a few others as well.  You ever stop to
>> think that what you observe is not the normal and certainly not the
>> default?  If what you claim was even remotely accurate, newegg would
>> have had a lot larger number of boards with two ports on it.  Thing is,
>> they didn't.  Kai pointed out that the same is true in Europe.  
>> Why would I assume that what someone else observes is a default?
>> Besides, I don't see what problem you're having with this.
>>
>>
> Then why would what you observe also be claimed to be the default?   As
> I also pointed out, it's not just what I observe, it's what I and others
> have observed as well.  So far, you are the only person claiming that
> two ports on a home user board is the default.  I have not seen anyone
> else post that you are correct.  Others have posted that you are not
> correct tho. 
>
> The problem is, you claim that having two ports is the default.  It is
> not the default.  I've said it, even researched it and explained how I
> researched it, others have also posted the same point.  Just because you
> have boards with two ports does not mean it is a default.  Given the
> research I did, it isn't even close.  Boards with two ports for a home
> user is not only not the default, it's somewhat rare.  Out of the top 72
> boards I checked, only a couple or so had two ports.  That is far from
> being the default.  That is quite rare.  Even if it was 5 boards, that
> would be under 10%.  That is hardly something to call a default.  If it
> were say 50%, then one could at least argue that the default is moving
> to having two ports.  It's just not the case. 
>
> The sooner you figure that out the better for you. 
 And eating rice is the default because so many people do it ...

 .

>>> You can claim that having two ports is the default but that isn't
>>> supported by a single fact.  As I said, the only person who thinks it is
>>> a default is you.  The default would be set by the manufacturers.  Since
>>> what is manufactured has to be sold, one good way to find out what the
>>> default is, go look at what is being sold.  When you see something that
>>> is common, like say four USB ports, then that is the default.  Another
>>> example, if most all boards have five PCI-e slots, then that is the
>>> default.  If you want six slots, seven slots or more, then you are
>>> likely going to pay extra and have fewer buying options because that is
>>> not the default. 
>>>
>>> Using your logic, no one eats rice since so much of it is grown and
>>> sold.  If rice was not grown and not sold, then your logic would work. 
>>> So, your post doesn't even make sense.  The manufacturers of boards by a
>>> large margin puts one ethernet port on a home use board and even most
>>> office computers only need one port.  If one goes and looks at what is
>>> being manufactured and sold, they would be able to see that.  Of course,
>>> some people can't see it even when several people post the facts.  It
>>> seems some will never get the idea. 
>> Rice is not eaten much around here, so it's not the default type of
>> food.
>>
>> Besides, people buy what is being manufactured.  If all boards were
>> manufactured with 4 ports, it wouldn't stop ppl from buying them, and if
>> no rice was grown, it wouldn't stop ppl from eating (if sufficient
>> quantities of other types of food were available).
>>
>>
>
> Rice isn't eaten much around here either.  That IS NOT the point tho. 

By way of your argumentation, it's still the default food.  You're
saying you aren't eating it much.  I would have to conclude that you're
living in a bubble outside of reality.

Or I could simply acknowledge that you have a different default.

> The point is that having two ports is not the default.  As I said
> before, if what you claim were even remotely true, then board sellers
> would be listing boards with two ports by huge numbers.  They are not. 
> It is rare even.  Well under 10%, likely less than 5%.  That is FAR from
> being a default.  Anyone claiming otherwise is delusional. 
>
> Given your other posts, I've come to the conclusion that you are truly
> living in a world that is not based on reality.  You live is some bubble
> that you have created where what you think is the only option.  You,
> even when shown facts, can not accept anything 

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[lee]

Tom H  writes:

> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 9:07 PM, lee  wrote:
>> Tom H  writes:
>>> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Daniel Frey  wrote:

 It is even more frustrating that these so-called predictable network
 names actually can change on a reboot, it's happened to me more than
 once when multiple network cards are detected in a different order.
>>>
From Kay Sievers in [1]:
>>>
>>> 
>>> Btw, predictable means it will not change between reboots, that names
>>> will not depend on enumeration order within the same setup. It does
>>> not mean or promise, that added kernel/driver/firmware features will
>>> not result in different names. That is expected behavior.
>>> 
>>>
>>> [1] 
>>> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2015-October/034614.html
>>
>> So the names will not change when rebooting and are to be expected to
>> possibly change at any time.
>>
>> How is that more reliable?
>
> It's more reliable than using the kernel's names because the names
> won't change UNLESS there's kernel/driver/firmware change for that
> NIC. I doubt that these changes occur that often. Perhaps someone else
> knows.

What happens more often:  That a network card is replaced with a
different one or that the software changes?

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[lee]

Rich Freeman  writes:

> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 8:52 PM, lee  wrote:
>>
>> I didn't see portage or anything else give me any instructions or
>> warnings about this.  The names just suddenly changed, and that screwed
>> things up.
>>
>
> https://www.gentoo.org/support/news-items/2013-03-29-udev-upgrade.html
>
> This shows up in eselect news list (and so on), and portage will tell

I never use that because I find it very awkward.  Why doesn't portage
just send me the news by email?

> you when you have unread news items.  Note that it only shows up if
> you have 
> Generally you want to read those BEFORE you go installing packages,
> since it may pertain to a package you're about to update.

Updating usually affects over 200 packages.  What's a good way to read
the news in advance?


> The original news item was less detailed, and IMO probably a bit
> easier to read.  Additional stuff was added to it later from the looks
> of it.  It isn't hard to read per-se, but there is a lot more going on
> in it.
>
> If you want to disable predictable network names then that is covered in #4.

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[lee]

Tom H  writes:

> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 8:57 PM, lee  wrote:
>> Tom H  writes:
>
>
>>> [1] There's no need to learn/use the udev rules syntax. I use the
>>> following in "/etc/systemd/network/" on a Debian 8 system with
>>> sysvinit-as-pid1:
>>>
>>> [Match]
>>> MACAddress=can't_be_bothered_to_look_it_up
>>> [Link]
>>> Name=en0
>>
>> Thanks!
>
> You're welcome.
>
>
>> What happens when you replace the card with another one that has a
>> different MAC? Shouldn't an assignment like this rather go by the
>> unrecognisable name? I'd find that more consistent.
>
> AFAIK, you have three possibilities.
>
> 1) If you're renaming a NIC via its MAC address, you have to edit the
> config file thatlinks the NIC's names and its MAC address.
>
> 2) If you're using udev's predictable names, the NIC'll have the same
> (more or less complex) name if you use the same slot.
>
> 3) If you're using the kernel names, you have no guarantee that ethX
> will be assigned to the same NIC at every bot.

So there's no good option because names may change unless you make and
maintain an assignment.  I wonder why that isn't the default ...

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Michael Mol]

On Tuesday, December 20, 2016 7:12:14 PM EST Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On 20/12/2016 19:04, Tanstaafl wrote:
> > On 12/19/2016 1:15 PM, lee  wrote:
> >> "Walter Dnes"  writes:
> >>> Similarly, the vast majority of home users have a machine with one
> >>> ethernet port, and in the past it's always been eth0.
> >> 
> >> Since 10 years or so, the default is two ports.
> > 
> > Not sure where you buy your machines, but that is simply wrong. The vast
> > majority of *home* users machines are single port machines.
> 
> and every rack server I've bought or worked on in the last 10 years has
> been quad-nic

My DL160s have 2x1GbE NICs each and a 1GbE NIC for OOB access, while my DL360s 
have 4x1GbE NICs and the single for OOB access. My old BL460cs had 2x1GbE 
connectivity.

But as far as home hardware, most pre-assembled home desktops I've seen any 
given year since 1998or so, have come with a single Ethernet port. The 
motherboards available for self-assembled PCs have usually had 2x1GbE since 
roughly 2005, IIRC.

So, enthusiast systems (who else builds their own?) will usually have a pair 
of Ethernet ports, while the cheap desktop systems will usually only have a 
single port.

Most casual user home desktop systems, IME, have been getting replaced with 
laptops and tablets, though, so you could argue that the home desktops that 
remain, over time, have tended more and more to be the self-assembled or 
enthusiast-built systems, and thus you tend to see desktop systems with 
multiple Ethernet ports more than with singles.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Neil Bothwick]

On Sat, 24 Dec 2016 10:50:53 -0500, Tom H wrote:

> >> I'm also a heretic who uses the systemd bootloader no matter what
> >> pid1 is in charge.
> >>
> >> It's the best thing that the systemd developers have produced!  
> >
> > Except they didn't produce it. They assimilated gummiboot, which I was
> > already using, into the systemd collective!  
> 
> Wasn't Kay Sievers one of the two gummiboot developers? (Along with
> Harald  of dracut fame.)

I had been unaware of that. But it was developed away from systemd
originally - maybe here was a conspiracy to add it to the systemd
collective all along ;-)

I was using gummiboot before I tried systemd.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Marriage is a relationship in which one person
is always right and the other is a husband


pgp2wuL4PQVWz.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Dale]

lee wrote:
> Dale  writes:
>
>> lee wrote:
>>> Dale  writes:
>>>
 lee wrote:
> Dale  writes:
>
> I didn't go look at boards I had around here.  I went to a major
> computer supplier, newegg, and looked at what they had.  Go back and
> read again what I did and maybe read it more carefully. 
>
> Might I also add, it's more than just me that has pointed out that you
> are not correct on this.  It's a few others as well.  You ever stop to
> think that what you observe is not the normal and certainly not the
> default?  If what you claim was even remotely accurate, newegg would
> have had a lot larger number of boards with two ports on it.  Thing is,
> they didn't.  Kai pointed out that the same is true in Europe.  
> Why would I assume that what someone else observes is a default?
> Besides, I don't see what problem you're having with this.
>
>
 Then why would what you observe also be claimed to be the default?   As
 I also pointed out, it's not just what I observe, it's what I and others
 have observed as well.  So far, you are the only person claiming that
 two ports on a home user board is the default.  I have not seen anyone
 else post that you are correct.  Others have posted that you are not
 correct tho. 

 The problem is, you claim that having two ports is the default.  It is
 not the default.  I've said it, even researched it and explained how I
 researched it, others have also posted the same point.  Just because you
 have boards with two ports does not mean it is a default.  Given the
 research I did, it isn't even close.  Boards with two ports for a home
 user is not only not the default, it's somewhat rare.  Out of the top 72
 boards I checked, only a couple or so had two ports.  That is far from
 being the default.  That is quite rare.  Even if it was 5 boards, that
 would be under 10%.  That is hardly something to call a default.  If it
 were say 50%, then one could at least argue that the default is moving
 to having two ports.  It's just not the case. 

 The sooner you figure that out the better for you. 
>>> And eating rice is the default because so many people do it ...
>>>
>>> .
>>>
>> You can claim that having two ports is the default but that isn't
>> supported by a single fact.  As I said, the only person who thinks it is
>> a default is you.  The default would be set by the manufacturers.  Since
>> what is manufactured has to be sold, one good way to find out what the
>> default is, go look at what is being sold.  When you see something that
>> is common, like say four USB ports, then that is the default.  Another
>> example, if most all boards have five PCI-e slots, then that is the
>> default.  If you want six slots, seven slots or more, then you are
>> likely going to pay extra and have fewer buying options because that is
>> not the default. 
>>
>> Using your logic, no one eats rice since so much of it is grown and
>> sold.  If rice was not grown and not sold, then your logic would work. 
>> So, your post doesn't even make sense.  The manufacturers of boards by a
>> large margin puts one ethernet port on a home use board and even most
>> office computers only need one port.  If one goes and looks at what is
>> being manufactured and sold, they would be able to see that.  Of course,
>> some people can't see it even when several people post the facts.  It
>> seems some will never get the idea. 
> Rice is not eaten much around here, so it's not the default type of
> food.
>
> Besides, people buy what is being manufactured.  If all boards were
> manufactured with 4 ports, it wouldn't stop ppl from buying them, and if
> no rice was grown, it wouldn't stop ppl from eating (if sufficient
> quantities of other types of food were available).
>
>

Rice isn't eaten much around here either.  That IS NOT the point tho. 
The point is that having two ports is not the default.  As I said
before, if what you claim were even remotely true, then board sellers
would be listing boards with two ports by huge numbers.  They are not. 
It is rare even.  Well under 10%, likely less than 5%.  That is FAR from
being a default.  Anyone claiming otherwise is delusional. 

Given your other posts, I've come to the conclusion that you are truly
living in a world that is not based on reality.  You live is some bubble
that you have created where what you think is the only option.  You,
even when shown facts, can not accept anything that doesn't fit in your
little bubble. 

You posted that two ports is the default.  Others and myself posted that
is not correct.  I even went to the trouble to prove it.  Yet here you
are still posting that it is when you have yet to post a SINGLE fact to
back up what you claim.  I posted how I researched it and did so in a
way that you should be able to do the same, and see 

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[lee]

Neil Bothwick  writes:

> On Sat, 24 Dec 2016 02:52:54 +0100, lee wrote:
>
>> >> I only know what the names are when I can look them up when the
>> >> computer is running.  I don't call that "predictable".  
>
> That's because you are using a different definition of predictable from
> that intended.

I'm not using a definition but understanding.  If you are about
definitions, then you should invent a new word by using the intended
definition and call the unrecognisable names by your new word.

>> > If they are constructed according to specific rules, they are
>> > predictable, by definition.  
>> 
>> You're overlooking that you need to know exactly, in advance, what the
>> rules are applied to, and all the rules, for having a chance that your
>> prediction turns out to be correct.
>
> So how do you write udev rules to rename ports without knowing the
> specifics of the hardware?

I don't.

> How do you know which port will be eth0 and which will be eth1 the first
> time you boot if you use no renaming?

I don't, I only know that they will be called eth0 and eth1.  With
unrecognisable names, I don't know anything.

> I really don't see your objection to a setting that, while a default, is
> trivial to change, even before you boot the installed distro for the
> first time. It is clearly useful to others, otherwise they would not have
> invested time and effort in implementing. If, in doing so, they had ruled
> out all alternatives, you would have a point. Those alternative are still
> there, so all you are doing is whining.

That's the usual method of calling something "whining" when someone has
run out of arguments and/or doesn't understand what someone else is
saying.

> No one has taken away your choice to do things how you see fit, why do
> you want to do the same for others.
>
> The choices are there, why not just use the one you want and leave others
> to use what they want.

Where did I say that anyone must use particular names for their network
interfaces?

It's the other way round in that the unrecognisable names have been
forced upon everyone because they were made the default.  You can either
use them or change them, and both requires additional work.  Why wasn't
the extra work forced upon those who want to use the unrecognisable
names?

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[lee]

Alan McKinnon  writes:

> On 24/12/2016 03:52, lee wrote:
>> Neil Bothwick  writes:
>> 
>>> On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 04:15:50 +0100, lee wrote:
>>>
> There are no config files to edit with the predictable names, the
> names are created from the physical location of the port.  That's why
> they are called predictable,  

 I only know what the names are when I can look them up when the computer
 is running.  I don't call that "predictable".
>>>
>>> If they are constructed according to specific rules, they are
>>> predictable, by definition.
>> 
>> You're overlooking that you need to know exactly, in advance, what the
>> rules are applied to, and all the rules, for having a chance that your
>> prediction turns out to be correct.  Provided you know all that, you can
>> predict the universe, assuming that everything always goes according to
>> rules.  You can not prove that it does and only disprove that it does
>> when you find a case in which it doesn't.  So what's your definition and
>> your predictions worth?
>
> You keep mis-defining what "predictable" means in this context. It does
> not mean, in the style of Newton, that you will always know everything
> about it. Neither is it the same meaning as prediction in the context of
> a scientific theory.
>
> "prediction" here simply means that the interface name is guaranteed to
> be the same as it was on last boot, and the somewhat random nature of
> kernael names (ethX, wlanX) is not in play.
>
> It does NOT mean that you are guaranteed to know exactly what an
> interface will be called before you boot it for the first time.
>
> Rename "predictable names" to "already known names" if it makes you feel
> better. There's nothing wrong with this definition of predictable, as it
> satisfies it's own rules and is consistent within itself. It is not
> complete though but we already know that from Godel.
>
> As long as you keep trying to apply the wrong meaning of predictable to
> this situation, you will keep typing mails like this one I'm replying to
> where you argue about something that is not even there. You also can't
> realistically argue about what "predictable" means because like almost
> all human concepts it is not a singularity, rather it is a spectrum
> where it means what the author says it means.
>
> And the quote for that meaning has already been posted in this thread
> somewhere.

Seriously?

Predicting something means to tell something in advance.  You are trying
to defend a wrong usage of language here.

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[lee]

Dale  writes:

> lee wrote:
>> Dale  writes:
>>
>>> lee wrote:
 Dale  writes:

 I didn't go look at boards I had around here.  I went to a major
 computer supplier, newegg, and looked at what they had.  Go back and
 read again what I did and maybe read it more carefully. 

 Might I also add, it's more than just me that has pointed out that you
 are not correct on this.  It's a few others as well.  You ever stop to
 think that what you observe is not the normal and certainly not the
 default?  If what you claim was even remotely accurate, newegg would
 have had a lot larger number of boards with two ports on it.  Thing is,
 they didn't.  Kai pointed out that the same is true in Europe.  
 Why would I assume that what someone else observes is a default?
 Besides, I don't see what problem you're having with this.


>>> Then why would what you observe also be claimed to be the default?   As
>>> I also pointed out, it's not just what I observe, it's what I and others
>>> have observed as well.  So far, you are the only person claiming that
>>> two ports on a home user board is the default.  I have not seen anyone
>>> else post that you are correct.  Others have posted that you are not
>>> correct tho. 
>>>
>>> The problem is, you claim that having two ports is the default.  It is
>>> not the default.  I've said it, even researched it and explained how I
>>> researched it, others have also posted the same point.  Just because you
>>> have boards with two ports does not mean it is a default.  Given the
>>> research I did, it isn't even close.  Boards with two ports for a home
>>> user is not only not the default, it's somewhat rare.  Out of the top 72
>>> boards I checked, only a couple or so had two ports.  That is far from
>>> being the default.  That is quite rare.  Even if it was 5 boards, that
>>> would be under 10%.  That is hardly something to call a default.  If it
>>> were say 50%, then one could at least argue that the default is moving
>>> to having two ports.  It's just not the case. 
>>>
>>> The sooner you figure that out the better for you. 
>> And eating rice is the default because so many people do it ...
>>
>> .
>>
>
> You can claim that having two ports is the default but that isn't
> supported by a single fact.  As I said, the only person who thinks it is
> a default is you.  The default would be set by the manufacturers.  Since
> what is manufactured has to be sold, one good way to find out what the
> default is, go look at what is being sold.  When you see something that
> is common, like say four USB ports, then that is the default.  Another
> example, if most all boards have five PCI-e slots, then that is the
> default.  If you want six slots, seven slots or more, then you are
> likely going to pay extra and have fewer buying options because that is
> not the default. 
>
> Using your logic, no one eats rice since so much of it is grown and
> sold.  If rice was not grown and not sold, then your logic would work. 
> So, your post doesn't even make sense.  The manufacturers of boards by a
> large margin puts one ethernet port on a home use board and even most
> office computers only need one port.  If one goes and looks at what is
> being manufactured and sold, they would be able to see that.  Of course,
> some people can't see it even when several people post the facts.  It
> seems some will never get the idea. 

Rice is not eaten much around here, so it's not the default type of
food.

Besides, people buy what is being manufactured.  If all boards were
manufactured with 4 ports, it wouldn't stop ppl from buying them, and if
no rice was grown, it wouldn't stop ppl from eating (if sufficient
quantities of other types of food were available).

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Rich Freeman]

On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 8:52 PM, lee  wrote:
>
> I didn't see portage or anything else give me any instructions or
> warnings about this.  The names just suddenly changed, and that screwed
> things up.
>

https://www.gentoo.org/support/news-items/2013-03-29-udev-upgrade.html

This shows up in eselect news list (and so on), and portage will tell
you when you have unread news items.  Note that it only shows up if
you have 

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Tom H]

On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 3:39 AM, Neil Bothwick  wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 02:26:05 -0500, Tom H wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't use grub on UEFI systems, but I use the systemd bootloader,
>>> so I thought I'd keep quiet about that ;-)
>>
>> I'm also a heretic who uses the systemd bootloader no matter what pid1
>> is in charge.
>>
>> It's the best thing that the systemd developers have produced!
>
> Except they didn't produce it. They assimilated gummiboot, which I was
> already using, into the systemd collective!

Wasn't Kay Sievers one of the two gummiboot developers? (Along with
Harald  of dracut fame.)

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Tom H]

On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 9:07 PM, lee  wrote:
> Tom H  writes:
>> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Daniel Frey  wrote:
>>>
>>> It is even more frustrating that these so-called predictable network
>>> names actually can change on a reboot, it's happened to me more than
>>> once when multiple network cards are detected in a different order.
>>
>>>From Kay Sievers in [1]:
>>
>> 
>> Btw, predictable means it will not change between reboots, that names
>> will not depend on enumeration order within the same setup. It does
>> not mean or promise, that added kernel/driver/firmware features will
>> not result in different names. That is expected behavior.
>> 
>>
>> [1] 
>> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2015-October/034614.html
>
> So the names will not change when rebooting and are to be expected to
> possibly change at any time.
>
> How is that more reliable?

It's more reliable than using the kernel's names because the names
won't change UNLESS there's kernel/driver/firmware change for that
NIC. I doubt that these changes occur that often. Perhaps someone else
knows.

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Tom H]

On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 8:57 PM, lee  wrote:
> Tom H  writes:


>> [1] There's no need to learn/use the udev rules syntax. I use the
>> following in "/etc/systemd/network/" on a Debian 8 system with
>> sysvinit-as-pid1:
>>
>> [Match]
>> MACAddress=can't_be_bothered_to_look_it_up
>> [Link]
>> Name=en0
>
> Thanks!

You're welcome.


> What happens when you replace the card with another one that has a
> different MAC? Shouldn't an assignment like this rather go by the
> unrecognisable name? I'd find that more consistent.

AFAIK, you have three possibilities.

1) If you're renaming a NIC via its MAC address, you have to edit the
config file thatlinks the NIC's names and its MAC address.

2) If you're using udev's predictable names, the NIC'll have the same
(more or less complex) name if you use the same slot.

3) If you're using the kernel names, you have no guarantee that ethX
will be assigned to the same NIC at every bot.

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Neil Bothwick]

On Sat, 24 Dec 2016 02:52:54 +0100, lee wrote:

> >> I only know what the names are when I can look them up when the
> >> computer is running.  I don't call that "predictable".  

That's because you are using a different definition of predictable from
that intended.

> >
> > If they are constructed according to specific rules, they are
> > predictable, by definition.  
> 
> You're overlooking that you need to know exactly, in advance, what the
> rules are applied to, and all the rules, for having a chance that your
> prediction turns out to be correct.

So how do you write udev rules to rename ports without knowing the
specifics of the hardware?

How do you know which port will be eth0 and which will be eth1 the first
time you boot if you use no renaming?

I really don't see your objection to a setting that, while a default, is
trivial to change, even before you boot the installed distro for the
first time. It is clearly useful to others, otherwise they would not have
invested time and effort in implementing. If, in doing so, they had ruled
out all alternatives, you would have a point. Those alternative are still
there, so all you are doing is whining.

No one has taken away your choice to do things how you see fit, why do
you want to do the same for others.

The choices are there, why not just use the one you want and leave others
to use what they want.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

I stayed up all night playing poker with tarot cards. I got a full
house and four people died.


pgpqpmnyPFtPo.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Alan McKinnon]

On 24/12/2016 03:52, lee wrote:
> Neil Bothwick  writes:
> 
>> On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 04:15:50 +0100, lee wrote:
>>
 There are no config files to edit with the predictable names, the
 names are created from the physical location of the port.  That's why
 they are called predictable,  
>>>
>>> I only know what the names are when I can look them up when the computer
>>> is running.  I don't call that "predictable".
>>
>> If they are constructed according to specific rules, they are
>> predictable, by definition.
> 
> You're overlooking that you need to know exactly, in advance, what the
> rules are applied to, and all the rules, for having a chance that your
> prediction turns out to be correct.  Provided you know all that, you can
> predict the universe, assuming that everything always goes according to
> rules.  You can not prove that it does and only disprove that it does
> when you find a case in which it doesn't.  So what's your definition and
> your predictions worth?

You keep mis-defining what "predictable" means in this context. It does
not mean, in the style of Newton, that you will always know everything
about it. Neither is it the same meaning as prediction in the context of
a scientific theory.

"prediction" here simply means that the interface name is guaranteed to
be the same as it was on last boot, and the somewhat random nature of
kernael names (ethX, wlanX) is not in play.

It does NOT mean that you are guaranteed to know exactly what an
interface will be called before you boot it for the first time.

Rename "predictable names" to "already known names" if it makes you feel
better. There's nothing wrong with this definition of predictable, as it
satisfies it's own rules and is consistent within itself. It is not
complete though but we already know that from Godel.

As long as you keep trying to apply the wrong meaning of predictable to
this situation, you will keep typing mails like this one I'm replying to
where you argue about something that is not even there. You also can't
realistically argue about what "predictable" means because like almost
all human concepts it is not a singularity, rather it is a spectrum
where it means what the author says it means.

And the quote for that meaning has already been posted in this thread
somewhere.





> 
>>> They were much more predictable before because I could be reasonably
>>> sure that each of the ports would be called 'ethN', starting with N = 0,
>> "Reasonably sure" is not predictable.
> 
> It's still better than something entirely unpredictable.
> 
> Show me that the names are predictable by writing them down, then
> grabbing an arbitrary computer and plugging in a network card the
> port(s) of which will then have the names you wrote down.
> 
>> A lot of this stuff is designed to
>> make automated management easier, so editing rules or config files is
>> undesirable. It is more about being able to automatically provision and
>> configure new systems, whether hardware or virtual.
> 
> How does it help with that?  Wouldn't it help even more if you could
> just give them the names you wanted them to have?
> 
> Like if you have N machines with an interface each you want to do
> something with, the only thing you'd have to do is make sure that this
> interface gets the right name assigned.
> 
> With unrecognisable names, the interface can still have a different name
> on each machine.  What's the advantage of that?
> 
>>> unless I changed a card for a different one after an udev rule had
>>> already been created.
>>
>> and being able to make changes without messing with the rest of your
>> system. I stand by my previous analogy of disk devices nodes vs UUIDs.
> 
> Are they predictable?
> 
>> One is readable the other is safe. Yes, you can use filesystem labels,
>> which can be both, but that requires intervention, just like your udev
>> rules. That doesn't make either approach wrong, just suited to different
>> purposes.
> 
> And I would find it much better if network ports had recognisable names
> without intervention.
> 
 unless you move the NIC to a different PCI slot, it will always have
 the same name, no matter what other hardware you add or remove. Yes,
 the names are cumbersome, but they have to be like that to guarantee
 their uniqueness.  
>>>
>>> You don't need to defend the unrecognisable names.  The names used for
>>> referring to network ports don't need to be like that.
>>
>> No they don't. It is merely one solution to the problem, and the names
>> are recognisable, Alan posted the key earlier. They are complex and may
>> look cryptic until you understand them, but so is English.
> 
> They don't become any more recognisable by knowing the rules.  They
> simply remain a combination of letters and numbers which is difficult to
> recognise.
> 
>>> The perceived advantage lies in being able to refer to network ports in
>>> a more reliable way, and I don't see how using unrecognisable names

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Dale]

lee wrote:
> Dale  writes:
>
>> lee wrote:
>>> Dale  writes:
>>>
>>> I didn't go look at boards I had around here.  I went to a major
>>> computer supplier, newegg, and looked at what they had.  Go back and
>>> read again what I did and maybe read it more carefully. 
>>>
>>> Might I also add, it's more than just me that has pointed out that you
>>> are not correct on this.  It's a few others as well.  You ever stop to
>>> think that what you observe is not the normal and certainly not the
>>> default?  If what you claim was even remotely accurate, newegg would
>>> have had a lot larger number of boards with two ports on it.  Thing is,
>>> they didn't.  Kai pointed out that the same is true in Europe.  
>>> Why would I assume that what someone else observes is a default?
>>> Besides, I don't see what problem you're having with this.
>>>
>>>
>> Then why would what you observe also be claimed to be the default?   As
>> I also pointed out, it's not just what I observe, it's what I and others
>> have observed as well.  So far, you are the only person claiming that
>> two ports on a home user board is the default.  I have not seen anyone
>> else post that you are correct.  Others have posted that you are not
>> correct tho. 
>>
>> The problem is, you claim that having two ports is the default.  It is
>> not the default.  I've said it, even researched it and explained how I
>> researched it, others have also posted the same point.  Just because you
>> have boards with two ports does not mean it is a default.  Given the
>> research I did, it isn't even close.  Boards with two ports for a home
>> user is not only not the default, it's somewhat rare.  Out of the top 72
>> boards I checked, only a couple or so had two ports.  That is far from
>> being the default.  That is quite rare.  Even if it was 5 boards, that
>> would be under 10%.  That is hardly something to call a default.  If it
>> were say 50%, then one could at least argue that the default is moving
>> to having two ports.  It's just not the case. 
>>
>> The sooner you figure that out the better for you. 
> And eating rice is the default because so many people do it ...
>
> .
>

You can claim that having two ports is the default but that isn't
supported by a single fact.  As I said, the only person who thinks it is
a default is you.  The default would be set by the manufacturers.  Since
what is manufactured has to be sold, one good way to find out what the
default is, go look at what is being sold.  When you see something that
is common, like say four USB ports, then that is the default.  Another
example, if most all boards have five PCI-e slots, then that is the
default.  If you want six slots, seven slots or more, then you are
likely going to pay extra and have fewer buying options because that is
not the default. 

Using your logic, no one eats rice since so much of it is grown and
sold.  If rice was not grown and not sold, then your logic would work. 
So, your post doesn't even make sense.  The manufacturers of boards by a
large margin puts one ethernet port on a home use board and even most
office computers only need one port.  If one goes and looks at what is
being manufactured and sold, they would be able to see that.  Of course,
some people can't see it even when several people post the facts.  It
seems some will never get the idea. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[andymenderunix]

 Original message From: lee <l...@yagibdah.de> Date: 24/12/2016 
 03:07  (GMT+01:00) To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 
from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No 
Tom H <tomh0...@gmail.com> writes:

> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Daniel Frey <djqf...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> It is even more frustrating that these so-called predictable network
>> names actually can change on a reboot, it's happened to me more than
>> once when multiple network cards are detected in a different order.
>
>>From Kay Sievers in [1]:
>
> 
> Btw, predictable means it will not change between reboots, that names
> will not depend on enumeration order within the same setup. It does
> not mean or promise, that added kernel/driver/firmware features will
> not result in different names. That is expected behavior.
> 
>
> [1] 
> >https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives>/systemd-devel/2015->October/034614.html

>So the names will not change when >rebooting and are to be expected to
>possibly change at any time.

>How is that more reliable?
Did you read the reply in the link properly? The ethernet device naming of the 
OP changed due to differences in the kernel .config. This IS expected behavior 
and is out of the scope of predictable network interface naming.
Also, could we drop the constant bickering from the mailing list? What once was 
a legit discussion on Firefox removing ALSA support turned into another whining 
spree, "because systemd is evil". Don't like it? Don't use it. End of story.
Cheers,Andrew

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[lee]

Neil Bothwick  writes:

> On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 04:15:50 +0100, lee wrote:
>
>> > There are no config files to edit with the predictable names, the
>> > names are created from the physical location of the port.  That's why
>> > they are called predictable,  
>> 
>> I only know what the names are when I can look them up when the computer
>> is running.  I don't call that "predictable".
>
> If they are constructed according to specific rules, they are
> predictable, by definition.

You're overlooking that you need to know exactly, in advance, what the
rules are applied to, and all the rules, for having a chance that your
prediction turns out to be correct.  Provided you know all that, you can
predict the universe, assuming that everything always goes according to
rules.  You can not prove that it does and only disprove that it does
when you find a case in which it doesn't.  So what's your definition and
your predictions worth?

>> They were much more predictable before because I could be reasonably
>> sure that each of the ports would be called 'ethN', starting with N = 0,
> "Reasonably sure" is not predictable.

It's still better than something entirely unpredictable.

Show me that the names are predictable by writing them down, then
grabbing an arbitrary computer and plugging in a network card the
port(s) of which will then have the names you wrote down.

> A lot of this stuff is designed to
> make automated management easier, so editing rules or config files is
> undesirable. It is more about being able to automatically provision and
> configure new systems, whether hardware or virtual.

How does it help with that?  Wouldn't it help even more if you could
just give them the names you wanted them to have?

Like if you have N machines with an interface each you want to do
something with, the only thing you'd have to do is make sure that this
interface gets the right name assigned.

With unrecognisable names, the interface can still have a different name
on each machine.  What's the advantage of that?

>> unless I changed a card for a different one after an udev rule had
>> already been created.
>
> and being able to make changes without messing with the rest of your
> system. I stand by my previous analogy of disk devices nodes vs UUIDs.

Are they predictable?

> One is readable the other is safe. Yes, you can use filesystem labels,
> which can be both, but that requires intervention, just like your udev
> rules. That doesn't make either approach wrong, just suited to different
> purposes.

And I would find it much better if network ports had recognisable names
without intervention.

>> > unless you move the NIC to a different PCI slot, it will always have
>> > the same name, no matter what other hardware you add or remove. Yes,
>> > the names are cumbersome, but they have to be like that to guarantee
>> > their uniqueness.  
>> 
>> You don't need to defend the unrecognisable names.  The names used for
>> referring to network ports don't need to be like that.
>
> No they don't. It is merely one solution to the problem, and the names
> are recognisable, Alan posted the key earlier. They are complex and may
> look cryptic until you understand them, but so is English.

They don't become any more recognisable by knowing the rules.  They
simply remain a combination of letters and numbers which is difficult to
recognise.

>> The perceived advantage lies in being able to refer to network ports in
>> a more reliable way, and I don't see how using unrecognisable names
>> instead of recognisable ones would make anything easier.
>
> See above re automation. It doesn't really matter whether you see the
> need or not. If you don't have the need, don't use it, they are an
> option for those who do want them.

Unfortunately, that option has been made the default.

>> It would have made things easier if the problem had been solved by
>> giving them recognisable names (or aliases) by default --- or even if
>> the default names (aliases) were the same as the unrecognisable names
>> --- and allowing to easily configure the names (aliases) actually used
>> to refer to the ports.
>
> That's a good point, and surely doable with udev rules, making the whole
> argument moot. I haven't investigated because I don't have the need, but
> I would be interested to hear what you discover.
>  and not that unrecognisable once you understand the systax.

I haven't investigated either because I figured there isn't much point
in it because if I wanted recognisable names, I would have to put some
extra work into every machine, which isn't a good option.  In the long
run, it might be less time consuming to use recognisable names, but who
knows if there isn't going to be yet another change, defeating a way I
might have found to get such names back.

>> Being able to refer to things in more reliable ways improves the quality
>> of the software.  Using unrecognisable names for things reduces the
>> quality.
>
> They are 

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[lee]

Dale  writes:

> lee wrote:
>> Dale  writes:
>>
>> I didn't go look at boards I had around here.  I went to a major
>> computer supplier, newegg, and looked at what they had.  Go back and
>> read again what I did and maybe read it more carefully. 
>>
>> Might I also add, it's more than just me that has pointed out that you
>> are not correct on this.  It's a few others as well.  You ever stop to
>> think that what you observe is not the normal and certainly not the
>> default?  If what you claim was even remotely accurate, newegg would
>> have had a lot larger number of boards with two ports on it.  Thing is,
>> they didn't.  Kai pointed out that the same is true in Europe.  
>> Why would I assume that what someone else observes is a default?
>> Besides, I don't see what problem you're having with this.
>>
>>
>
> Then why would what you observe also be claimed to be the default?   As
> I also pointed out, it's not just what I observe, it's what I and others
> have observed as well.  So far, you are the only person claiming that
> two ports on a home user board is the default.  I have not seen anyone
> else post that you are correct.  Others have posted that you are not
> correct tho. 
>
> The problem is, you claim that having two ports is the default.  It is
> not the default.  I've said it, even researched it and explained how I
> researched it, others have also posted the same point.  Just because you
> have boards with two ports does not mean it is a default.  Given the
> research I did, it isn't even close.  Boards with two ports for a home
> user is not only not the default, it's somewhat rare.  Out of the top 72
> boards I checked, only a couple or so had two ports.  That is far from
> being the default.  That is quite rare.  Even if it was 5 boards, that
> would be under 10%.  That is hardly something to call a default.  If it
> were say 50%, then one could at least argue that the default is moving
> to having two ports.  It's just not the case. 
>
> The sooner you figure that out the better for you. 

And eating rice is the default because so many people do it ...

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[lee]

Tom H  writes:

> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Daniel Frey  wrote:
>>
>> It is even more frustrating that these so-called predictable network
>> names actually can change on a reboot, it's happened to me more than
>> once when multiple network cards are detected in a different order.
>
>>From Kay Sievers in [1]:
>
> 
> Btw, predictable means it will not change between reboots, that names
> will not depend on enumeration order within the same setup. It does
> not mean or promise, that added kernel/driver/firmware features will
> not result in different names. That is expected behavior.
> 
>
> [1] 
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2015-October/034614.html

So the names will not change when rebooting and are to be expected to
possibly change at any time.

How is that more reliable?

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[lee]

Tom H  writes:

> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 3:56 AM, Neil Bothwick  wrote:
>> On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 04:15:50 +0100, lee wrote:
>>>
>>> The perceived advantage lies in being able to refer to network ports
>>> in a more reliable way, and I don't see how using unrecognisable
>>> names instead of recognisable ones would make anything easier.
>>
>> See above re automation. It doesn't really matter whether you see the
>> need or not. If you don't have the need, don't use it, they are an
>> option for those who do want them.
>
> All of this whining about predictable NIC names would be more or less
> OK if there wasn't an easy way to override them in
> "/{lib,etc}/systemd/network/" (even on a non-systemd system, see [1])
> or in "/etc/udev/rules.d/"!
>
> [1] There's no need to learn/use the udev rules syntax. I use the
> following in "/etc/systemd/network/" on a Debian 8 system with
> sysvinit-as-pid1:
>
> [Match]
> MACAddress=can't_be_bothered_to_look_it_up
> [Link]
> Name=en0

Thanks!

What happens when you replace the card with another one that has a
different MAC?  Shouldn't an assignment like this rather go by the
unrecognisable name?  I'd find that more consistent.

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Jorge Almeida]

On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 12:39 AM, Neil Bothwick  wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 02:26:05 -0500, Tom H wrote:
>

>>
>> It's the best thing that the systemd developers have produced!
>
> Except they didn't produce it. They assimilated gummiboot, which I was
> already using, into the systemd collective!
>
Wasn't gummiboot the brain child of a certain systemd developer who
got kicked off the kernel due to attitude issues?


And keep those taglines coming.

Jorge Almeida

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Neil Bothwick]

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 02:26:05 -0500, Tom H wrote:

> > I don't use grub on UEFI systems, but I use the systemd bootloader,
> > so I thought I'd keep quiet about that ;-)  
> 
> I'm also a heretic who uses the systemd bootloader no matter what pid1
> is in charge.
> 
> It's the best thing that the systemd developers have produced!

Except they didn't produce it. They assimilated gummiboot, which I was
already using, into the systemd collective!


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Are Cheerios really doughnut seeds?


pgpy6QVESJ8ud.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Tom H]

On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Daniel Frey  wrote:
> On 12/21/2016 10:53 PM, Tom H wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 3:35 PM, Daniel Frey  wrote:
>>>
>>> It could be I found a bug. After a reboot it went from the normal
>>> enp0s1 (or whatever) to eno1677789 or something ridiculous. I had
>>> this happen on two different machines.
>>
>> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/6c1e69f9
>
> So it wasn't just me! My memory seems to lose voltage once in a while,
> but I remember wondering what happened to the system I was working on
> remotely after I rebooted, that's why I was sure it happened! ;-)

LOL

I was intrigued by the "non-sensically high onboard indexes" and
Google gave me the following (you're definitely not alone):

http://serverfault.com/questions/636621/why-is-my-eth0-called-eno1636

http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/91085/udev-renaming-my-network-interface

http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/153785/what-does-eno-mean-in-network-interface-name-eno1636-for-centos-7-or-rhel

>From the last link:

The /(:1000208:01.0)/ above is the Domain:Bus:Device.Function
address with the bus value, "1000208", being the hexadecimal
representation of 1636. However, "0x100" (256) Should be the maximum
value that you can have for "Bus."

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Tom H]

On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 7:38 AM, Neil Bothwick  wrote:
>
> I don't use grub on UEFI systems, but I use the systemd bootloader, so I
> thought I'd keep quiet about that ;-)

I'm also a heretic who uses the systemd bootloader no matter what pid1
is in charge.

It's the best thing that the systemd developers have produced!

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Daniel Frey]

On 12/21/2016 10:53 PM, Tom H wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 3:35 PM, Daniel Frey  wrote:
>> On 12/19/2016 01:09 PM, Andrej Rode wrote:
>>>
>>> https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/PredictableNetworkInterfaceNames/
>>
>> It could be I found a bug. After a reboot it went from the normal
>> enp0s1 (or whatever) to eno1677789 or something ridiculous. I had this
>> happen on two different machines.
> 
> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/6c1e69f9
> 

So it wasn't just me! My memory seems to lose voltage once in a while,
but I remember wondering what happened to the system I was working on
remotely after I rebooted, that's why I was sure it happened! ;-)

Dan

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Neil Bothwick]

On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 05:27:03 -0500, Tom H wrote:

> > You forgot /etc/default/grub ;-)  
> 
> Indeed :)
> 
> But I was going with the idea of using udev to rename NICs rather than
> reverting to kernel names.
> 
> I hope that you're ready to duck because someone might say "Linux is
> about choice" while reminding you that grub isn't the only bootloader
> :)

I don't use grub on UEFI systems, but I use the systemd bootloader, so I
thought I'd keep quiet about that ;-)


-- 
Neil Bothwick

WITLAG: The delay between delivery and comprehension of a joke.


pgpnaMOuEDEHM.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Tom H]

On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 5:14 AM, Neil Bothwick  wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 04:52:41 -0500, Tom H wrote:
>
>> All of this whining about predictable NIC names would be more or less
>> OK if there wasn't an easy way to override them in
>> "/{lib,etc}/systemd/network/" (even on a non-systemd system, see [1])
>> or in "/etc/udev/rules.d/"!
>
> You forgot /etc/default/grub ;-)

Indeed :)

But I was going with the idea of using udev to rename NICs rather than
reverting to kernel names.

I hope that you're ready to duck because someone might say "Linux is
about choice" while reminding you that grub isn't the only bootloader
:)

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Neil Bothwick]

On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 04:52:41 -0500, Tom H wrote:

> All of this whining about predictable NIC names would be more or less
> OK if there wasn't an easy way to override them in
> "/{lib,etc}/systemd/network/" (even on a non-systemd system, see [1])
> or in "/etc/udev/rules.d/"!

You forgot /etc/default/grub ;-)

It's a pity this information is so well hidden in the elog message you
get when you install the software!


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Yes, I've heard of "decaf." What's your point?


pgpUY7HGVxvhv.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Tom H]

On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 3:56 AM, Neil Bothwick  wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 04:15:50 +0100, lee wrote:
>>
>> The perceived advantage lies in being able to refer to network ports
>> in a more reliable way, and I don't see how using unrecognisable
>> names instead of recognisable ones would make anything easier.
>
> See above re automation. It doesn't really matter whether you see the
> need or not. If you don't have the need, don't use it, they are an
> option for those who do want them.

All of this whining about predictable NIC names would be more or less
OK if there wasn't an easy way to override them in
"/{lib,etc}/systemd/network/" (even on a non-systemd system, see [1])
or in "/etc/udev/rules.d/"!

[1] There's no need to learn/use the udev rules syntax. I use the
following in "/etc/systemd/network/" on a Debian 8 system with
sysvinit-as-pid1:

[Match]
MACAddress=can't_be_bothered_to_look_it_up
[Link]
Name=en0

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Walter Dnes]

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 05:19:35PM -0800, Daniel Campbell wrote
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 07:53:51AM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
> 
> > How do you think we ended up with eudev?
> 
> I assume we ended up with eudev because upstream decided that
> they were going back on their promise that udev would remain usable
> without systemd. (I can fish up the e-mail -- sent by Lennart himself
> -- if you'd like. It may take some time) To this day it still is, but
> that's only until the successor to kdbus wriggles itself into the
> kernel. At that point, they will have the leverage (and the excuse, in
> their minds) to drop all support for udev outside of systemd.

https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2012-August/006066.html

> Well, we intent to continue to make it possible to run udevd outside
> of systemd. But that's about it. We will not polish that, or add
> new features to that or anything.
> 
> OTOH we do polish behaviour of udev when used *within* systemd
> however, and that's our primary focus.
> 
> And what we will certainly not do is compromise the uniform
> integration into systemd for some cosmetic improvements for
> non-systemd systems.
> 
> (Yes, udev on non-systemd systems is in our eyes a dead end, in case
> you haven't noticed it yet. I am looking forward to the day when we
> can drop that support entirely.)
>
> Lennart
>
> --
> Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.

  Right now the "stand-alone udev" actually requires building the entire
systemd+udev combo, and then copying just the udev parts.  I remember
Anthony Basile mentioning that he had refactored the code during the the
udev ==> eudev conversion process, and removed over a hundred uncalled
functions.  They were probably part of udev's integration into systemd.
So one advantage of eudev is that it has less memory footprint and
attack surface.

> eudev is an attempt to retain udev as it was originally -- init
> agnostic. At some point in the future, it will become the only way to
> get udev outside of systemd.

  Agreed.

-- 
Walter Dnes 
I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Neil Bothwick]

On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 04:15:50 +0100, lee wrote:

> > There are no config files to edit with the predictable names, the
> > names are created from the physical location of the port.  That's why
> > they are called predictable,  
> 
> I only know what the names are when I can look them up when the computer
> is running.  I don't call that "predictable".

If they are constructed according to specific rules, they are
predictable, by definition.

> They were much more predictable before because I could be reasonably
> sure that each of the ports would be called 'ethN', starting with N = 0,
"Reasonably sure" is not predictable. A lot of this stuff is designed to
make automated management easier, so editing rules or config files is
undesirable. It is more about being able to automatically provision and
configure new systems, whether hardware or virtual.

> unless I changed a card for a different one after an udev rule had
> already been created.

and being able to make changes without messing with the rest of your
system. I stand by my previous analogy of disk devices nodes vs UUIDs.
One is readable the other is safe. Yes, you can use filesystem labels,
which can be both, but that requires intervention, just like your udev
rules. That doesn't make either approach wrong, just suited to different
purposes.

> > unless you move the NIC to a different PCI slot, it will always have
> > the same name, no matter what other hardware you add or remove. Yes,
> > the names are cumbersome, but they have to be like that to guarantee
> > their uniqueness.  
> 
> You don't need to defend the unrecognisable names.  The names used for
> referring to network ports don't need to be like that.

No they don't. It is merely one solution to the problem, and the names
are recognisable, Alan posted the key earlier. They are complex and may
look cryptic until you understand them, but so is English.
 
> The perceived advantage lies in being able to refer to network ports in
> a more reliable way, and I don't see how using unrecognisable names
> instead of recognisable ones would make anything easier.

See above re automation. It doesn't really matter whether you see the
need or not. If you don't have the need, don't use it, they are an
option for those who do want them.
 
> It would have made things easier if the problem had been solved by
> giving them recognisable names (or aliases) by default --- or even if
> the default names (aliases) were the same as the unrecognisable names
> --- and allowing to easily configure the names (aliases) actually used
> to refer to the ports.

That's a good point, and surely doable with udev rules, making the whole
argument moot. I haven't investigated because I don't have the need, but
I would be interested to hear what you discover.
 and not that unrecognisable once you understand the systax.

> Being able to refer to things in more reliable ways improves the quality
> of the software.  Using unrecognisable names for things reduces the
> quality.

They are reliable, unlike your "reasonably sure" approach, 


> This is like you're defending a type of new pliers.

I'm not so much defending them and expressing an opinion. I can see the
benefits and the drawbacks. They are an option, albeit one that is turned
on by default (but since when have Gentoo users ever been bothered about
upstream defaults?). Portage even gives you explicit instuctions on how
to permanently disable them with a single command, although I generally
use the net.ifnames=0 kernel option instead on single NIC machines, where
the feature is pointless.

> But who knows, perhaps it is now possible to easily, on the fly, name
> the network ports through a neat configuration file.  I'm merely asking
> if there is because I don't know and would find that very useful.

Can't ifrename do what you want?

> > How often you you have to type interface names anyway, and how many of
> > those are in a shell with tab completion that takes care of it for
> > you?  
> 
> None of them are, and I don't type the names.  They require copy and
> paste, or very careful and tedious typing after looking them up.

Well, if you're scripting them, you only need to do it once per
interface, surely? That might be less work that setting up ifrename, but
use whatever works for you, your choices include, but are not restricted
to, and in no particular order.

Learn how the predictable names work
Disable the feature entirely and hope the eth0 names work as expected
Use udev rules
Use ifrename
Some combination of the above.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

...and that is how we know the Earth to be banana-shaped.


pgpKWx_UU2I9j.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Tom H]

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 5:04 PM, lee  wrote:
> Andrej Rode  writes:
>>
>>> Or can you explain how unrecognisable names make things easier?
>>
>> Yeah they make life easier. From your talk you never had a problem
>> with eth<0,10> switching names after boot. Everyone who had them
>> appreciates predictable network interfaces.
>
> Right, I've never had a problem like that.

Therefore no one else could possibly have had it...

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Tom H]

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 3:35 PM, Daniel Frey  wrote:
> On 12/19/2016 01:09 PM, Andrej Rode wrote:
>>
>> https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/PredictableNetworkInterfaceNames/
>
> It could be I found a bug. After a reboot it went from the normal
> enp0s1 (or whatever) to eno1677789 or something ridiculous. I had this
> happen on two different machines.

https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/6c1e69f9

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Tom H]

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Rich Freeman  wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Heiko Baums  wrote:
>>
>> You don't need to be convinced. It's sufficient that I know systemd
>> pretty well from the beginning when the Poettering fanboys of Arch Linux
>> forced this crap onto the Arch Linux users, while they regularly were
>> telling that they don't force it onto their users, that it will be only
>> optional.
>
> Clearly nobody forced you to run it, because you aren't running it
> now.  And if you wanted to run openrc on Arch you certainly could.
> Nobody will help you do it, but it certainly can be done.

To Rich: There are howtos

To Heiko: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=arch+linux+openrc

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Tom H]

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Heiko Baums  wrote:
> Am 20.12.2016 um 05:23 schrieb Andrej Rode:
>>
>> Yeah they make life easier. From your talk you never had a problem
>> with eth<0,10> switching names after boot. Everyone who had them
>> appreciates predictable network interfaces.
>
> Everyone who had them could learn how to write simple udev rules to
> get fixed eth<0,10> names after every boot. No systemd and no
> "predictable" names necessary.
>
> Nevertheless I'm still wondering what's so predictable at those
> incomprehensible, cryptic device names anyway. And I don't want to
> know that.

The predictable interface names (the systemd developers have an
unfortunate knack for misnaming ) arose for a multi-NIC world where

1) the kernel's ethX name for a particular NIC can change from one
boot to another

2) udev renaming NICs "ethX" can break if you rename a NIC "eth4" and
the kernel later names another NIC "eth4" as it enumerates the
hardware.

Given the above, the udev maintainers could've implemented a policy
that a NIC couldn't be renamed "ethX" but they decided no longer to
default to MAC-based naming rules and came up with naming based on
whether a NIC is an on-board one (enoX), a PCI Express one (ensX), a
PCI one (enpXsY), etc. In doing so, they defaulted to names that are
more complex than the kernel's (ethX) but you can now replace a NIC
without editing a file under "/etc/udev/rules.d/".

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Tom H]

On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Daniel Frey  wrote:
>
> It is even more frustrating that these so-called predictable network
> names actually can change on a reboot, it's happened to me more than
> once when multiple network cards are detected in a different order.

>From Kay Sievers in [1]:


Btw, predictable means it will not change between reboots, that names
will not depend on enumeration order within the same setup. It does
not mean or promise, that added kernel/driver/firmware features will
not result in different names. That is expected behavior.


[1] 
https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2015-October/034614.html

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Tom H]

On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 9:52 AM, Marc Joliet  wrote:

> When people compare systemd unit files to init scripts, they usually
> mean *raw* (LSB?) sysvinit scripts (as IIUC Debian use{s,d}), with all
> of their ridiculous amounts of boilerplate.

The latest Debian init.d skeleton uses "#!/lib/init/init-d-script" as
its shebang


th@localhost ~ $ cat /etc/init.d/skeleton
#!/bin/sh
# kFreeBSD do not accept scripts as interpreters, using #!/bin/sh and sourcing.
if [ true != "$INIT_D_SCRIPT_SOURCED" ] ; then
set "$0" "$@"; INIT_D_SCRIPT_SOURCED=true . /lib/init/init-d-script
fi
### BEGIN INIT INFO
# Provides:  skeleton
# Required-Start:$remote_fs $syslog
# Required-Stop: $remote_fs $syslog
# Default-Start: 2 3 4 5
# Default-Stop:  0 1 6
# Short-Description: Example initscript
# Description:   This file should be used to construct scripts to be
#placed in /etc/init.d.  This example start a
#single forking daemon capable of writing a pid
#file.  To get other behavoirs, implemend
#do_start(), do_stop() or other functions to
#override the defaults in /lib/init/init-d-script.
### END INIT INFO

# Author: Foo Bar 
#
# Please remove the "Author" lines above and replace them
# with your own name if you copy and modify this script.

DESC="Description of the service"
DAEMON=/usr/sbin/daemonexecutablename


You can source an environment file and add "DAEMON_ARGS=" should you
need to do so.

This was created in the debian-devel@ systemd thread by the
sysinit/sysvrc maintainer.

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[lee]

Neil Bothwick  writes:

> On Wed, 21 Dec 2016 22:48:29 +0100, lee wrote:
>
>> > You can't switch any two names because the udev rules are run singly,
>> > so at one point you will be trying to rename an interface with a name
>> > that is already in use.  
>> 
>> I mean more like renaming them on the fly --- or by having a
>> configuration file with key:value pairs like 'enp69s0f1:eth3' --- or
>> perhaps triples like 'enp69s0f1:eth3:"DMZ Interface"'.
>
> In that case you may as well leave the unique names in place and set up
> recognisable aliases.

Sure, you can call the names you pick aliases.  Can that be done?  Not
as in "going back to the old way", but as described.

>> That way, you could have a recognisable name (or several names) for
>> every unrecognisable one and assume that "eth3" or "foo" or however you
>> want to call it is the same interface just as much as you would with
>> unrecognisable names --- plus the advantage that when you ever need to
>> change an interface, you only need to edit one small file rather than
>> various configurations files having the unrecognisable name(s) in them.
>
> There are no config files to edit with the predictable names, the
> names are created from the physical location of the port.  That's why
> they are called predictable,

I only know what the names are when I can look them up when the computer
is running.  I don't call that "predictable".

They were much more predictable before because I could be reasonably
sure that each of the ports would be called 'ethN', starting with N = 0,
unless I changed a card for a different one after an udev rule had
already been created.  Now I can only assume that they will be called
something.

> unless you move the NIC to a different PCI slot, it will always have
> the same name, no matter what other hardware you add or remove. Yes,
> the names are cumbersome, but they have to be like that to guarantee
> their uniqueness.

You don't need to defend the unrecognisable names.  The names used for
referring to network ports don't need to be like that.

The perceived advantage lies in being able to refer to network ports in
a more reliable way, and I don't see how using unrecognisable names
instead of recognisable ones would make anything easier.

It would have made things easier if the problem had been solved by
giving them recognisable names (or aliases) by default --- or even if
the default names (aliases) were the same as the unrecognisable names
--- and allowing to easily configure the names (aliases) actually used
to refer to the ports.

Being able to refer to things in more reliable ways improves the quality
of the software.  Using unrecognisable names for things reduces the
quality.

This is like you're defending a type of new pliers.  The old ones didn't
hold stuff as securely as the new ones do, but the new ones require that
you use both hands to use them.  The new pliers can provide an advantage
for instances in which you do have to hold something very securely ---
and in which another tool, like a vice, might be more appropriate anyway
--- but for most of the time, they hinder you doing your work because
they're so unwieldy.  Of course, you call the new pliers "more secure
pliers" rather than "unwieldy pliers", because that makes them easier to
sell.

Alas, "improvements" just like this seem to become more and more common,
replacing actual improvements: The king gets new garments not seldom
times, yet twice a day, and those who cry deceit are called not children
but trolls.

But who knows, perhaps it is now possible to easily, on the fly, name
the network ports through a neat configuration file.  I'm merely asking
if there is because I don't know and would find that very useful.

> How often you you have to type interface names anyway, and how many of
> those are in a shell with tab completion that takes care of it for
> you?

None of them are, and I don't type the names.  They require copy and
paste, or very careful and tedious typing after looking them up.

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Daniel Campbell]

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 07:56:29PM +0100, Heiko Baums wrote:
> Am 21.12.2016 um 14:03 schrieb Rich Freeman:
> > I don't agree that you are "forced"
> > to use systemd.  Maybe you might be forced to use a different browser
> > or fork your browser or patch it or stick with an old version and
> > backport security fixes if you want to use it without systemd some
> > day.
> 
> And there it is again this silly argument and this twisting of words.
> Typical for those Poettering fanboys.
> 
> > But, if the entire Firefox developer community quit and decided
> > to do something else (a la Thunderbird) you'd be in a similar boat.
> > Sometimes you get what you pay for.
> 
> And this again. You know the difference between OpenSource and ClosedSource?
> 
> You pay for ClosedSource. For OpenSource you don't need to pay. But I
> have neither time nor energy to explain you the philosophy (before
> Poetterix) of OpenSource. But I can tell you this much. OpenSource and
> its developers usually have no commercial intentions. It seems to be
> different for Poettering and his fanboys.
> 
> > I get that people who want to avoid systemd are frustrated by this,
> > but honestly it feels like spitting against the wind at this point.
> 
> And the arrogance and ignorance of Poettering's and his fanboys' again.
> 
> > I
> > was frustrated back when everybody stopped taking care of kde-3.5 and
> > kde-4 wasn't really ready and was a resource hog on older systems.  I
> > switched to xfce for a while, because ultimately I can't demand that
> > the kde project cater to my whims.
> 
> Just compare apples and oranges. Also typical for Poettering and his
> fanboys.
> 
> The situation with KDE has nothing - and I mean nothing - to do with the
> situation with systemd. But I have neither time nor energy to explain
> that, too. I would talk to a wall anyway.
> 
> > In general though, nobody is required to engage in
> > debates/arguments/etc here, or even read your posts.  People choose to
> > participate in list discussions just as they choose what software they
> > want to maintain.
> 
> There they are again: The apples and the oranges.
> 
> Heiko Baums
> 

I'm getting the feeling that others would be more receptive to your
communication if you weren't belittling them with name-calling. I
personally feel similarly about systemd and Poettering, but it's more
effective to target ideas and behaviors rather than people. Targeting
people will -- understandably -- cause them to become defensive, which
will only make them dig their heels in and decide you aren't worth
conversing with. I don't think that's your intention.

Rich has a point that we're dependent on code we don't write. So when a
project goes in a direction we don't like, we have three options: go
along with it, reject it and use something different, or fork it.

Most choose 1 or 2 because 3 is demanding and often requires a team.
Teams are hard, wetware is hard.

I'm 100% with you on the political front. As long as we have distros
that respect that choice -- Gentoo, Devuan, etc. -- we still retain the
ability to "dodge" projects like systemd or Firefox. Life may become a
bit more difficult due to learning a new package, or finding a new
project that "speaks to you", but ultimately libre software developers
are volunteers and we can't force them to do anything. This is the
Bazaar at work.

Ironically, there are parallels to this and the idea of markets. If a
vendor isn't providing what you want, do you attack them or simply go to
another vendor? In libre software, mindshare and participation are
currency. Taking your currency somewhere else is the best way to show
that you don't approve of a project's direction. Blog posts, forks, or
participation in other (competing) projects shows that you care enough
to devote time to it. Most in the community respect someone who "puts
their money where their mouth is", so to speak. Taking part and getting
involved shows that you care and are willing to help make goals become
reality.

So, what can you or others do about Firefox? Use another browser. Help
them out, even if it's testing or bug reports. That stuff matters. I've
already started looking for another browser, myself, since I plan to
excise PA from my system again some time. It can definitely be done.

At some point, you have to ask yourself, "How much do I care about
this?" If you care enough, you will do something about it. It's my hope
that my e-mail inspires you to become more active in libre software.

TLDR: You catch more flies with honey than vinegar.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Daniel Campbell]

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 07:53:51AM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 10:49 PM, Daniel Campbell  wrote:
> > On 12/20/2016 06:33 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> >> We don't have some
> >> committee on high pick a winner and tell all the maintainers that they
> >> all have to move from supporting x to supporting y.
> >
> > Fair points across the board but this stood out to me. We *do* have
> > groups that, on some subset of the tree, exert what they feel to be
> > winners. QA, the KDE team, and GNOME team have all made formal
> > recommendations or requirements that they expect to see in ebuilds going
> > forward. QA is blessed by council of course, so they have a bit more
> > sway. But we're lying if we say we don't have committees making
> > decisions on packaging guidelines.
> >
> > That's not the same as choosing a single package and telling every one
> > to scram, but we're not hands-off, either.
> >
> 
> Anybody wishing to add stuff to the main repository does not get a
> choice in following QA policy (though these matters can be appealed to
> the Council).  However, their policies for the most part are fairly
> sensible and concern stuff like listing things as a dependency if you
> link to them and so on.
> 
> KDE and GNOME developers work as a team, but these teams do not have
> any exclusive control over anything in the tree.  If a Gentoo
> developer doesn't like what they've done with kmail they can add a
> kmail2 or kmail-rich0 or whatever that works they way they want it to.
> Heck, if a bunch of devs wanted to do their own thing they could start
> a kde-improved team if they wanted to.

Right, I'm not disagreeing with any of that. I was just pointing out
that we *do* have teams that enforce their view of how packages should
be handled -- whether with Council's authority (QA) or not (others).
Some groups attempt to assert control over certain USE flags, too. Most
of the time we just aim for consistency with flags, so I can't fault
that. But we're lying to ourselves if we pretend that there aren't
groups within Gentoo who exert policy against others and make package
decisions, be it legitimate or otherwise.

If you want examples, look at gtk <-> gtk2 <-> gtk3, or qt <-> qt4 <->
qt5. Or memcache -> memcached, bikeshedding wrt virtual providers, etc.
At a certain point, teams are given the go-ahead by someone in authority
(QA or Council usually) to make sweeping changes or urge maintainers to
make changes. I'm not saying this is 100% bad; I'm just ensuring we stay
honest about what we do as a distro.

No value statements are intended.

> 
> In general this doesn't happen, because the developers interested in
> maintaining these packages tend to agree on how they want to maintain
> them, or at least they don't care enough to bother with forking them.
> 
> How do you think we ended up with eudev?

I assume we ended up with eudev because upstream decided that
they were going back on their promise that udev would remain usable
without systemd. (I can fish up the e-mail -- sent by Lennart himself
-- if you'd like. It may take some time) To this day it still is, but
that's only until the successor to kdbus wriggles itself into the
kernel. At that point, they will have the leverage (and the excuse, in
their minds) to drop all support for udev outside of systemd.

eudev is an attempt to retain udev as it was originally -- init
agnostic. At some point in the future, it will become the only way to
get udev outside of systemd.

> 
> -- 
> Rich
> 


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Neil Bothwick]

On Wed, 21 Dec 2016 22:48:29 +0100, lee wrote:

> > You can't switch any two names because the udev rules are run singly,
> > so at one point you will be trying to rename an interface with a name
> > that is already in use.  
> 
> I mean more like renaming them on the fly --- or by having a
> configuration file with key:value pairs like 'enp69s0f1:eth3' --- or
> perhaps triples like 'enp69s0f1:eth3:"DMZ Interface"'.

In that case you may as well leave the unique names in place and set up
recognisable aliases.

> That way, you could have a recognisable name (or several names) for
> every unrecognisable one and assume that "eth3" or "foo" or however you
> want to call it is the same interface just as much as you would with
> unrecognisable names --- plus the advantage that when you ever need to
> change an interface, you only need to edit one small file rather than
> various configurations files having the unrecognisable name(s) in them.

There are no config files to edit with the predictable names, the names
are created from the physical location of the port. That's why they are
called predictable, unless you move the NIC to a different PCI slot, it
will always have the same name, no matter what other hardware you add or
remove. Yes, the names are cumbersome, but they have to be like that to
guarantee their uniqueness. How often you you have to type interface
names anyway, and how many of those are in a shell with tab completion
that takes care of it for you?

The names are ugly, but that's about their only sin.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Head: (n.) the part of a disk drive which detects sectors and decides
which of the two possible values to return: 'lose a turn' or 'bankrupt.'


pgp9F5OiUdFDJ.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Dale]

lee wrote:
> Dale  writes:
>
> I didn't go look at boards I had around here.  I went to a major
> computer supplier, newegg, and looked at what they had.  Go back and
> read again what I did and maybe read it more carefully. 
>
> Might I also add, it's more than just me that has pointed out that you
> are not correct on this.  It's a few others as well.  You ever stop to
> think that what you observe is not the normal and certainly not the
> default?  If what you claim was even remotely accurate, newegg would
> have had a lot larger number of boards with two ports on it.  Thing is,
> they didn't.  Kai pointed out that the same is true in Europe.  
> Why would I assume that what someone else observes is a default?
> Besides, I don't see what problem you're having with this.
>
>

Then why would what you observe also be claimed to be the default?   As
I also pointed out, it's not just what I observe, it's what I and others
have observed as well.  So far, you are the only person claiming that
two ports on a home user board is the default.  I have not seen anyone
else post that you are correct.  Others have posted that you are not
correct tho. 

The problem is, you claim that having two ports is the default.  It is
not the default.  I've said it, even researched it and explained how I
researched it, others have also posted the same point.  Just because you
have boards with two ports does not mean it is a default.  Given the
research I did, it isn't even close.  Boards with two ports for a home
user is not only not the default, it's somewhat rare.  Out of the top 72
boards I checked, only a couple or so had two ports.  That is far from
being the default.  That is quite rare.  Even if it was 5 boards, that
would be under 10%.  That is hardly something to call a default.  If it
were say 50%, then one could at least argue that the default is moving
to having two ports.  It's just not the case. 

The sooner you figure that out the better for you. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[lee]

Neil Bothwick  writes:

> On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 23:11:08 +0100, lee wrote:
>
>> >> But you already heard of udev rules? I guess I mentioned them
>> >> already. They are not so hard to write and they only need to be
>> >> written once.  
>> >
>> > It's too late by then, if eth0 and eth1 already exist, you cannot
>> > switch them with udev rules - as anyone who had worked with dual NICs
>> > would have discovered.  
>> 
>> Can you switch them when they have unrecognisable names?
>
> You can't switch any two names because the udev rules are run singly, so
> at one point you will be trying to rename an interface with a name that
> is already in use.

I mean more like renaming them on the fly --- or by having a
configuration file with key:value pairs like 'enp69s0f1:eth3' --- or
perhaps triples like 'enp69s0f1:eth3:"DMZ Interface"'.

That way, you could have a recognisable name (or several names) for
every unrecognisable one and assume that "eth3" or "foo" or however you
want to call it is the same interface just as much as you would with
unrecognisable names --- plus the advantage that when you ever need to
change an interface, you only need to edit one small file rather than
various configurations files having the unrecognisable name(s) in them.
And you would also have descriptions.

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[lee]

Dale  writes:

> lee wrote:
>> Dale  writes:
>>
>>> lee wrote:
 Dale  writes:

> lee wrote:
>> Daniel Frey  writes:
>>
>>> On 12/19/2016 10:15 AM, lee wrote:
 "Walter Dnes"  writes:

>   Similarly, the vast majority of home users have a machine with one
> ethernet port, and in the past it's always been eth0.
 Since 10 years or so, the default is two ports.
>>> Not in any of the computers I've built. Generally only high end or
>>> workstation/server boards have two ports.
>>>
>>> i.e. not what the typical home user would buy.
>> It is not reasonable to assume that a "typical home user" would want a
>> computer with a crappy board to run Linux on it (or for anything
>> else). If they are that cheap, they're better off buying a used one.
>> When they are sufficiently clueless to want something like that, what
>> does it matter what the network interfaces are called.
>>
> I built my current rig just a few years ago.  It has one ethernet port
> on it.  Since it didn't work right, bad drivers I guess, I added a card
> to have the second port.  The rig I built before that, it also had one
> ethernet port. 
>
> I might add, I didn't buy a "crappy board" either.  The first was Abit
> which was the top rated brand at the time and my current board is
> Gigabyte, another highly rated board at the time I bought it.
 I have no experience with Abit, and I can tell you from experience with
 a couple of them that Gigabyte is the worst junk for a board you can
 buy and that their support has no idea what they are doing.
>>> Well, I have two of them and they work just fine.  I might add, Abit
>>> gave me many years of 24/7 service.  Being outdated was its only
>>> problem.  Also, Gigabyte and Asus were the top rated boards when I
>>> bought my board.  Some who have been here long enough may even recall me
>>> posting my buy list here on this mailing list.  So, you thinking
>>> Gigabyte is junk can go in the same place as your thinking two ports on
>>> every board is the default.   It's your opinion and not based on
>>> reality.   I've learned the same usually applies to hard drives as well. 
>> You must be assuming that the Gigabyte boards I've had my hands on
>> somehow existed outside of reality.
>
> I think you are outside reality at this point. 
>
>
>>
> As Daniel
> points out, you have to get into some pretty high end boards before you
> get two ethernet ports. 
>
> Just for giggles, I went and looked at Asus boards, currently highly
> rated.  I had to get up around the $400 range to find two ports.  Most
> computers built for home use, and even some, maybe most, business
> computers, only have one port.  It's all they need. 
>
> I might also add, I have a lot of friends that give me their old
> computers.  Of all the puters I have ever seen, they had one ethernet
> port.  Over the past decade or so, I've likely stripped out a few dozen
> computers for parts.  Not one of them had two ethernet ports. 
>
> I'm with Daniel on this one. 
 The last time I got a board that didn't have two ports is about 20 years
 ago, and I never bought one for 400.  They all just have 2, needed or
 not, even cheap ones.


>>> Odd.  Just for giggles, I went to Newegg.  I pulled up both AMD and
>>> Intel boards.  I then looked at the pictures of the top sellers listed
>>> there.  With my settings, it lists 36 on each page.  Out of the first
>>> page for each type, only a couple or so had two ports and only one that
>>> I saw was under $200.00.  The rest were more expensive than that.  I
>>> think that one $200.00 board was a Gigabyte by the way.  I doubt you
>>> want to claim owning that, right?  Looked at 72 boards, only found a
>>> couple or so with two ethernet ports. 
>>>
>>> So, looking at a large website that has likely millions of customers,
>>> carries about every brand of board there is, I could only find a very
>>> small percentage of boards that have two ethernet ports built in.  That
>>> is not what a reasonable person would call the default.  If it was the
>>> default as you claim, then there should only be a few that don't have
>>> two ports.  You add in that Daniel, Taiidan and myself have not seen
>>> such a default, then I think you are mistaken. 
>> That may very well be so, yet the boards around here usually have two
>> ports.  If the ones around you usually have one port, it's not
>> surprising that you would assume a different default number of ports.
>> So what?
>>
>> .
>>
>
> I didn't go look at boards I had around here.  I went to a major
> computer supplier, newegg, and looked at what they had.  Go back and
> read again what I did and maybe read it more carefully. 
>
> Might I also add, 

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Heiko Baums]

Am 21.12.2016 um 20:31 schrieb Rich Freeman:
> OpenSource has nothing to do with whether something costs money.  Not
> even RMS or ESR would agree with "For OpenSource you don't need to
> pay."

Ok, now we're getting a little bit closer again.

All the rest... I have neither time nor energy to answer to this.

You definitely have not understood the original philosophy of OpenSource
and the difference between OpenSource and ClosedSource.

It's not only about the open source code. There's a lot more about that.

But like I said... No time and no energy. And the wall I would talk to.

Heiko Baums

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Rich Freeman]

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 1:56 PM, Heiko Baums  wrote:
>
> And this again. You know the difference between OpenSource and ClosedSource?
>
> You pay for ClosedSource. For OpenSource you don't need to pay. But I
> have neither time nor energy to explain you the philosophy (before
> Poetterix) of OpenSource.

OpenSource has nothing to do with whether something costs money.  Not
even RMS or ESR would agree with "For OpenSource you don't need to
pay."

For starters, all software costs somebody something.  It might be
offered for free TO YOU, but somebody spent a lot of time and effort
making it, and somebody may or may not have been compensated to do it.

Here is a decent overview from the FSF's perspective, though they're
more focused on free software than open source:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html

Here is their take on free software vs open source:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html

Now, if you asked ESR for his take he'd have a different perspective,
though he'd agree with the FSF that neither has anything to do with
whether you have to pay for it, and he would agree on the
differentiation between OSS and FOSS.

Some off the cuff definitions:
Open Source: generally means the author makes the source code
available.  OSI has their take on it which most people accept:
https://opensource.org/osd
Free Software: licensed in a manner that guarantees the FSF's four
freedoms.  https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html

In general all free software is open source, but not all open source
software is free software.

Either can be free as in beer or not.  It is completely legal for me
to download a Debian DVD, make some changes to it, put a copy of the
source code on the DVD, and offer to sell it to you for $5000 licensed
under its original licenses.  The only thing I can't do is prevent you
from sticking an image of that DVD on your website after you buy it so
that nobody else has to buy it from me.  In practice a lot of it tends
to be free as in beer because FOSS licenses make it impossible to
prevent somebody from offering it free of charge, and people tend not
to pay for something when they can get the same thing for free.
However, companies like Red Hat can and do charge for their distros
all the same, usually offering things like support to entice people to
pay.  When you buy RHEL you're buying the software and not just the
support, even if you could get most of it for free without paying for
it.

>  But I can tell you this much. OpenSource and
> its developers usually have no commercial intentions.

This is true of some open source software.  I'm not convinced it is
even true for most of it.

Half of the companies that contribute to Linux are for-profit entities
that have a profit motive behind their contributions.  Some of the
most popular Linux distros like Ubuntu and RHEL are for-profit
enterprises.  A few major projects are backed by foundations, but IMO
some of them are really only non-profit in the sense that they don't
pay dividends to anybody (heck, the US National Football League is
non-profit by that definition); some of them have small armies of
executives and administrative staff like any other large corporation.
Quite a bit of FOSS isn't developed by organizations like Gentoo which
are community based with low amounts of money going around.

A lot of FOSS is also failed commercial software, or parallel
community versions to commercial software (think Fedora/CentOS, or the
old MySQL model).

And there is nothing wrong with any of this.  It is just free
software.  At worst you can just ignore it.  At best you can adapt it
to your own needs, or just use it as-is if it fits your needs.  We
aren't worse off because somebody made it available to us.  I might
never use RHEL, but the fact that it is out there doesn't hurt me.
Maybe the fact that RHEL is actually paying developers means that
fewer of them have free time to donate (assuming that you don't care
for the stuff RedHat does contribute), but who am I to begrudge
somebody the right to make a living?  Programmers don't have to be
starving artists to claim some kind of moral superiority.

Personally I prefer to work in a community-based environment, which is
why I'm here and not running Debian (well, that's just one reason, I
also prefer the Gentoo approach in general and have used Gentoo since
long before openrc even existed, let alone systemd).  Ultimately
though we're just a small part of a much larger ecosystem.  There are
things about that ecosystem that I like more, and things that I like
less.  However, if we allow developers the freedom to create what they
want to create then we're going to need to deal with the reality that
sometimes they won't want to create the things we want them to.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Heiko Baums]

Am 21.12.2016 um 15:28 schrieb Rich Freeman:
> udev and systemd operate based on text configuration files that are
> declarative in nature.

Seldom laughed as much.

Heiko Baums

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Heiko Baums]

Am 21.12.2016 um 14:03 schrieb Rich Freeman:
> I don't agree that you are "forced"
> to use systemd.  Maybe you might be forced to use a different browser
> or fork your browser or patch it or stick with an old version and
> backport security fixes if you want to use it without systemd some
> day.

And there it is again this silly argument and this twisting of words.
Typical for those Poettering fanboys.

> But, if the entire Firefox developer community quit and decided
> to do something else (a la Thunderbird) you'd be in a similar boat.
> Sometimes you get what you pay for.

And this again. You know the difference between OpenSource and ClosedSource?

You pay for ClosedSource. For OpenSource you don't need to pay. But I
have neither time nor energy to explain you the philosophy (before
Poetterix) of OpenSource. But I can tell you this much. OpenSource and
its developers usually have no commercial intentions. It seems to be
different for Poettering and his fanboys.

> I get that people who want to avoid systemd are frustrated by this,
> but honestly it feels like spitting against the wind at this point.

And the arrogance and ignorance of Poettering's and his fanboys' again.

> I
> was frustrated back when everybody stopped taking care of kde-3.5 and
> kde-4 wasn't really ready and was a resource hog on older systems.  I
> switched to xfce for a while, because ultimately I can't demand that
> the kde project cater to my whims.

Just compare apples and oranges. Also typical for Poettering and his
fanboys.

The situation with KDE has nothing - and I mean nothing - to do with the
situation with systemd. But I have neither time nor energy to explain
that, too. I would talk to a wall anyway.

> In general though, nobody is required to engage in
> debates/arguments/etc here, or even read your posts.  People choose to
> participate in list discussions just as they choose what software they
> want to maintain.

There they are again: The apples and the oranges.

Heiko Baums

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Corbin Bird]

On 12/21/2016 08:28 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Corbin Bird  wrote:
>> The old manual method of configuration is extremely flexible, you can
>> get the "who-knows-where-it-came-from-component" to work. The new
>> "automagic" of udev / systemd  forget it. At least with script based
>> init systems I could change the run level to fix Xorg problems.
> udev and systemd operate based on text configuration files that are
> declarative in nature.
>
> You can certainly change the "run level" in systemd (what you'd call a
> runlevel in openrc would be a target in systemd).  You can even pass
> the default target on the kernel command line, or change the default
> target in /etc. As with openrc they aren't numbered and you aren't
> limited to any particular number of them.  There are some standard
> ones out of the box, like multi-user, emergency, getty, basic, etc.
>
>> The systemd configuration files are designed for programmers, not
>> technicians. And their is a HUGE difference between "programmers" and
>> "technicians". Different aptitudes, different skills. The old .conf
>> files, technicians can easily handle. Requiring everyone to be a
>> programmer is a really bad idea.
>>
> The only "configuration" files openrc supports for services are shell
> scripts, as opposed to declarative configuration files used by
> systemd.  Now, openrc init.d shell scripts might source configuration
> from some text file in /etc/conf.d, but there is nothing that prevents
> systemd units from doing the same.  On Gentoo we stick the settings in
> drop-in files instead, but these are no more complex.
>
> Here is an example of a Gentoo systemd drop-in:
> /etc/systemd/system/ntpdate.service.d/00gentoo.conf
> [Service]
> Environment="SERVER=0.gentoo.pool.ntp.org 1.gentoo.pool.ntp.org
> 2.gentoo.pool.ntp.org 3.gentoo.pool.ntp.org"
>
>
> That hardly requires programming to understand.
>
>
> And here is the entire ntpdate unit file:
> /usr/lib/systemd/system/ntpdate.service
> [Unit]
> Description=Set time via NTP using ntpdate
> After=network-online.target nss-lookup.target
> Before=time-sync.target
> Wants=time-sync.target
> Conflicts=systemd-timesyncd.service
>
> [Service]
> Type=oneshot
> ExecStart=/usr/sbin/ntpdate -b -u $SERVER
> RemainAfterExit=yes
>
> [Install]
> WantedBy=multi-user.target
>
>
> No programming there either.
>
> Most of the stuff that is hard to understand in the file are the
> dependencies, and that is just because you need to learn the
> terminology that systemd uses, though most of that is straightforward.
> The After= line is roughly equivalent to "use net dns" in openrc,
> though systemd has a lot more virtuals defined out of the box and
> they're more granular.  For example, systemd distinguishes between an
> interface existing, and an interface having an IP/etc, while on openrc
> we have just one virtual that covers the latter.
>
> I know, it almost sounds like the systemd design is intended to
> support running a diverse service ecosystem.  Go figure...
>

I noticed what you avoided addressing.

The mailing list is not for "flame wars". I will not respond to any
further comments from you.

Have a nice day.

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Rich Freeman]

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Corbin Bird  wrote:
>
> The old manual method of configuration is extremely flexible, you can
> get the "who-knows-where-it-came-from-component" to work. The new
> "automagic" of udev / systemd  forget it. At least with script based
> init systems I could change the run level to fix Xorg problems.

udev and systemd operate based on text configuration files that are
declarative in nature.

You can certainly change the "run level" in systemd (what you'd call a
runlevel in openrc would be a target in systemd).  You can even pass
the default target on the kernel command line, or change the default
target in /etc. As with openrc they aren't numbered and you aren't
limited to any particular number of them.  There are some standard
ones out of the box, like multi-user, emergency, getty, basic, etc.

>
> The systemd configuration files are designed for programmers, not
> technicians. And their is a HUGE difference between "programmers" and
> "technicians". Different aptitudes, different skills. The old .conf
> files, technicians can easily handle. Requiring everyone to be a
> programmer is a really bad idea.
>

The only "configuration" files openrc supports for services are shell
scripts, as opposed to declarative configuration files used by
systemd.  Now, openrc init.d shell scripts might source configuration
from some text file in /etc/conf.d, but there is nothing that prevents
systemd units from doing the same.  On Gentoo we stick the settings in
drop-in files instead, but these are no more complex.

Here is an example of a Gentoo systemd drop-in:
/etc/systemd/system/ntpdate.service.d/00gentoo.conf
[Service]
Environment="SERVER=0.gentoo.pool.ntp.org 1.gentoo.pool.ntp.org
2.gentoo.pool.ntp.org 3.gentoo.pool.ntp.org"


That hardly requires programming to understand.


And here is the entire ntpdate unit file:
/usr/lib/systemd/system/ntpdate.service
[Unit]
Description=Set time via NTP using ntpdate
After=network-online.target nss-lookup.target
Before=time-sync.target
Wants=time-sync.target
Conflicts=systemd-timesyncd.service

[Service]
Type=oneshot
ExecStart=/usr/sbin/ntpdate -b -u $SERVER
RemainAfterExit=yes

[Install]
WantedBy=multi-user.target


No programming there either.

Most of the stuff that is hard to understand in the file are the
dependencies, and that is just because you need to learn the
terminology that systemd uses, though most of that is straightforward.
The After= line is roughly equivalent to "use net dns" in openrc,
though systemd has a lot more virtuals defined out of the box and
they're more granular.  For example, systemd distinguishes between an
interface existing, and an interface having an IP/etc, while on openrc
we have just one virtual that covers the latter.

I know, it almost sounds like the systemd design is intended to
support running a diverse service ecosystem.  Go figure...

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Corbin Bird]

On 12/21/2016 06:09 AM, k...@aspodata.se wrote:
> Regarding the controversy about systemd etc.
>
> The problem isn't that systemd is available, or that there exist a 
> company named Red Had or that there exist a developer named Lennart
> Poettering that develops programs.
>
> The problem is that an ever increasing amount of programs list systemd 
> or some of its libs as a depenancy. So it is getting harder and harder 
> to opt out.
>
> The situation is similar to the one with udev and variants. Some 
> programs list udev as a requirement even though there is no requirment
> on technical grounds. I.e. X, I can run X perfectly without udev, I
> just have to make my own xorg.conf, or I might want to run X with udev
> since then it handles multiple keyboards with different layouts 
> automatically. It's like when buying a car, some prefer automats, some
> stick shift. There are pro and cons for both cases.
>
> Sometimes its useful and sometimes its not needed, why should I be more 
> or less forced to use it in every case ? No one is expecting me to run a 
> webserver on every systems, why then the heated arguments about this ?
> It should be my own decision what to install, not someone elses.
>
> Regards,
> /Karl Hammar
>
> ---
> Aspö Data
> Lilla Aspö 148
> S-742 94 Östhammar
> Sweden
> +46 173 140 57
>
>
>
The other thing not really mentioned about systemd  the problems of
"fixing" systems with it.

Its a "one-size-fits-all" solution, just like Windows. If you don't have
a "standard" desktop / notebook ... you are S.O.L.

The old manual method of configuration is extremely flexible, you can
get the "who-knows-where-it-came-from-component" to work. The new
"automagic" of udev / systemd  forget it. At least with script based
init systems I could change the run level to fix Xorg problems.

The systemd configuration files are designed for programmers, not
technicians. And their is a HUGE difference between "programmers" and
"technicians". Different aptitudes, different skills. The old .conf
files, technicians can easily handle. Requiring everyone to be a
programmer is a really bad idea.

You really don't want to see the "quality" of the code a technician
would produce :(

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Rich Freeman]

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 7:09 AM,   wrote:
>
> The problem is that an ever increasing amount of programs list systemd
> or some of its libs as a depenancy. So it is getting harder and harder
> to opt out.
>
> The situation is similar to the one with udev and variants. Some
> programs list udev as a requirement even though there is no requirment
> on technical grounds. I.e. X, I can run X perfectly without udev, I
> just have to make my own xorg.conf, or I might want to run X with udev
> since then it handles multiple keyboards with different layouts
> automatically. It's like when buying a car, some prefer automats, some
> stick shift. There are pro and cons for both cases.
>

I get your frustration.

Below is just my personal sense of things, ultimately the entire
Council sets policy but this is my sense of the "Gentoo Way" and how I
see things being likely to go.

On Gentoo at a distro level we're never going to force package
maintainers to make any particular package a dependency as long as the
software works without it.  At the same time we're not going to force
maintainers to patch software to eliminate dependencies.  We certainly
encourage maintainers to do things like this within reason, but we
don't require it.

In your example, if upstream xorg starts sticking dbus calls to
udev/systemd/etc in their code, and it fails to launch if those
packages aren't running, then unless somebody patches out that
behavior or makes it conditional then udev/systemd would need to be
listed as dependencies.  It isn't like simply not listing them would
fix the issue anyway, it would just cause X to fail to launch for some
users.

When software just runs without some features without another package
installed, then there is no requirement to list it as a dependency
(generally speaking).  Maybe during the install it might suggest
installing some other packages for full functionality.

In the end though, if xorg requires systemd as shipped upstream, that
is an upstream issue.  I realize you'll get a lot less sympathy with
many upstream projects than you'll get around here because
goals/philosophies differ.

And as upstream projects go further down that road, it will in
practice become more difficult for a distro like Gentoo to maintain
larger and larger patches to alter their behavior.  Gentoo as a distro
will probably never force a developer to give up, but at some point
you're talking about maintaining a fork and not a patch.  Now, you can
look at eudev and see that there is ultimately no limit on how long
that can go on, but it depends on people willing to do the work.

Ultimately Gentoo is a place where we all come together to try to
support our ability to maintain a diverse configuration space.  Still,
that diversity largely depends on the interests of those who put in
the work to maintain it.  And it often comes at a cost of less
vertical integration and automation.  At a distro level we try to
remove barriers to individual contribution, not force individuals to
contribute in a manner that we would prefer them to.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Rich Freeman]

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 7:36 AM, Tanstaafl  wrote:
> On 12/20/2016 9:33 PM, Rich Freeman  wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 5:51 PM, Alan Mackenzie  wrote:
>>> systemd is primarily a political project, not a technical one.
>
>> What political benefit do I gain from using and maintaining systemd?
>
> Interesting that you snipped the rest of his comment - or more his main
> point - that followed.
>

I don't really consider it political, but I think it was largely
correct insofar as one of the goals of systemd is to standardize the
core system dependencies/etc so that packages can rely on them being
present and vertically integrate.  I don't agree that you are "forced"
to use systemd.  Maybe you might be forced to use a different browser
or fork your browser or patch it or stick with an old version and
backport security fixes if you want to use it without systemd some
day.  But, if the entire Firefox developer community quit and decided
to do something else (a la Thunderbird) you'd be in a similar boat.
Sometimes you get what you pay for.

I get that people who want to avoid systemd are frustrated by this,
but honestly it feels like spitting against the wind at this point.  I
was frustrated back when everybody stopped taking care of kde-3.5 and
kde-4 wasn't really ready and was a resource hog on older systems.  I
switched to xfce for a while, because ultimately I can't demand that
the kde project cater to my whims.

The moment you choose to run code that you didn't write yourself, then
you become dependent on them.  With FOSS it gives you a lot more
options as anybody can potentially fork it and take it in a new
direction.  That doesn't change the reality that developing FOSS takes
work, and if 1% of the community wants to take it in a substantially
different direction they're going to have a much harder time of it
than the 99%.

In general though, nobody is required to engage in
debates/arguments/etc here, or even read your posts.  People choose to
participate in list discussions just as they choose what software they
want to maintain.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Rich Freeman]

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 10:49 PM, Daniel Campbell  wrote:
> On 12/20/2016 06:33 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> We don't have some
>> committee on high pick a winner and tell all the maintainers that they
>> all have to move from supporting x to supporting y.
>
> Fair points across the board but this stood out to me. We *do* have
> groups that, on some subset of the tree, exert what they feel to be
> winners. QA, the KDE team, and GNOME team have all made formal
> recommendations or requirements that they expect to see in ebuilds going
> forward. QA is blessed by council of course, so they have a bit more
> sway. But we're lying if we say we don't have committees making
> decisions on packaging guidelines.
>
> That's not the same as choosing a single package and telling every one
> to scram, but we're not hands-off, either.
>

Anybody wishing to add stuff to the main repository does not get a
choice in following QA policy (though these matters can be appealed to
the Council).  However, their policies for the most part are fairly
sensible and concern stuff like listing things as a dependency if you
link to them and so on.

KDE and GNOME developers work as a team, but these teams do not have
any exclusive control over anything in the tree.  If a Gentoo
developer doesn't like what they've done with kmail they can add a
kmail2 or kmail-rich0 or whatever that works they way they want it to.
Heck, if a bunch of devs wanted to do their own thing they could start
a kde-improved team if they wanted to.

In general this doesn't happen, because the developers interested in
maintaining these packages tend to agree on how they want to maintain
them, or at least they don't care enough to bother with forking them.

How do you think we ended up with eudev?

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Tanstaafl]

On 12/20/2016 9:33 PM, Rich Freeman  wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 5:51 PM, Alan Mackenzie  wrote:
>> systemd is primarily a political project, not a technical one.

> What political benefit do I gain from using and maintaining systemd?

Interesting that you snipped the rest of his comment - or more his main
point - that followed.

How about commenting on the most important point he made:

On 12/20/2016 5:51 PM, Alan Mackenzie  wrote:
> ... [systemd's] object is clearly to turn GNU/Linux into a tightly
> bound vertical stack where only Red Hat's views on what is good will
> prevail. Our freedom to chose which core packages to run is being
> steadily encroached upon, and pretty soon we will have no choice at
> all.
> 
> Already, as discussed in this thread, pulseaudio has become a hard 
> dependency of Firefox on G/L, and pulseaudio is controlled by the 
> politicians. The next step will be to make systemd a hard dependency 
> of pulseaudio (it will happen, just as it happened for udev and
> gnome), at which point the "happy" people running openrc will not be
> able to run Firefox. Happy indeed.

This, to me, is the single most important problem with systemd, but I'm
not sure that enough people who are in a position to be able to do
anything about it care about or are really fully aware of it.

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[karl]

Regarding the controversy about systemd etc.

The problem isn't that systemd is available, or that there exist a 
company named Red Had or that there exist a developer named Lennart
Poettering that develops programs.

The problem is that an ever increasing amount of programs list systemd 
or some of its libs as a depenancy. So it is getting harder and harder 
to opt out.

The situation is similar to the one with udev and variants. Some 
programs list udev as a requirement even though there is no requirment
on technical grounds. I.e. X, I can run X perfectly without udev, I
just have to make my own xorg.conf, or I might want to run X with udev
since then it handles multiple keyboards with different layouts 
automatically. It's like when buying a car, some prefer automats, some
stick shift. There are pro and cons for both cases.

Sometimes its useful and sometimes its not needed, why should I be more 
or less forced to use it in every case ? No one is expecting me to run a 
webserver on every systems, why then the heated arguments about this ?
It should be my own decision what to install, not someone elses.

Regards,
/Karl Hammar

---
Aspö Data
Lilla Aspö 148
S-742 94 Östhammar
Sweden
+46 173 140 57

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[karl]

Neil Bothwick:
> On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 23:11:08 +0100, lee wrote:
> > >> But you already heard of udev rules? I guess I mentioned them
> > >> already. They are not so hard to write and they only need to be
> > >> written once.  
> > > It's too late by then, if eth0 and eth1 already exist, you cannot
> > > switch them with udev rules - as anyone who had worked with dual NICs
> > > would have discovered.  
> > Can you switch them when they have unrecognisable names?
> You can't switch any two names because the udev rules are run singly, so
> at one point you will be trying to rename an interface with a name that
> is already in use.
...

Not everyone runs udev, and you don't need udev to change the eth name,
a few other choises are presented here:

 https://ivi.fnwi.uva.nl/sne/air//wiki/LogicalInterfaceNames/

Regards,
/Karl Hammar

---
Aspö Data
Lilla Aspö 148
S-742 94 Östhammar
Sweden
+46 173 140 57

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Daniel Campbell]

On 12/20/2016 06:33 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> We don't have some
> committee on high pick a winner and tell all the maintainers that they
> all have to move from supporting x to supporting y.

Fair points across the board but this stood out to me. We *do* have
groups that, on some subset of the tree, exert what they feel to be
winners. QA, the KDE team, and GNOME team have all made formal
recommendations or requirements that they expect to see in ebuilds going
forward. QA is blessed by council of course, so they have a bit more
sway. But we're lying if we say we don't have committees making
decisions on packaging guidelines.

That's not the same as choosing a single package and telling every one
to scram, but we're not hands-off, either.

-- 
Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer
OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net
fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C  1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Rich Freeman]

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 5:51 PM, Alan Mackenzie  wrote:
>
> As a reference point, just before I start, I'm a contributor to Emacs,
> both new stuff and bug fixing, in both C and Lisp, and (occasionally) I
> write documentation.  ;-)
>

Great.  I don't use any of that stuff.

How would you feel if I told you to just quit doing those things
(which you presumably enjoy) to maintain something else that you don't
care for, like systemd?

That would clearly be wrong of me.  People work on the stuff they're
interested in.  People who are interested in using openrc are going to
work on openrc.  People who are interested in systemd are going to
work on systemd.

It is nice if you run into a situation where you work on software I
like and I work on software you like.  However, that isn't the same as
pointing out that you contribute to something that you like, and
therefore I should also contribute to something that you like.

> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 12:57:02PM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Heiko Baums  wrote:
>> > Am 20.12.2016 um 17:47 schrieb Rich Freeman:
>
>> Anybody can run openrc on Arch linux.  They just have to set it up
>> themselves, or form a group to share the work.
>
> There's no "just" to it.  It would be a long, time consuming project;
> unless, of course you were already intimately familiar with both openrc
> and Arch Linux.

Sure, and that is how we end up with stuff in the community-based FOSS
world.  People freely spend their time on long time-consuming
projects, so that others can benefit in turn, and probably so that
they can personally benefit in some way.

If something doesn't work on a particular distro, it is because nobody
cared enough to spend a lot of time on it.

>
> systemd is primarily a political project, not a technical one.

What political benefit do I gain from using and maintaining systemd?
I don't use any Redhat-originated distros at home or at work.  I don't
get paid in any way by them, or by anybody who actually profits from
FOSS much at all.  I'm certainly not going to gain votes on the Gentoo
Council by saying I use systemd, since Gentoo has become a bit of a
refuge for people who seem to despise it, and far more Gentoo
developers prefer openrc to systemd.

I use systemd because I personally find it useful, and the reasons for
that are largely technical in my judgment.

>
> Sadly, there are not enough people in the free software world who were
> politically aware enough, and energetic enough, to fight this purloining
> of our software by Red Hat.

Sometimes when people make different decisions than you do, it isn't
because they don't know something that you know, or because they're
not as smart as you.  Sometimes they just have different priorities.

I don't consider Red Hat taking over the world a serious threat.
Heaven forbid they donate more free software that I can choose to use
or not if I wish.

>
>> > That's true for Gentoo, Slackware, Devuan, and maybe still Debian, but
>> > not for the other Distros like Ubuntu and its derivatives, Arch Linux,
>> > Redhat, Fedora etc.
>
>
>> Anybody can maintain openrc on any distro.
>
> No they can't.  Or at least, not unless they make it their main spare
> time occupation, and already are competent hackers.

They could also hire somebody to maintain it for them, or barter what
they have in some way.  Maybe I could be persuaded to do a little
openrc work for you on Arch if you spent some time improving vim.  :)

>
>> Maybe they can't put it in the official repository, that would be up to
>> the people who control those repositories.  However, as everybody is
>> quick to point out the dependency list for sysvinit+openrc is
>> incredibly light, which makes it fairly easy to run on any distro.  You
>> could probably get sysvinit running on arch in 15min.
>
> Sorry, but that's so far out of kilter with reality I have to object.  If
> you are intimately familiar with openrc, the Linux booting system,
> administrative things (like where to find the source code), technical
> things (how to build it, how to link it into Linux), you just _might_
> manage it in a few hours.  Somebody starting from scratch is not going to
> get sysvinit running on a different distro in 15 hours, never mind 15
> minutes.

You don't need to know anything at all about openrc to get sysvinit
working.  Sysvinit doesn't depend on openrc in any way.

sysvinit consists of one 60-line configuration file (most of which is
comments), 8 binaries, and 5 symlinks.  Oh, and some manpages and docs
and stuff.  It isn't very hard to set up.

And that is how you go about things like this, one step at a time.

>
> I thoroughly dislike all these platitudes that have also annoyed Heiko.
> That "you get what you pay for", "It's free, get up and hack", and so on.

Well, ultimately these are attitudes that benefit the world of FOSS,
because 1 guy that actually contributes back is worth 100 who whine on
mailing 

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Neil Bothwick]

On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 23:11:08 +0100, lee wrote:

> >> But you already heard of udev rules? I guess I mentioned them
> >> already. They are not so hard to write and they only need to be
> >> written once.  
> >
> > It's too late by then, if eth0 and eth1 already exist, you cannot
> > switch them with udev rules - as anyone who had worked with dual NICs
> > would have discovered.  
> 
> Can you switch them when they have unrecognisable names?

You can't switch any two names because the udev rules are run singly, so
at one point you will be trying to rename an interface with a name that
is already in use.

This has nothing to do with how easily you are able to grok the name
scheme and everything to do with consistency. Unfortunately, there are
still situations, especially with USB NICs, where this can fail, but for
PCI NICs you are guaranteed that the names will always stay the same and
you are not suddenly in the position of the two sides of your firewall
switching places.

But of you don't like it,, just do what the elog message tells you and it
won't be a problem, it's a default setting not an enforced behaviour.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

"There are some ideas so idiotic that only an intellectual could believe
them" George Orwell


pgpuh7UjmWux4.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Dale]

lee wrote:
> Dale  writes:
>
>> lee wrote:
>>> Dale  writes:
>>>
 lee wrote:
> Daniel Frey  writes:
>
>> On 12/19/2016 10:15 AM, lee wrote:
>>> "Walter Dnes"  writes:
>>>
   Similarly, the vast majority of home users have a machine with one
 ethernet port, and in the past it's always been eth0.
>>> Since 10 years or so, the default is two ports.
>> Not in any of the computers I've built. Generally only high end or
>> workstation/server boards have two ports.
>>
>> i.e. not what the typical home user would buy.
> It is not reasonable to assume that a "typical home user" would want a
> computer with a crappy board to run Linux on it (or for anything
> else). If they are that cheap, they're better off buying a used one.
> When they are sufficiently clueless to want something like that, what
> does it matter what the network interfaces are called.
>
 I built my current rig just a few years ago.  It has one ethernet port
 on it.  Since it didn't work right, bad drivers I guess, I added a card
 to have the second port.  The rig I built before that, it also had one
 ethernet port. 

 I might add, I didn't buy a "crappy board" either.  The first was Abit
 which was the top rated brand at the time and my current board is
 Gigabyte, another highly rated board at the time I bought it.
>>> I have no experience with Abit, and I can tell you from experience with
>>> a couple of them that Gigabyte is the worst junk for a board you can
>>> buy and that their support has no idea what they are doing.
>> Well, I have two of them and they work just fine.  I might add, Abit
>> gave me many years of 24/7 service.  Being outdated was its only
>> problem.  Also, Gigabyte and Asus were the top rated boards when I
>> bought my board.  Some who have been here long enough may even recall me
>> posting my buy list here on this mailing list.  So, you thinking
>> Gigabyte is junk can go in the same place as your thinking two ports on
>> every board is the default.   It's your opinion and not based on
>> reality.   I've learned the same usually applies to hard drives as well. 
> You must be assuming that the Gigabyte boards I've had my hands on
> somehow existed outside of reality.

I think you are outside reality at this point. 


>
 As Daniel
 points out, you have to get into some pretty high end boards before you
 get two ethernet ports. 

 Just for giggles, I went and looked at Asus boards, currently highly
 rated.  I had to get up around the $400 range to find two ports.  Most
 computers built for home use, and even some, maybe most, business
 computers, only have one port.  It's all they need. 

 I might also add, I have a lot of friends that give me their old
 computers.  Of all the puters I have ever seen, they had one ethernet
 port.  Over the past decade or so, I've likely stripped out a few dozen
 computers for parts.  Not one of them had two ethernet ports. 

 I'm with Daniel on this one. 
>>> The last time I got a board that didn't have two ports is about 20 years
>>> ago, and I never bought one for 400.  They all just have 2, needed or
>>> not, even cheap ones.
>>>
>>>
>> Odd.  Just for giggles, I went to Newegg.  I pulled up both AMD and
>> Intel boards.  I then looked at the pictures of the top sellers listed
>> there.  With my settings, it lists 36 on each page.  Out of the first
>> page for each type, only a couple or so had two ports and only one that
>> I saw was under $200.00.  The rest were more expensive than that.  I
>> think that one $200.00 board was a Gigabyte by the way.  I doubt you
>> want to claim owning that, right?  Looked at 72 boards, only found a
>> couple or so with two ethernet ports. 
>>
>> So, looking at a large website that has likely millions of customers,
>> carries about every brand of board there is, I could only find a very
>> small percentage of boards that have two ethernet ports built in.  That
>> is not what a reasonable person would call the default.  If it was the
>> default as you claim, then there should only be a few that don't have
>> two ports.  You add in that Daniel, Taiidan and myself have not seen
>> such a default, then I think you are mistaken. 
> That may very well be so, yet the boards around here usually have two
> ports.  If the ones around you usually have one port, it's not
> surprising that you would assume a different default number of ports.
> So what?
>
> .
>

I didn't go look at boards I had around here.  I went to a major
computer supplier, newegg, and looked at what they had.  Go back and
read again what I did and maybe read it more carefully. 

Might I also add, it's more than just me that has pointed out that you
are not correct on this.  It's a few others as well.  You ever stop to
think that what you 

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Alan Mackenzie]

Hello Rich, and Gentoo.

As a reference point, just before I start, I'm a contributor to Emacs,
both new stuff and bug fixing, in both C and Lisp, and (occasionally) I
write documentation.  ;-)

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 12:57:02PM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Heiko Baums  wrote:
> > Am 20.12.2016 um 17:47 schrieb Rich Freeman:
> >> Clearly nobody forced you to run it, because you aren't running it
> >> now.

> > That's again one of those silly arguments. I'm just not running it
> > because I'm using Gentoo again. On Arch Linux they forced systemd onto
> > the users. Because the Arch Linux users don't have any choice if they
> > want to use Arch Linux, because they e.g. don't want to compile anything
> > and still want to have bleeding edge software.

> Anybody can run openrc on Arch linux.  They just have to set it up
> themselves, or form a group to share the work.

There's no "just" to it.  It would be a long, time consuming project;
unless, of course you were already intimately familiar with both openrc
and Arch Linux.

I too get annoyed by the attitude "it's free software, _just_ change it
to do what you want/fork it.".  The software is indeed in one sense free,
in another sense it's tightly controlled by its maintainers.  Anybody
capable enough, with enough time on their hands can indeed change it, but
only for themselves - if the maintainers don't like your patch, then it's
going nowhere but your own box.  Unless, of course, you've got a really
massive amount of time on your hands, a group of like-minded hackers,
organisational ability, and the drive required to fork a project.

[  ]

> >> People who prefer systemd will maintain it, and people who prefer
> >> openrc will maintain that, and we can all be happy.

But for how long?  systemd is primarily a political project, not a
technical one.  Its object is clearly to turn GNU/Linux into a tightly
bound vertical stack where only Red Hat's views on what is good will
prevail.  Our freedom to chose which core packages to run is being
steadily encroached upon, and pretty soon we will have no choice at all.

Already, as discussed in this thread, pulseaudio has become a hard
dependency of Firefox on G/L, and pulseaudio is controlled by the
politicians.  The next step will be to make systemd a hard dependency of
pulseaudio (it will happen, just as it happened for udev and gnome), at
which point the "happy" people running openrc will not be able to run
Firefox.  Happy indeed.

Sadly, there are not enough people in the free software world who were
politically aware enough, and energetic enough, to fight this purloining
of our software by Red Hat.  It should surely have been obvious enough
when they made the technically loopy decision to subsume udev into
systemd, that the idea was to capture the core software.  The process is
largely complete - we have lost.  People not running systemd and friends
are gradually being pushed into irrelevant backwaters.

> > That's true for Gentoo, Slackware, Devuan, and maybe still Debian, but
> > not for the other Distros like Ubuntu and its derivatives, Arch Linux,
> > Redhat, Fedora etc.


> Anybody can maintain openrc on any distro.

No they can't.  Or at least, not unless they make it their main spare
time occupation, and already are competent hackers.

> Maybe they can't put it in the official repository, that would be up to
> the people who control those repositories.  However, as everybody is
> quick to point out the dependency list for sysvinit+openrc is
> incredibly light, which makes it fairly easy to run on any distro.  You
> could probably get sysvinit running on arch in 15min.

Sorry, but that's so far out of kilter with reality I have to object.  If
you are intimately familiar with openrc, the Linux booting system,
administrative things (like where to find the source code), technical
things (how to build it, how to link it into Linux), you just _might_
manage it in a few hours.  Somebody starting from scratch is not going to
get sysvinit running on a different distro in 15 hours, never mind 15
minutes.

Hacking free software is a slow laborious process.

> Openrc would take longer, mainly because you'd have to adapt the
> scripts for any services you care about.  But, it isn't THAT hard to
> do.

There's a lot of learning involved first.

I thoroughly dislike all these platitudes that have also annoyed Heiko.
That "you get what you pay for", "It's free, get up and hack", and so on.
There are (or, at least, used to be) unwritten understandings between
hackers, like: you don't make other hackers' lives difficult; you support
other hackers' freedom to hack; you _MAINTAIN_ your own products; even
you have a responsibility to the community to maintain your software.  It
is these understandings that allowed free software to flourish.
Predatory companies like Red Hat (there are probably others) have broken
these understandings, and twisted others' helpfulness 

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[lee]

Dale  writes:

> lee wrote:
>> Dale  writes:
>>
>>> lee wrote:
 Daniel Frey  writes:

> On 12/19/2016 10:15 AM, lee wrote:
>> "Walter Dnes"  writes:
>>
>>>   Similarly, the vast majority of home users have a machine with one
>>> ethernet port, and in the past it's always been eth0.
>> Since 10 years or so, the default is two ports.
> Not in any of the computers I've built. Generally only high end or
> workstation/server boards have two ports.
>
> i.e. not what the typical home user would buy.
 It is not reasonable to assume that a "typical home user" would want a
 computer with a crappy board to run Linux on it (or for anything
 else). If they are that cheap, they're better off buying a used one.
 When they are sufficiently clueless to want something like that, what
 does it matter what the network interfaces are called.

>>> I built my current rig just a few years ago.  It has one ethernet port
>>> on it.  Since it didn't work right, bad drivers I guess, I added a card
>>> to have the second port.  The rig I built before that, it also had one
>>> ethernet port. 
>>>
>>> I might add, I didn't buy a "crappy board" either.  The first was Abit
>>> which was the top rated brand at the time and my current board is
>>> Gigabyte, another highly rated board at the time I bought it.
>> I have no experience with Abit, and I can tell you from experience with
>> a couple of them that Gigabyte is the worst junk for a board you can
>> buy and that their support has no idea what they are doing.
>
> Well, I have two of them and they work just fine.  I might add, Abit
> gave me many years of 24/7 service.  Being outdated was its only
> problem.  Also, Gigabyte and Asus were the top rated boards when I
> bought my board.  Some who have been here long enough may even recall me
> posting my buy list here on this mailing list.  So, you thinking
> Gigabyte is junk can go in the same place as your thinking two ports on
> every board is the default.   It's your opinion and not based on
> reality.   I've learned the same usually applies to hard drives as well. 

You must be assuming that the Gigabyte boards I've had my hands on
somehow existed outside of reality.

>>> As Daniel
>>> points out, you have to get into some pretty high end boards before you
>>> get two ethernet ports. 
>>>
>>> Just for giggles, I went and looked at Asus boards, currently highly
>>> rated.  I had to get up around the $400 range to find two ports.  Most
>>> computers built for home use, and even some, maybe most, business
>>> computers, only have one port.  It's all they need. 
>>>
>>> I might also add, I have a lot of friends that give me their old
>>> computers.  Of all the puters I have ever seen, they had one ethernet
>>> port.  Over the past decade or so, I've likely stripped out a few dozen
>>> computers for parts.  Not one of them had two ethernet ports. 
>>>
>>> I'm with Daniel on this one. 
>> The last time I got a board that didn't have two ports is about 20 years
>> ago, and I never bought one for 400.  They all just have 2, needed or
>> not, even cheap ones.
>>
>>
>
> Odd.  Just for giggles, I went to Newegg.  I pulled up both AMD and
> Intel boards.  I then looked at the pictures of the top sellers listed
> there.  With my settings, it lists 36 on each page.  Out of the first
> page for each type, only a couple or so had two ports and only one that
> I saw was under $200.00.  The rest were more expensive than that.  I
> think that one $200.00 board was a Gigabyte by the way.  I doubt you
> want to claim owning that, right?  Looked at 72 boards, only found a
> couple or so with two ethernet ports. 
>
> So, looking at a large website that has likely millions of customers,
> carries about every brand of board there is, I could only find a very
> small percentage of boards that have two ethernet ports built in.  That
> is not what a reasonable person would call the default.  If it was the
> default as you claim, then there should only be a few that don't have
> two ports.  You add in that Daniel, Taiidan and myself have not seen
> such a default, then I think you are mistaken. 

That may very well be so, yet the boards around here usually have two
ports.  If the ones around you usually have one port, it's not
surprising that you would assume a different default number of ports.
So what?

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[lee]

Neil Bothwick  writes:

> On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 19:22:44 +0100, Heiko Baums wrote:
>
>> > eth0 is the first card found by software, and not always the one you
>> > think it is.  
>> 
>> But you already heard of udev rules? I guess I mentioned them already.
>> They are not so hard to write and they only need to be written once.
>
> It's too late by then, if eth0 and eth1 already exist, you cannot switch
> them with udev rules - as anyone who had worked with dual NICs would have
> discovered.

Can you switch them when they have unrecognisable names?

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[lee]

Andrej Rode  writes:

> Why
>> Or can you explain how unrecognisable names make things easier?
>
> Yeah they make life easier. From your talk you never had a problem with
> eth<0,10> switching names after boot. Everyone who had them appreciates
> predictable network interfaces.

Right, I've never had a problem like that.

> If you don't like them you can disable them in udev (I actually was
> wrong about only systemd).
> And actually I couldn't care less how my devices are named. Because
> ranting about them on a mailing list already takes more time and
> characters than typing `ip a`
>
> But yeah, I stop feeding the trolls right here :)

You have missed the point.

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Rich Freeman]

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Neil Bothwick  wrote:
>
> Yes, the predictable names are pointless on a single-NIC system, which is
> why there exist simple methods to switch back to the old way.
>

Either that, or just use a wildcard.  I just stick e* in my network
configuration so that it doesn't matter on single-NIC systems.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Neil Bothwick]

On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 19:22:44 +0100, Heiko Baums wrote:

> > eth0 is the first card found by software, and not always the one you
> > think it is.  
> 
> But you already heard of udev rules? I guess I mentioned them already.
> They are not so hard to write and they only need to be written once.

It's too late by then, if eth0 and eth1 already exist, you cannot switch
them with udev rules - as anyone who had worked with dual NICs would have
discovered.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

I wonder how much deeper would the ocean be without sponges.


pgpmWbg1xbmVT.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-user] from Firefox52: NO pure ALSA?, WAS: Firefox 49.0 & Youtube... Audio: No

[Neil Bothwick]

On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 18:50:38 +0100, Heiko Baums wrote:

> > Maybe there are different opinions, but what is cryptic on - as a
> > typical one - enp3s0?:
> > e - ethernet
> > n - network
> > p - pci (port) ...
> > 3 - ... 3
> > s - slot ...
> > 0 - ... 0  
> 
> Think about that yourself again and compare it to - eth0:
> 
> eth - ethernet
> 0 - 1st card

And which physical card is that? Each time you boot?
 
> I don't think I need to explain which of both is a lot more complicated
> and cryptic.

Yes, it is more complicated, but they are called predictable network
names, not simple network names. It means you know exactly which port a
network device refers to, every time you boot. Adding another NIC, even
if it is discovered first, will not change the names of existing NICs.

It's rather like the situation with hard disks, where sda may one day
become sdb, so distros use UUIDs in fstab. UUIDs are far more cryptic
than predictable network names, but no one complains loudly and
pointlessly about them, which I can only attribute to provenance.

Yes, the predictable names are pointless on a single-NIC system, which is
why there exist simple methods to switch back to the old way.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Bug: (n.) any program feature not yet described to the marketing
department.


pgpPVZEO9ABgW.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature