Fancy climbing into ALP over New Year's? Fresh preview versions of SUSE's distro and NetBSD 10 are here
This may or may not clarify the direction that SuSE is taking: https://www.theregister.com/2022/12/23/new_preview_versions_of_suses/ Leslie -- Platform: Linux Distribution: openSUSE Leap 15.4 x86_64
On 1/1/23 01:50, J Leslie Turriff wrote:
This may or may not clarify the direction that SuSE is taking: https://www.theregister.com/2022/12/23/new_preview_versions_of_suses/
Leslie
And I was actually hopeful 2023 would be a good year -- foolish when your OS depends on the short-sightedness and greed f others.... I'll give up my traditional packaged system when they pry my laptop from by cold, dead hands. Others are saying ALP will lead to fertility problems and allows big brother to track you and ALP will modify your DNA leading to a more docile and easily controlled human.... Isn't that how it goes? -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
Sun, 1 Jan 2023 04:58:39 -0600 "David C. Rankin" <drankinatty@suddenlinkmail.com> :
On 1/1/23 01:50, J Leslie Turriff wrote:
This may or may not clarify the direction that SuSE is taking: https://www.theregister.com/2022/12/23/new_preview_versions_of_suses/
I'll give up my traditional packaged system when they pry my laptop from by cold, dead hands.
half a dozen paragraphs, none of it human readable but my stance is fairly basic, if I cannot install or use without an internet connection, then it's double-time migration-time!
On 2023-01-01 17:38, bent fender wrote:
Sun, 1 Jan 2023 04:58:39 -0600 "David C. Rankin" <drankinatty@suddenlinkmail.com> :
On 1/1/23 01:50, J Leslie Turriff wrote:
This may or may not clarify the direction that SuSE is taking: https://www.theregister.com/2022/12/23/new_preview_versions_of_suses/
I'll give up my traditional packaged system when they pry my laptop from by cold, dead hands.
half a dozen paragraphs, none of it human readable
I read it. I don't see anything enticing.
but my stance is fairly basic, if I cannot install or use without an internet connection, then it's double-time migration-time!
Certainly, same here. But where does it say that? -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 15.4 x86_64 at Telcontar)
Sun, 1 Jan 2023 21:36:28 +0100 "Carlos E. R." <carlos.e.r@opensuse.org> :
On 2023-01-01 17:38, bent fender wrote:
Sun, 1 Jan 2023 04:58:39 -0600 "David C. Rankin" <drankinatty@suddenlinkmail.com> :
On 1/1/23 01:50, J Leslie Turriff wrote:
This may or may not clarify the direction that SuSE is taking: https://www.theregister.com/2022/12/23/new_preview_versions_of_suses/
I'll give up my traditional packaged system when they pry my laptop from by cold, dead hands.
half a dozen paragraphs, none of it human readable
I read it. I don't see anything enticing.
I never said you were human
but my stance is fairly basic, if I cannot install or use without an internet connection, then it's double-time migration-time!
Certainly, same here. But where does it say that?
I could tell you if the language was humanly readable, since it isn't the question remains where did I say what I'm going to do if whatever comes isn't to my liking?
On 2023-01-01 22:55, bent fender wrote:
Sun, 1 Jan 2023 21:36:28 +0100 "Carlos E. R." <> :
On 2023-01-01 17:38, bent fender wrote:
Sun, 1 Jan 2023 04:58:39 -0600 "David C. Rankin" <> :
On 1/1/23 01:50, J Leslie Turriff wrote:
This may or may not clarify the direction that SuSE is taking: https://www.theregister.com/2022/12/23/new_preview_versions_of_suses/
I'll give up my traditional packaged system when they pry my laptop from by cold, dead hands.
half a dozen paragraphs, none of it human readable
I read it. I don't see anything enticing.
I never said you were human
I'm not saying I understood everything ;-)
but my stance is fairly basic, if I cannot install or use without an internet connection, then it's double-time migration-time!
Certainly, same here. But where does it say that?
I could tell you if the language was humanly readable, since it isn't the question remains where did I say what I'm going to do if whatever comes isn't to my liking?
Ok, but what I want to know is if this tidbit is verified. If the new distribution needs internet to run, I have to migrate. I don't even need to try it. It is final. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 15.4 x86_64 at Telcontar)
Sun, 1 Jan 2023 23:05:25 +0100 "Carlos E. R." <carlos.e.r@opensuse.org> :
On 2023-01-01 22:55, bent fender wrote:
I never said you were human
I'm not saying I understood everything ;-) ... If the new distribution needs internet to run, I have to migrate. I don't even need to try it. It is final.
Anything goes in love and war, there IS a war (data-denial is the name of the game) so mere suspicion is enough and evidence is not required :-) Nonetheless I will wait to actually see the bogeyman, even if every gauge points to the impossibility of commercial success without snooping on people. Speakin' of pointed peaks, anybody try Alpine yet?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 El 2023-01-01 a las 19:03 -0500, bent fender escribió:
Sun, 1 Jan 2023 23:05:25 +0100 "Carlos E. R." <> :
...
Speakin' of pointed peaks, anybody try Alpine yet?
I'm composing this email with Alpine 2.26, if that is what you mean :-) - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. (from openSUSE 15.4 x86_64 at Telcontar) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHYEARECADYWIQQZEb51mJKK1KpcU/W1MxgcbY1H1QUCY7JL/hgcY2FybG9zLmUu ckBvcGVuc3VzZS5vcmcACgkQtTMYHG2NR9UAjQCdH4EAzDcnXOCMU0XE1+e6sHQ+ yY8AnRSEDvf/1omK1ELvkFbLh7OEu8QK =Hj7A -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
[Subject change for new topic] On Sun, 1 Jan 2023 19:03:02 -0500, bent fender <ksusup@trixtar.org> wrote:
Speakin' of pointed peaks, anybody try Alpine yet?
https://alpinelinux.org/about/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpine_Linux -- Robert Webb
* Robert Webb <webbdg@verizon.net> [01-01-23 22:22]:
[Subject change for new topic]
On Sun, 1 Jan 2023 19:03:02 -0500, bent fender <ksusup@trixtar.org> wrote:
Speakin' of pointed peaks, anybody try Alpine yet?
https://alpinelinux.org/about/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpine_Linux
yes, you changed the SUBJ but neglected to begin an new thread. it's called hijacking. If you do not understand, ask. -- (paka)Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA @ptilopteri http://en.opensuse.org openSUSE Community Member facebook/ptilopteri Photos: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/piwigo paka @ IRCnet oftc
[Whoops, I did it again.] On Sun, 1 Jan 2023 22:56:18 -0500, Patrick Shanahan <paka@opensuse.org> wrote:
* Robert Webb <webbdg@verizon.net> [01-01-23 22:22]:
[Subject change for new topic]
On Sun, 1 Jan 2023 19:03:02 -0500, bent fender <ksusup@trixtar.org> wrote:
Speakin' of pointed peaks, anybody try Alpine yet?
[...]
yes, you changed the SUBJ but neglected to begin an new thread. it's called hijacking. If you do not understand, ask.
I disagree. First, to Bent Fender, thanks for bringing this topic up. I am interested and want to read the discussion. Patrick, the whole point of changing the subject line was to avoid having the new topic being discussed under the old title (actual "hijacking"). This is now a new thread that has branched off from the original. I suppose you are declaring that it is the same thread because messages of the original thread are referred to in the 'In-Reply-To:' and 'References:' headers. Replying to a message while changing the subject, and thereby leaving the connections to earlier messages, as I did, is the *correct* way to split off a new thread from an existing one. Do you think it is a good idea to reply to a message, but remove all references to said message? That would be broken. Did I cause problems like real thread hijacking where the subject stays the same? No! When you look at the message list in your mail reader, You know which messages belong to which topic, and they are grouped separately. What's the problem? This was not a hijacking. (Except that it is now, since we are on a new topic!) :-) -- Robert Webb
Mon, 2 Jan 2023 06:24:08 +0000 (UTC) Robert Webb <webbdg@verizon.net> :
[Whoops, I did it again.]
On Sun, 1 Jan 2023 22:56:18 -0500, Patrick Shanahan <paka@opensuse.org> wrote:
* Robert Webb <webbdg@verizon.net> [01-01-23 22:22]:
[Subject change for new topic]
On Sun, 1 Jan 2023 19:03:02 -0500, bent fender <ksusup@trixtar.org> wrote:
Speakin' of pointed peaks, anybody try Alpine yet?
[...]
yes, you changed the SUBJ but neglected to begin an new thread. it's called hijacking. If you do not understand, ask.
I disagree. First, to Bent Fender, thanks for bringing this topic up. I am interested and want to read the discussion. Patrick, the whole point of changing the subject line was to avoid having the new topic being discussed under the old title (actual "hijacking"). This is now a new thread that has branched off from the original.
I suppose you are declaring that it is the same thread because messages of the original thread are referred to in the 'In-Reply-To:' and 'References:' headers. Replying to a message while changing the subject, and thereby leaving the connections to earlier messages, as I did, is the *correct* way to split off a new thread from an existing one. Do you think it is a good idea to reply to a message, but remove all references to said message? That would be broken.
Did I cause problems like real thread hijacking where the subject stays the same? No! When you look at the message list in your mail reader, You know which messages belong to which topic, and they are grouped separately. What's the problem? This was not a hijacking. (Except that it is now, since we are on a new topic!) :-) -- Robert Webb
Mail/usenet used to work quite well before rules and netiquette because common sense still had a chance back in the day. A temporary subject-change is the proper way to handle a temporary subject-change, sometimes also called a sidebar (similar to a judge ordering the attorneys to the bench), Problem is we too often forget to reset to the original subject and before long both subjects (if not a dozen by then) color the header pane :-) I don't make an issue out of it because for one thing it evolved naturally in response to a need, for another it usually fixes itself as interest fades in either or both topics and finally it does accomodate what interest there is while it is.
* bent fender <ksusup@trixtar.org> [01-02-23 08:13]:
Mon, 2 Jan 2023 06:24:08 +0000 (UTC) Robert Webb <webbdg@verizon.net> :
[Whoops, I did it again.]
On Sun, 1 Jan 2023 22:56:18 -0500, Patrick Shanahan <paka@opensuse.org> wrote:
* Robert Webb <webbdg@verizon.net> [01-01-23 22:22]:
[Subject change for new topic]
On Sun, 1 Jan 2023 19:03:02 -0500, bent fender <ksusup@trixtar.org> wrote:
Speakin' of pointed peaks, anybody try Alpine yet?
[...]
yes, you changed the SUBJ but neglected to begin an new thread. it's called hijacking. If you do not understand, ask.
I disagree. First, to Bent Fender, thanks for bringing this topic up. I am interested and want to read the discussion. Patrick, the whole point of changing the subject line was to avoid having the new topic being discussed under the old title (actual "hijacking"). This is now a new thread that has branched off from the original.
I suppose you are declaring that it is the same thread because messages of the original thread are referred to in the 'In-Reply-To:' and 'References:' headers. Replying to a message while changing the subject, and thereby leaving the connections to earlier messages, as I did, is the *correct* way to split off a new thread from an existing one. Do you think it is a good idea to reply to a message, but remove all references to said message? That would be broken.
Did I cause problems like real thread hijacking where the subject stays the same? No! When you look at the message list in your mail reader, You know which messages belong to which topic, and they are grouped separately. What's the problem? This was not a hijacking. (Except that it is now, since we are on a new topic!) :-) -- Robert Webb
Mail/usenet used to work quite well before rules and netiquette because common sense still had a chance back in the day. A temporary subject-change is the proper way to handle a temporary subject-change, sometimes also called a sidebar (similar to a judge ordering the attorneys to the bench), Problem is we too often forget to reset to the original subject and before long both subjects (if not a dozen by then) color the header pane :-) I don't make an issue out of it because for one thing it evolved naturally in response to a need, for another it usually fixes itself as interest fades in either or both topics and finally it does accomodate what interest there is while it is.
wat? :( you don't even break your lines. -- (paka)Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA @ptilopteri http://en.opensuse.org openSUSE Community Member facebook/ptilopteri Photos: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/piwigo paka @ IRCnet oftc
* Robert Webb <webbdg@verizon.net> [01-02-23 01:27]:
[Whoops, I did it again.]
On Sun, 1 Jan 2023 22:56:18 -0500, Patrick Shanahan <paka@opensuse.org> wrote:
* Robert Webb <webbdg@verizon.net> [01-01-23 22:22]:
[Subject change for new topic]
On Sun, 1 Jan 2023 19:03:02 -0500, bent fender <ksusup@trixtar.org> wrote:
Speakin' of pointed peaks, anybody try Alpine yet?
[...]
yes, you changed the SUBJ but neglected to begin an new thread. it's called hijacking. If you do not understand, ask.
I disagree. First, to Bent Fender, thanks for bringing this topic up. I am interested and want to read the discussion. Patrick, the whole point of changing the subject line was to avoid having the new topic being discussed under the old title (actual "hijacking"). This is now a new thread that has branched off from the original.
since you appear to be unaware of "threading", you merely changed the msg subj, the post remains in the current thread. it does not start a new thread!
I suppose you are declaring that it is the same thread because messages of the original thread are referred to in the 'In-Reply-To:' and 'References:' headers. Replying to a message while changing the subject, and thereby leaving the connections to earlier messages, as I did, is the *correct* way to split off a new thread from an existing one. Do you think it is a good idea to reply to a message, but remove all references to said message? That would be broken.
it is not the "correct" way, merely changes the subj but not the thread.
Did I cause problems like real thread hijacking where the subject stays the same? No! When you look at the message list in your mail reader, You know which messages belong to which topic, and they are grouped separately. What's the problem? This was not a hijacking. (Except that it is now, since we are on a new topic!) :-)
you need to research threading in email. -- (paka)Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA @ptilopteri http://en.opensuse.org openSUSE Community Member facebook/ptilopteri Photos: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/piwigo paka @ IRCnet oftc
On 2023-01-02 16:54, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
* Robert Webb <> [01-02-23 01:27]:
[Whoops, I did it again.]
On Sun, 1 Jan 2023 22:56:18 -0500, Patrick Shanahan <paka@opensuse.org> wrote:
* Robert Webb <webbdg@verizon.net> [01-01-23 22:22]:
[Subject change for new topic]
On Sun, 1 Jan 2023 19:03:02 -0500, bent fender <ksusup@trixtar.org> wrote:
Speakin' of pointed peaks, anybody try Alpine yet?
[...]
yes, you changed the SUBJ but neglected to begin an new thread. it's called hijacking. If you do not understand, ask.
I disagree. First, to Bent Fender, thanks for bringing this topic up. I am interested and want to read the discussion. Patrick, the whole point of changing the subject line was to avoid having the new topic being discussed under the old title (actual "hijacking"). This is now a new thread that has branched off from the original.
since you appear to be unaware of "threading", you merely changed the msg subj, the post remains in the current thread. it does not start a new thread!
As intended. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 15.4 x86_64 at Telcontar)
On Mon, 2 Jan 2023 at 01:07, bent fender <ksusup@trixtar.org> wrote:
Speakin' of pointed peaks, anybody try Alpine yet?
Well, yes, I have, but apparently you think my prose is unreadable, so you probably won't like it. https://www.theregister.com/2022/05/26/alpine_linux_316_released/ It's pretty good, IMHO. Hard to dual-boot, though. -- Liam Proven ~ Profile: https://about.me/liamproven Email: lproven@cix.co.uk ~ gMail/gTalk/FB: lproven@gmail.com Twitter/LinkedIn: lproven ~ Skype: liamproven UK: (+44) 7939-087884 ~ Czech [+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal]: (+420) 702-829-053
On 1/8/23 04:48, Liam Proven wrote:
On Mon, 2 Jan 2023 at 01:07, bent fender <ksusup@trixtar.org> wrote:
Speakin' of pointed peaks, anybody try Alpine yet? Well, yes, I have, but apparently you think my prose is unreadable, so you probably won't like it. https://www.theregister.com/2022/05/26/alpine_linux_316_released/
It's pretty good, IMHO. Hard to dual-boot, though.
I like your prose, Liam! It even brought back fond memories of my time with LRP (Linux Router Project) which used busybox too. I started using LRP in response to our Cisco router being scheduled to die at Y2K. It was great! It booted from a 1.44MB 3.5in floppy and ran out of RAM. Didn't even have a hard disk. It was safe, just make the floppy read-only and if you suffered a compromise, just reboot and you're clean. Then fix the vulnerability. BTW, I did suffer a remote-root compromise via ssh in 2002, if memory serves. Regards, Lew
On Sun, 1 Jan 2023 at 17:39, bent fender <ksusup@trixtar.org> wrote:
half a dozen paragraphs, none of it human readable
:-( I wrote the story in question. Are you saying my text is not human-readable? What's wrong with it? -- Liam Proven ~ Profile: https://about.me/liamproven Email: lproven@cix.co.uk ~ gMail/gTalk/FB: lproven@gmail.com Twitter/LinkedIn: lproven ~ Skype: liamproven UK: (+44) 7939-087884 ~ Czech [+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal]: (+420) 702-829-053
participants (9)
-
bent fender -
Carlos E. R. -
Carlos E. R. -
David C. Rankin -
J Leslie Turriff -
Lew Wolfgang -
Liam Proven -
Patrick Shanahan -
Robert Webb