On Mon, 28 Oct 2013 15:40, Archie Cobbs wrote:

Jan Engelhardt wrote:

...

14:42 ares07:~ > xfs_info . [snip] Sorry for the following rant, I just can't stand to be silent anymore...

This filesystem performance discussion is very interesting!

Unfortunately, I can't read any of the reported statistics.

Why are they unreadable? Because all of the emails are plain text, but rendered in Gmail in a non-fixed width font, so the columns don't line up.

Why are all of the emails plain text? Because all openSUSE mailing lists require this.

Why do all openSUSE mailing lists require plain text? HECK IF I KNOW!?!

This is 2013. Is anyone out there still reading email using /usr/bin/mail?

It sure would be nice if people could send HTML email, like the rest of the world (and every other open source project I'm involved in) has been doing for the past 15 years, so that, say, a fixed-width font could be specified for stuff that needs a fixed-width font.

We could even require HTML emails to be "multipart/alternative" for those remaining 17 /usr/bin/mail users.

What am I missing?

A regular mail-program. A browser is NO replacement for a full mail-program, no matter what your web mail provider insists on. Or, get your ass in gear and bleat against google, to get them to render text/plain mail in monospaced fonts. Maybe you should check your browser settings, and make sure that you use a monospaced font for the fixed-width / monospaced setting. E.g. choosing "Arial" as "monospaced" font is shit on your side. I'm against wasted space. To much hidden shit in those html mails. E.g 65 lines of css-style for a one line reply. Most of that bogus waste is produced by web-mail providers. Thank you for wanting to waste additional bandwidth. - Yamaban. -- Using the internet since 28.8kbit. Yes, I'm 'old'. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Yamaban wrote:

Using the internet since 28.8kbit. Yes, I'm 'old'.

My first modem was 300 bits/sec, you young whipper snapper! ;-) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Archie Cobbs wrote:

Plain text is fine for most of the email on this list. My point is that it would be nice if people had the option to use a little formatting to help get their point across (which is why formatting exists).

The problem is, as is often the case, there will always be those who abuse that option to send a lot of unnecessary and often irritating junk. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On Monday 2013-10-28 15:40, Archie Cobbs wrote:

Jan Engelhardt wrote:

...

14:42 ares07:~ > xfs_info . meta-data=/dev/md7 isize=256 agcount=32, agsize=22891675 blks = sectsz=512 attr=2 data = bsize=4096 blocks=732533583, imaxpct=5 = sunit=0 swidth=0 blks naming =version 2 bsize=4096 ascii-ci=0 log =internal bsize=4096 blocks=357682, version=2 = sectsz=512 sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=1 realtime =none extsz=4096 blocks=0, rtextents=0

Unfortunately, I can't read any of the reported statistics. Why are they unreadable? Because all of the emails are plain text, but rendered in Gmail in a non-fixed width font, so the columns don't line up.

Then you should stop using Gmail. They spy on you anyway. The only time when rendering a text/plain mail with proportional fonts starts being ok is when the header has a "text-flowed" setting. Which mine don't. That said, I don't even complain about your HTML mails and I still read them, so give me some leeway! -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Monday, 2013-10-28 at 11:27 -0400, James Knott wrote:

Archie Cobbs wrote:

...

Plain text is fine for most of the email on this list. My point is that it would be nice if people had the option to use a little formatting to help get their point across (which is why formatting exists).

The problem is, as is often the case, there will always be those who abuse that option to send a lot of unnecessary and often irritating junk.

Yep. I agree that sometimes it would be interesting to have some formatting capabilities (italics, bold, tables perhaps...), but it can be abused. The size argument is moot, though: the list no longer filters attachements. Dunno why. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. (from 12.3 x86_64 "Dartmouth" at Telcontar) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlJuinEACgkQtTMYHG2NR9U49QCgkExhAIFIQns+VmJ3b5rW/2Kq r/EAn3EguZPJgpAaksunpY3V3HidiUkj =Q6HC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On 2013-10-28 11:20 (GMT-0400) Archie Cobbs composed:

Plain text is fine for most of the email on this list. My point is

Email at its inception was no more than plain text. Formatted email was not (didn't exist, same as GUI interfaces). Today's formatted email is marked up text (HTML or a variation thereof) that the original email readers cannot display comprehensibly, so doesn't constitute real email, even though for well over a decade most messages conveyed via the email system have been formatted, and the markup/formatting is provided for in updated specs in the form of a "multipart" specification. HTML email amounts to web pages conveyed via the email system, providing the means for spammers to do their dirty deeds that are impossible via pure plain text, and in most cases whether spam or not, loading system via unnecessary bloat. A more serious problem for mailing lists is in the archival process and hosting, where normally bloat must of necessity be removed for the archive to be usable.

that it would be nice if people had the option to use a little formatting to help get their point across (which is why formatting exists).

The few spoil it for the many. The option to use a little in reality serves as license to use more than a little, and to abuse. If your list message *really* needs special formatting, create a URL for it, and point to it in an email as a link, so that it can be viewed in the web browsers that were designed for competent viewing of formatted documents.

Anyway, yes the increase in size is a valid counter-argument (the only one I know of), but is your inbox really causing you to run out of disk space? If so then how can you possibly be reading it? This just seems like a very weak counter-argument.

It isn't the disk space itself. It's the RAM consumption increase that accompanies the larger disk consumption, making an email app less responsive, and possibly causing otherwise unneeded RAM swapping, making everything less responsive.

I mean, everyone out there must get lots of HTML formatted email from other sources. It's perfectly readable. What's the real problem? Just

It's rarely "perfectly" readable. Most HTML comes formatted dictating sender's (M$ default mousetype usually), which means it does not display using the font I specified in my email app for optimal reading of email (usually at less than half of optimal size). That doesn't actually bother me, as my email app offers a setting to disregard the formatting, which I have turned on 99.7% of the time, and shows me optimal size text (that I can actually read without some kind of magnification).

seems mostly like all arguments against add up to nothing more than historical inertia.

But the world has evolved. We have new tools... we should be able to use them.

That new tools exist is not justification to destroy utility of old tools people like using that do still work. Not everyone welcomes the learning curve that typically accompanies new tools. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Yamaban wrote:

Using the internet since 28.8kbit. Yes, I'm 'old'.

I think my first US Robotics was 14.4K, but before that I had the usual 1200 and 2400baud modems. Then I went ISDN and got 64K. That was about twenty years ago. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (15.2°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - dedicated server rental in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On Monday 2013-10-28 21:41, Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

Given the right reader, we have /italics/ and *bold* and _underlined_. In e.g. knode smileys too are displayed as graphics.

I know, but it is not standard. Pine doesn't render those, for instance.

You do not need that with pine, because pine can render basic HTML, which so much superior, I hear ;) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On Mon, 28 Oct 2013 21:45:05 +0100 (CET) Jan Engelhardt wrote:

On Monday 2013-10-28 21:41, Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

...

Given the right reader, we have /italics/ and *bold* and _underlined_. In e.g. knode smileys too are displayed as graphics.

I know, but it is not standard. Pine doesn't render those, for instance.

You do not need that with pine, because pine can render basic HTML, which so much superior, I hear ;)

Superior to what? Yes, HTML is superior at transporting viruses and malware onto your computer or causing other inappropriate actions to occur. That's aside from the 400-500% bloat factor which makes downloading it very SLOW if you're in an area that doesn't have/can't afford broadband not to mention the excess storage space requirements. Consider a typical mail list which might receive in excess of 500-1000 messages per day, many of which will need to be moderated or outright rejected due to size. And if you're the one having to pay to download those bloated files due to ISP bandwidth restrictions can you afford it?? Thanks, Tom -- Every man is encompassed by a cloud of comforting convictions, which move with him like flies on a summer day. - Bertrand Russell ^^ --... ...-- / -.- --. --... -.-. ..-. -.-. ^^^^ Tom Taylor - retired penguin - KG7CFC AMD Phenom II x4 955 -- 4GB RAM -- 2x1.5TB sata2 openSUSE 13.1_RC1-x86_64 KDE 4.11.12, FF 24.0, claws-mail 3.9.2 registered linux user 263467 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On 10/28/2013 8:10 AM, James Knott wrote:

Yamaban wrote:

...

Using the internet since 28.8kbit. Yes, I'm 'old'.

My first modem was 300 bits/sec, you young whipper snapper! ;-)

But was it acoustic, where you had to put the phone in the rubber cups? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On 10/28/2013 8:33 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:

If you have problems reading plain text email on your "reader", change reader. That's the only solution for you.

------------ Conversely if you have problems reading HTML email on your reader, then change your reader. That's the only solution for you. Can you say narrow minded wearing blinders? I prefer the option to send in either, Anyone who can't handle either has a problem. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

* Linda Walsh [10-28-13 23:06]:

On 10/28/2013 8:33 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

If you have problems reading plain text email on your "reader", change reader. That's the only solution for you.

------------

Conversely if you have problems reading HTML email on your reader, then change your reader. That's the only solution for you.

Can you say narrow minded wearing blinders?

I prefer the option to send in either,

Anyone who can't handle either has a problem.

Agreed. But it remains a matter of consideration and politeness. HTML is not wanted nor welcome here and by many people not necessarily here. I can handle html mail and reject it w/o a problem or every even looking at it. But then, *you* do not have to be polite, do you? -- (paka)Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA @ptilopteri http://en.opensuse.org openSUSE Community Member facebook/ptilopteri http://wahoo.no-ip.org Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2 Registered Linux User #207535 @ http://linuxcounter.net -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On 2013-10-28 20:23 (GMT-0700) Linda Walsh composed:

You obviously never lived through the days of large ascii art sigs..

I suppose it doesn't count that ascii art wall banners I created in the early 1970s from punch card input were printed on 11X15 green bar fan fold paper on a chain printer instead of a dumb terminal that wouldn't do sideways text. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On 10/28/2013 8:25 PM, Patrick Shanahan wrote:

* Linda Walsh [10-28-13 23:06]:

...

On 10/28/2013 8:33 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

If you have problems reading plain text email on your "reader", change reader. That's the only solution for you.

---

Conversely if you have problems reading HTML email on your reader, then change your reader. That's the only solution for you.

Can you say narrow minded wearing blinders?

I prefer the option to send in either,

Anyone who can't handle either has a problem.

Agreed. But it remains a matter of consideration and politeness. HTML is not wanted nor welcome here and by many people not necessarily here. I can handle html mail and reject it w/o a problem or every even looking at it.

But then, *you* do not have to be polite, do you?

No more than anyone else is to me. I *like* well formatted emails if it helps me read or get the message. It has been *WELL* documented that reading fixed-type text slows down reading rate, and hinders comprehension. So the people who don't adapt to HTML and proportional fonts with CSS driven margins are the EXTREMELY RUDE, and INCONSIDERATE people who slow down and hurt all of society by their selfishness -- because everyone loses by having their time wasted reading fixed type text. If you don't believe me, go google read rates and comprehension and font-usage -- especially w/rt fixed vs. proportional fonts. The fact that such a selfish and collectively hindering body of people would even think to call someone, who knows enough to how much a 10% loss in reading rate would affect one over 100's of hours/year spent reading mind numbing fixed fonts, "impolite", is .. ludicrous. And you are wrong about HTML not being wanted nor welcome here. It is wanted and would be welcomed here by some loud, established people. The most common use of fixed type font outside of the computer industry is to educate those who don't know how to read -- where reading speed or comprehension isn't an issue. I fought the same issues over the past 10 years using unicode as well. It's been mostly english speaking americans that have fought the hardest against that as well. One nice thing about HTML -- I don't have to worry about my line length. I can just keep typing and typing, and it will all line up properly. If I want something to look "just right" in email, I need to make sure my email window width is set exactly right for 80 columns and even then I need to be careful to remember to hit CR. Either that or run it through gvim and format it. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Hi, On Mon, Oct 28, Linda Walsh wrote:

...

Email at its inception was no more than plain text.

---

And displays were limited to ascii text -- they couldn't do graphics.

There was a reason for such a limitation.

On top of that, there was no internet. Things were done in batches over telephone lines w/uucp.

Neither of those restrictions exist today.

They still exist _sometimes_! I prefer being able to read my mail always and not only on sunny days. [...]

I doubt that anyone here is not regularly email over some sort of GUI.

I _NEVER_ need to use a GUI for reading my mail.

There is little excuse for not adapting to such.

Excuse? For what? [...]

Get an HTML->text translator. Have your html filtered. They've existed for years.

Das ist ja an Überheblichkeit nicht mehr zu überbieten. Erst einfach das falsche Protokoll verwenden, dann eine Entschuldigung von denen fordern, die sich an die Protokolle halten und dann sich einfach auf den Standpunkt stellen, dass jeder sich doch einfach zusätzliche Arbeit machen soll, wenn er mit der selbsternannten Avantgarde kommunizieren möchte... Did not understand what I wrote? Hey, get an German -> English translator. They've existed for years. There is no excuse for not learning the language _I_ prefer!!! Get some dictionary and look up the meaning of "arrogance"! Hubert Mantel -- 1. e4!! (M27) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Linda Walsh wrote:

...

Yamaban wrote:

...

Using the internet since 28.8kbit. Yes, I'm 'old'.

My first modem was 300 bits/sec, you young whipper snapper! ;-)

But was it acoustic, where you had to put the phone in the rubber cups?

No, it was direct connect, but I had to manually switch it in. I'd dial the phone, listen for the carrier and then switch the modem to originate mode and hang up the phone. I used it to connect to the old BBS systems, but I was originally able to get it because my wife wanted to be able to play "Adventure" a the VAX 11/780 at my work. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On Tuesday 2013-10-29 08:32, Linda Walsh wrote:

On 10/28/2013 9:14 PM, Jan Engelhardt wrote:

...

...

Isn't suse moving to systemd? There is very little ascii text about that,

Other than that, there is about 680 KB worth of manpage prose. In ASCII. Your argument - which is actually more like a continuous rambling - fails.

---

The fact that the config files are no longer in a readable text, and need 680KB of man pages to explain them is part of the problem.

I don't need that for shell scripts.... i.e. you just made my point. :-)

You are just babbling nonsense as usual. The real sad part about it is, you do not even recognize it. But hey, systemd haters gonna hate. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Hubert Mantel wrote:

...

Get an HTML->text translator. Have your html filtered. They've existed for years.

Das ist ja an Überheblichkeit nicht mehr zu überbieten. Erst einfach das falsche Protokoll verwenden, dann eine Entschuldigung von denen fordern, die sich an die Protokolle halten und dann sich einfach auf den Standpunkt stellen, dass jeder sich doch einfach zusätzliche Arbeit machen soll, wenn er mit der selbsternannten Avantgarde kommunizieren möchte...

Did not understand what I wrote? Hey, get an German -> English translator. They've existed for years. There is no excuse for not learning the language _I_ prefer!!!

Get some dictionary and look up the meaning of "arrogance"!

+1 Well said. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (9.8°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - dedicated server rental in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On 10/29/2013 5:53 AM, Jan Engelhardt wrote:

...

The fact that the config files are no longer in a readable text, and need 680KB of man pages to explain them is part of the problem.

I don't need that for shell scripts.... i.e. you just made my point. :-)

You are just babbling nonsense as usual. The real sad part about it is, you do not even recognize it. But hey, systemd haters gonna hate.

What part of .6MB of needed documentation to begin to understand systemd don't you understand? I need no special documentation for the scripts that brought up the system in SysVinit. systemd uses it's only special syntax and language that needs well over a half a meg of specialized documentation that still doesn't make it's configuration easy or scriptable. That you think I hate systemd is your projection. Unlike you, I dislike having large alien bodies shoved down my throat. I'd have been ecstatic if it had been offered as a choice and likely would have dumped as many processes on it as possible. But needing specialized log formats that are in binary -- just like MS's logs shows me it's designed for keeping people from casually examining it and taking control away from end users. It's difficult to keep up on and examine the MS logs because their log format is binary and you have to write special tools to decode it. You can't use off-the-shelf text processing utils that have been available on *nix for 40+ years. Then you start bundling in device and power control into your service manager as well as it handling the logging -- and you are talking *monolithic*. That's poor design in the unix world where doing 1-2 things well and have them be inter-operable with other tools so you can have any format you want -- but ... inter-operable? What unix utils is systemd interoperable with? What pre-existing tools can we re-use to manage it, interpret the log files, etc. Then is the plain *bad practice*... in the unix world -- of using absolute, hard-coded paths. It can't use "PATH", or look where libraries are -- so all the binaries have to be moved to /usr/bin -- thus forcing /usr to be mounted before systemd ever starts. Again -- another weakness that suse works around by forcing initrd's on everyone... All this added complexity for dubious gain but mostly with complete incompatibility and lack of support for legacy usage. Yet these same people whine to high heaven about how a standard that's been around for near 20+ years, is "too new-fangled to be forced on users reading text"... The hypocrisy is ridiculous. You're just trying to wind me up... with such ridiculous nonsense. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On 10/30/2013 12:35 AM, Stefan Seyfried wrote:

Am 29.10.2013 04:23, schrieb Linda Walsh:

...

Isn't suse moving to systemd? There is very little ascii text about that,

nice try.

susi:~ # rpm -ql systemd|grep /man/|wc 274 274 12221 fail.

Now show me how many extra lines were needed with SysVInit to explain what startup scripts did. They were written in a well understood language using tools that have been around for over 30 years. The fact that systemd NEEDS considerable amounts of extra documentation to describe it's non-readable, specialized format config scripts (not to mention it's binary log format), is the point -- systemd doesn't use ascii -- it needs considerable documentation to explain the formats and encodings it uses. Original statement still stands. There is very little readable text that can be understood without the translation documents you mention. Most people on linux, who have done system admin work could very likely read nearly all the shell scripts that configured sysVinit w/o the need to look things up OR look in multiple places. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

В Thu, 31 Oct 2013 07:25:05 -0700 Linda Walsh пишет:

What part of .6MB of needed documentation to begin to understand systemd don't you understand? I need no special documentation for the scripts that brought up the system in SysVinit.

Except - you had to at some point need to learn shell. And that's not exactly trivial. I doubt you were born with shell knowledge implanted in you brains. - you learn systemd unit description syntax ones and it applies to any unit definition. Every time you have new script you have *new* script which you need to read and understand again. So it is by far not enough to know syntax of shell; you also need programming skills to actually interpret and predict results of shell script. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On Thu, 2013-10-31 at 08:01 -0700, Linda Walsh wrote:

On 10/30/2013 12:35 AM, Stefan Seyfried wrote:

...

Am 29.10.2013 04:23, schrieb Linda Walsh:

...

Isn't suse moving to systemd? There is very little ascii text about that,

nice try.

susi:~ # rpm -ql systemd|grep /man/|wc 274 274 12221 fail.

---

Now show me how many extra lines were needed with SysVInit to explain what startup scripts did. They were written in a well understood language using tools that have been around for over 30 years.

You're wasting your time, the decision has been made. The only question is what the decision to trash man-centuries of experience built upon traditional UNIX pipe/filter/script "there are ten thousand ways to skin any given cat" simplicity/flexibility will cost. -Mike -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On 10/31/2013 9:41 AM, Andrey Borzenkov wrote:

� Thu, 31 Oct 2013 07:25:05 -0700 Linda Walsh �����:

...

What part of .6MB of needed documentation to begin to understand systemd don't you understand? I need no special documentation for the scripts that brought up the system in SysVinit.

Except

- you had to at some point need to learn shell. And that's not exactly trivial. I doubt you were born with shell knowledge implanted in you brains.

Ah, I was waiting for someone to bring up that point. I was introduced to Bourne and Korn script back in the mid 80's. I wanted to use it to automate a build procedure. Since then, such scripting has proven superior for most low-level "tying things together work -- even on Windows over it's shell such that I did most of my sysmaint on it in cygwin w/bash. " It's proven it's worth again and again -- it isn't something that can only be used in 1 special case -- w/systemd. That is by far the biggest point. Systemd had to do everything from scratch -- It couldn't even be bothered with the convention of using PATH to look up binaries! The point was -- there was no need for a custom design. Even perl would have been better due to the established base and understanding. But it's would be like requiring people to learn esperanto to communicate with anyone in administration in the U.N. Learning a special purpose language that isn't used anywhere else is a guarantee it will never fully be learned -- if you don't use it all the time, you lose it. Shell gets reused enough that I don't forget it. On top of that. The "language"[sic] of systemd is completely a specialized domain language that is unusable for anything else. They've created a part that won't integrate with anything and doesn't integrate with anything from the past. A completely non-interoperative component that everyone is going on about how great it is as anything that tries to interoperate with it is likely to be subsumed by it (udev/powerd...et all).

- you learn systemd unit description syntax ones and it applies to any unit definition. Every time you have new script you have *new* script which you need to read and understand again. So it is by far not enough to know syntax of shell; you also need programming skills to actually interpret and predict results of shell script.

--- You learn a language and you can speak the language and express multiple concepts. You learn the "bind" (named), or sendmail and what do you have that's usable anywhere else? Nada. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On 10/31/2013 10:44 PM, Michal Hrusecky wrote:

Hi,

I would say that this flame is now pointless.

Dunno how useful it is w/o the legend, but attached is the SVG graph of this conversation. It started out because people couldn't tolerate HTML, which has been around for near 20+ years, because it caused too much change. Then the same people who can't handle something 20 years old, come along and switch to systemd which is .. at most a year or two and certainly not that long since it's first official release (if its had one yet). The flame as you call it was about people claiming they can't change, yet systemd clearly shows that this is wrong. It's more change over a shorter period of time with less compatibiltiy to anything, and yet all the movers and shakers of this list have jumped on its bandwagon -- yet those same people can't tolerate or accept HTML because it's too much change? I think people missed the point. I really had no delusions that anything I said about systemd would make any difference, yet, how can people adopt something like that that has all its faults and incompatibilities (despite it's good features!), yet protest so loudly over html? It just doesn't make sense. And I agree w/the rest of what you said about doing my own thing if it so important. I am doing my own thing.. but whether or not I'll ever productize it is unknown though unlikely. It took me nearly 6 years just to release a module to print things on CPAN, because I kept tweaking it and testing it.. I'm way to demanding/exacting to feel comfortable releasing most things... But then, that's why I'm constantly amazed at what passes for released SW (speaking in general, not about anything OpnSuse specific, to be clear), w/ much of it being Beta quality... so I'd assume I wasn't going to do something until it's done.

On 11/5/2013 2:42 PM, Brian K. White wrote:

On 10/28/2013 11:03 PM, Linda Walsh wrote:

...

On 10/28/2013 5:16 PM, Thomas Taylor wrote: Yes, HTML is superior at transporting viruses and malware

...

onto your computer or causing other inappropriate actions to occur.

---

That's just crap.

HTML transports viruses as much as txt does.

Ok so like I said about Linda being right and reasonable most of the time... gotta have a few exceptions to prove the rule I guess?

How anyone who knows what html is can deny that *rendering* html doesn't introduce new and vastly more powerful channels to cause your client to silently do stuff than plain text is beyond me.

You message had "*rendering*" in bold text -- did you write in HTML? No -- I assert that HTML is markup on text -- it isn't scripting -- but it does the same thing that some reader do automatically. Note, that fact that your reader is displaying binary data as "text" is already an interpretive layer. You can claim, that interpreting a binary stream as text is vastly different than interpreting it as emphasized, italicized, or paragraph-formatted or proportional text, but it's a matter of degree. If you aren't seeing, *only* electrical "on/off" states, you are seeing some level of interpretation -- even "slashdot" allows HTML (or a subset thereof) for markup. I don't recall any instance where a site has been hacked due to a bug in an HTML renderer. If you have an example to the contrary, I'd find it very interesting, but if not, I'd say it's the same probability as worrying about virus's embedded in the headers of your email (which email readers don't show you, but are definitely used by various interpreters) or in the parity bits of your text (which most email readers ignore unless they are trying to interpret it for some purpose (like alternate charsets -- a type of markup!)... I have seen bugs in jpg display, and audio display, but those are very rare and I really wouldn't regard them as serious threat vectors these days. Technically HTML is marginally more complex to interpret than text, but I would still ask for a proof of concept -- I don't recall it ever being seriously considered a threat vector. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On 11/5/2013 7:44 PM, Claudio Freire wrote:

On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 11:09 PM, Linda Walsh wrote:

...

No -- I assert that HTML is markup on text -- it isn't scripting -- but it does the same thing that some reader do automatically.

That's oh-so-naive

---- Could you elaborate. I'm talking HTML with no includes and no scripts… i.e. the complete source in the text. I'll ask you the same — can you give any record of an exploit in such? Or are you talking theory? Note that anyone looking at this text is looking at it through an interpreter (unless they are looking at it on an old fashion serial terminal (𝑑𝑜 𝑡𝘩𝑒𝑦 𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝑒𝑥𝑖𝑠𝑡❔) with a character generator in hardware. But most people use a GUI interpreter, even if they "ssh" into their machine, the window they use is still a local GUI. If you can't admit that what you call plain text is an interpretive display, then I'll take your naïve and raise it 1¹. ¹ – BTW, if some chars ✱didn't✱ look strange, you have some that new UTF-8 interpretation going on in your “plain-text” reader. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On 11/5/2013 9:45 PM, Claudio Freire wrote:

On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 1:13 AM, Linda Walsh wrote:

...

On 11/5/2013 7:44 PM, Claudio Freire wrote:

...

On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 11:09 PM, Linda Walsh wrote:

...

No -- I assert that HTML is markup on text -- it isn't scripting -- but it does the same thing that some reader do automatically.

That's oh-so-naive

---- Could you elaborate. I'm talking HTML with no includes and no scripts� i.e. the complete source in the text.

https://www.google.com.ar/search?q=buffer+overflow+in+html+parser&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&gws_rd=cr&ei=Ntd5UqCJO5C_sQSFoIHgDw

Google search, first try, first query that popped into my head.

----------- You should have looked a bit deeper... Nothing about an exploit, but you can find a similar list @: https://www.google.com/search?q=buffer+overflow+in+text+parser Or https://www.google.com/search?q=buffer+overflow+in+text+email Including buffer overflows in mutt -- a plaintext reader. or this is a goodie: CERT/CC Blog: *****Plain Text Email in Outlook Express************* www.cert.org/blogs/certcc/.../plain_text_email_in_outlook_ex.html - Cached - Similar Nov 13, 2009 ... Reading email messages in plain text seems like a reasonable thing to ... cursor stack buffer overflow vulnerability (VU#191609), I noticed that ... So far you helping me show more bugs in plain text emails that I would have guessed... fascinating...so maybe text emails are more of a security risk than HTML, due to people's implicit belief that plaintext emails can't contain such problems so there is less checking? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Hello, Am Dienstag, 5. November 2013 schrieb Linda Walsh:

You message had "*rendering*" in bold text -- did you write in HTML?

No -- I assert that HTML is markup on text -- it isn't scripting --

HTML is more than markup - and it can contain scripting. The problem isn't the markup part (bold/italic/underline etc.), but all the other things (like javascript and tracking pixels) that can be embedded in HTML. I'm fine with rendering text in mails *bold* or _underlined_, but I don't want colored text, javascript or tracking pixels in my mails.

Note, that fact that your reader is displaying binary data as "text" is already an interpretive layer. You can claim, that interpreting a binary stream as text is vastly different than interpreting it as emphasized, italicized, or paragraph-formatted or proportional text, but it's a matter of degree. If you aren't seeing, *only* electrical "on/off" states, you are seeing some level of interpretation

01110111 01110010 01101111 01101110 01100111 *SCNR*

I don't recall any instance where a site has been hacked due to a bug in an HTML renderer.

I strongly disagree - XSS is basically a bug in the renderer (because it doesn't remove or escape <script> or <div onmouseover=...> tags), and you can read about XSS attacks quite often.

Technically HTML is marginally more complex to interpret than text, but I would still ask for a proof of concept -- I don't recall it ever being seriously considered a threat vector.

A simple example: a HTML mail could hide/optically replace the message header part (showing Subject/From/To/Date) in KMail with a positioned <div> and display whatever it wants there. With the same method, it could probably also simulate the green "This mail has a valid GPG signature from" box, which could then trick you to click on links (because you trust the (displayed) sender/signature), and the link targets could do phishing etc. That's one of the reasons why I don't like HTML mails - there's an additional risk level without any benefit. The other reason is more practical - I want mails displayed in the font _I_ like - not in a random font and (mis)design that the sender might like, but is harder to read. Regards, Christian Boltz --

...

Wow consensus in less than 24 hours....imagine if it always worked that way....:-) Something smells fishy here ;-) Do you have the solution(tm) for the "Kanzlerfrage"? :) [>> Peter Flodin, > Andreas Jäger und Christoph Thiel in opensuse]

-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

On 11/6/2013 5:50 AM, Claudio Freire wrote:

On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 4:16 AM, Linda Walsh wrote:

...

So far you helping me show more bugs in plain text emails that I would have guessed... fascinating...so maybe text emails are more of a security risk than HTML, due to people's implicit belief that plaintext emails can't contain such problems so there is less checking?

Morale is, any input to any program can contain viruses. Some venues are more likely/more exploited than others, and HTML has been exploited way too much for you to claim it hasn't and still appear knowledgeable.

Stop putting words in my mouth. My original statement was " HTML transports viruses as much as txt does. Scripting is a different matter. " So far all you have managed to prove is that plain-text mail readers as many or more buffer overflows (that may or may not be exploitable) than your average average HTML-only renderer built into built into mail programs like Tbird. (HTML-only renderer = no scripts, no fonts, no objects, etc). -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

What does any of the last 30+ messages have to do with filesystems? What does HTML in email have anything to do with openSUSE factory? Stay on topic or take it off-list, please. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org