[gentoo-user] what's the deal with use flags in (brackets)?
daniel
interesting output:
$ emerge -pv mplayer
These are the packages that I would merge, in order:
Calculating dependencies ...done!
[ebuild R ] media-video/mplayer-1.0_pre6-r5 (-3dfx) (-3dnow) +3dnowext
+X -aalib +alsa (-altivec) -arts +avi -bidi -bl +cdparanoia +debug +dga
-directfb (-divx4linux) -doc +dts +dv +dvb +dvd +dvdread +edl +encode -esd
-fbcon -ggi +gif -gtk +i8x0 -ipv6 -jack -joystick +jpeg -libcaca -lirc -live
+lzo +mad -matroska -matrox (-mmx) (-mmxext) +mpeg -mythtv -nas +nls -nvidia
+oggvorbis +opengl -oss +png +real +rtc -samba -sdl (-sse) (-sse2) (-svga)
+tga +theora +truetype +v4l +v4l2 -xanim -xinerama +xmms +xv +xvid -xvmc 0kB
what i'm trying to understand here is why so many of the above flags are in
brackets and marked with a "-" even though they're clearly enabled in my
make.conf file as flags i want to use. most important being mmx, sse, sse2
and divx4linux.
can someone please explain to me why these flags are being ignored and what
those brackets mean? if you're interested, here's my USE variable in
make.conf (i used app-portage/ufed):
USE="-* 3dnow 3dnowex 3dnowext X aac acl acpi acpi4linux aim alsa amarok
audiofile avantgo avi berkdb bzip2 bzlib cdda cdio cdparanoia cdr
chroot codecs css curl debug dga dio divx4linux dnd dts dv dvb dvd
dvdr dvdread edl encode exif extraicons faad ffmpeg freetype ftp gd
geoip gif gpgme gstreamer i8x0 icq jabber java javascript jpeg
jpeg2k kde kdepim libclamav libgd libwww lm_sensors logitech-mouse
lzo lzw-tiff mad maildir md5sum mmx mmxext motif moznocompose
moznoirc moznomail moznoxft mozp3p mozsvg mp3 mpeg mpeg4 mplayer
msn ncurses network nls no-old-linux noamazon nocd oav offensive
ogg oggvorbis openal opengl pam pam_chroot pam_timestamp pda pdf
pdflib perl png posix povray python qt quicktime rar real rtc sdk
session smime sms sox spamassassin spell sql sqlite sqlite3 sse
sse2 ssl svg svga tga theora tidy tiff transcode truetype
truetype-fonts type1-fonts usb v4l v4l2 vcd vcdimager wmf xface
xine xml xml2 xmms xosd xsl xv xvid yahoo zlib"
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Paul Varner
> i've been noticing lately that the output of emerge -pv is giving me some
> interesting output:
>
> $ emerge -pv mplayer
>
> These are the packages that I would merge, in order:
>
> Calculating dependencies ...done!
> [ebuild R ] media-video/mplayer-1.0_pre6-r5 (-3dfx) (-3dnow) +3dnowext
> +X -aalib +alsa (-altivec) -arts +avi -bidi -bl +cdparanoia +debug +dga
> -directfb (-divx4linux) -doc +dts +dv +dvb +dvd +dvdread +edl +encode -esd
> -fbcon -ggi +gif -gtk +i8x0 -ipv6 -jack -joystick +jpeg -libcaca -lirc -live
> +lzo +mad -matroska -matrox (-mmx) (-mmxext) +mpeg -mythtv -nas +nls -nvidia
> +oggvorbis +opengl -oss +png +real +rtc -samba -sdl (-sse) (-sse2) (-svga)
> +tga +theora +truetype +v4l +v4l2 -xanim -xinerama +xmms +xv +xvid -xvmc 0kB
>
> what i'm trying to understand here is why so many of the above flags are in
> brackets and marked with a "-" even though they're clearly enabled in my
> make.conf file as flags i want to use. most important being mmx, sse, sse2
> and divx4linux.
>
> can someone please explain to me why these flags are being ignored and what
> those brackets mean? if you're interested, here's my USE variable in
> make.conf (i used app-portage/ufed):
What profile are you using?
ls -l /etc/make.profile
The parenthesis indicate that the USE flag is masked by your profile.
Regards,
Paul
--
My Gentoo stuff: http://varnerfamily.org/pvarner/gentoo
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
daniel
> On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 22:46 -0400, daniel wrote:
> > can someone please explain to me why these flags are being ignored and
> > what those brackets mean? if you're interested, here's my USE variable
> > in make.conf (i used app-portage/ufed):
>
> What profile are you using?
>
> ls -l /etc/make.profile
# ls -l /etc/make.profile
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 50 Apr 2 03:55 /etc/make.profile
-> ../usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/amd64/2005.0
oh that's what it means! where'd you find that out? does this mean that
using an amd64 means i won't get support for any of those things? is this
likely to change?
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Ciaran McCreesh
<danstempor...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
| oh that's what it means! where'd you find that out? does this mean
| that using an amd64 means i won't get support for any of those
| things? is this likely to change?
Well, sse, sse2, mmx, mmxext and 3dnow are x86 things, not amd64 things,
so you don't get to play with them. altivec is ppc, so you can't play
with that either. I'm guessing that the rest are masked due to
non-working dependencies.
--
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Fluxbox, shell tools)
Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org
Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm
daniel
> On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 08:44:54 -0400 daniel
>
> <danstempor...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> | oh that's what it means! where'd you find that out? does this mean
> | that using an amd64 means i won't get support for any of those
> | things? is this likely to change?
>
> Well, sse, sse2, mmx, mmxext and 3dnow are x86 things, not amd64 things,
> so you don't get to play with them. altivec is ppc, so you can't play
> with that either. I'm guessing that the rest are masked due to
> non-working dependencies.
then why are 3dnow, mmx, sse and sse2 in the flags section of cpuinfo? or is
this in no way related to the use flags?
$ cat /proc/cpuinfo
processor : 0
vendor_id : AuthenticAMD
cpu family : 15
model : 7
model name : AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3500+
stepping : 10
cpu MHz : 2211.337
cache size : 512 KB
fpu : yes
fpu_exception : yes
cpuid level : 1
wp : yes
flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca
cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 pni syscall nx
mmxext lm 3dnowext 3dnow
bogomips : 4374.52
TLB size : 1024 4K pages
clflush size : 64
cache_alignment : 64
address sizes : 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
power management: ts fid vid ttp
--
faith sustains us in the hour when reason tells us that we can not continue,
that the whole of our whole lives is without meaning.
- brother alwyn macomber, babylon 5 "the deconstruction of falling stars"
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Ciaran McCreesh
<danstempor...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
| > Well, sse, sse2, mmx, mmxext and 3dnow are x86 things, not amd64
| > things, so you don't get to play with them. altivec is ppc, so you
| > can't play with that either. I'm guessing that the rest are masked
| > due to non-working dependencies.
|
| then why are 3dnow, mmx, sse and sse2 in the flags section of cpuinfo?
| or is this in no way related to the use flags?
Well, you always get them on amd64. But that's not what those USE flags
are for -- they enable or disable x86-specific assembly stuff where
relevant. On amd64, it's not relevant.
I wanted to call the flags x86-3dnow, x86-sse, ppc-altivec, sparc-vis
and so on to avoid this problem. Ah well.
Calvin Spealman
Ciaran McCreesh
<ironf...@gmail.com> wrote:
| i dont understand whats going on here. I thought those flags enabled
| the use of extended sets of the x86 instruction set, and amd64 chips
| are in the x86 family, aren't they? and they support those
| extensions, I'm sure, so what then do those flags do that the amd64
| can't make use of the flags?
Nooooo. See, there're two possibilities here.
Possibility the first: the optimised code works on amd64. In this case,
it's used on amd64 no matter what, since there aren't any amd64 chips
that don't have the extra optimisations. So, no USE flag.
Possibility the second. the optimised code is x86-specific and won't
work on amd64. In this case, it's never used on amd64, and you don't
want a USE flag to turn it on since it'll break.
So, these USE flags aren't relevant. Unfortunately, amd64 wasn't around
when they first came up, so we didn't give them a better name.
Now, if at some point in the future, an amd64 chip comes along with some
extra fancy optimisations (say sse4 or whatever), we'll have to have an
sse4 USE flag added which *will* be enabled on amd64.
I still think arch- prefixes to those flags is a good idea.
Paul Varner
I see you got the anwsers to most of your question. Regarding how I
found out the meaning, man emerge and man portage
Regards,
Paul
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Kiawud
> <ironf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> | i dont understand whats going on here. I thought those flags enabled
> | the use of extended sets of the x86 instruction set, and amd64 chips
> | are in the x86 family, aren't they? and they support those
> | extensions, I'm sure, so what then do those flags do that the amd64
> | can't make use of the flags?
>
I thought that if you 'cat /proc/cpuinfo' it'll show you the flags
that are compatible with your cpu. Is that not accurate for the amd64
chip?
-Hani
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Ciaran McCreesh
| I thought that if you 'cat /proc/cpuinfo' it'll show you the flags
| that are compatible with your cpu. Is that not accurate for the amd64
| chip?
Uh huh, but those flags don't correspond to the USE flags.
Keith Gable
If something came out that was AMD64 Generation 2 specific (and wasn't supported by regular AMD64), it'd have a USE flag that only works on AMD64. And you wouldn't want to turn that flag on on a normal AMD64, since it doesn't support it.
Right now, if you compile mplayer, you'll get MMX/SSE/SSE2/3DNOW and all that crap. Just there are no special USE flags for it.
"Microsoft is a lot better at making money than it is at making good operating systems."
-- Linus Torvalds
Calvin Spealman
Are the things that are automatically enabled for compilation different than the things the USE flags enable?
If these things are automatic, then why have the flags at all?
Ciaran McCreesh
<ironf...@gmail.com> wrote:
| Are the things that are automatically enabled for compilation
| different than the things the USE flags enable?
| If these things are automatic, then why have the flags at all?
The flags are relevant for x86. They are not relevant for amd64.
Calvin Spealman
Graham Murray
> but amd64 is itself an extension of the x86 architecture, isn't that the case? amd64 chips run x86 code, i'm sure. do
> they not support those extensions? I understand that for some reason the USE flags are irrelevent here, but I don't
> understand why and it is starting to drive me crazy because I'm just missing something here.
The reason is that with the x86 arch, not all processors support all
of these features. So the USE flags allow the user to specify which
features their processor (or the one for which they are building)
supports. For amd64, there is no variation in the features supported,
so these USE flags are not needed for amd64.
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Calvin Spealman
Thanks for clearing up the confusion.
Neil Walker
> So its automatic detection of the features if possible, but USE flags if
> otherwise.
No. There is no detection. Just assumption that AMD65 will support
certain extensions.
And please turn of HTML for posts in mailing lists.
Be lucky,
Neil
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Calvin Spealman
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Dave Nebinger
It's an extreme waste and provides no value.
We're here to post questions and responses, not to create pretty pictures
with colored fonts, etc.
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Robert G. Hays
stuff makes it *hard* to read. (I use graphical...)
--Because this is what thy're used to &/or they have limited memory
-AND/OR- becase this is the Safe! way to do email.
-- -- (Just look at all those *loverly* security alerts &
infection/wipe-outs in WhinedoZZZe partly because of accepting non-text.)
Helpful?
rgh.
David Morgan
> > I know people say it, but why?
>
> It's an extreme waste and provides no value.
>
> We're here to post questions and responses, not to create pretty pictures
> with colored fonts, etc.
>
Not to mention the fact that not everyone is using a client that
supports html. People have better things to do than try and
read emails filled with html tags.
Plus, I'd like to choose what font colour, face, etc the text I read
uses, not someone else.
--
djm
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Alex A. Smith MCP
My 2 cent's
Alex A. Smith MCP
ASMHosting.com Owner
kashani
> I know people say it, but why?
>
> On 5/2/05, Neil Walker <ne...@ep.mine.nu> wrote:
>
>>
>>And please turn of HTML for posts in mailing lists.
>>
>>Be lucky,
>>
>>Neil
Because it tends to look like crap in any other mail client other than
the one it was composed in. Or any other resolution. Or any other font.
And so on.
kashani, running 1900x1200
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Nick Rout
On Mon, 02 May 2005 21:00:30 +0000
Alex A. Smith MCP wrote:
> Time straped as it is, I'll type in what ever my Default Email prog
That'd be the one without a spell checker? :-)
Frankly I think your approach is arrogant. Mail is a text medium, if you
want to do html, make a web page.
As the old saying goes..."When in Rome..."
> wants me to, asking people to turn it off wont work much, better to make
> a better argument and ask the developers to dist it without html as default.
>
> My 2 cent's
>
> Alex A. Smith MCP
> ASMHosting.com Owner
--
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Greg Donald
> Time straped as it is, I'll type in what ever my Default Email prog wants
> me to
Laziness is no excuse. Takes all of 2 seconds to turn it off.
--
Greg Donald
Zend Certified Engineer
http://destiney.com/
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Neil Bothwick
> Time straped as it is, I'll type in what ever my Default Email prog
> wants me to, asking people to turn it off wont work much, better to make
> a better argument and ask the developers to dist it without html as
> default.
Remember that when you ask a question in HTML and the person that really
knows the answer does even read it because he is too "time straped" to
sort the message from the decorations.
If you want people to read your mails, make them readable. Does
configuring your mail client really waste more time than writing mails
that will be ignored?
--
Neil Bothwick
Ohnosecond: That minuscule fraction of time in which you realize
you've just made a big mistake
Richard Fish
Alex A. Smith MCP
And I'd prefer if you didnt call someone you have never ment and know nothing about lazy. For your info I'm 19, work 2 Jobs and run a small hosting company. That I feel is far from lazy.
Alex
Holly Bostick
> On 5/2/05, Alex A. Smith MCP <al...@asmhosting.com> wrote:
>
>> Time straped as it is, I'll type in what ever my Default Email prog wants
>>me to
>
>
> Laziness is no excuse. Takes all of 2 seconds to turn it off.
>
>
Edit=>Account Preferences=>Composition and Addressing=>uncheck "Compose
Messages in HTML format".
Done (just had to do it myself, since I've *finally* got Gentoo
reinstalled --who missed me ? :) -- and this is thus a new T-bird install).
Really, it's the right thing to do. HTML mail is "OK" if you're getting
an email newsletter from a store or or Activision or whoever (it's not
really "OK", but at least the product kinda justifies it, and you can
reasonably expect that it's "safe", being from an authorized source).
But there's no reason whatsoever to use HTML on a mailing list that
might be read via
1) a text mail client
2) a text newsgroup reader
3) a gui mail client or news reader that doesn't support all the HTML
features your mail composition program does
4) a web browser that doesn't support all the HTML features your mail
composition program does (hey, there's a lot of GMail users here, and
they could be accessing GMail via "unsupported browsers", which drops
you to "Basic HTML view" which could mean anything in terms of ultimate
mail display, over and above the service's feature limitation that is
explained for this condition)
5) on any computer that doesn't have all the same pretty fonts installed
(unless you embed your fonts in the mail as well, which would cause at
least me to come after you with --at the very minimum-- a big axe, and
at preference, a huge amount of somewhat heavier weaponry. I hate people
embedding fonts in their emails like my mail server has infinite space
to hold their bloody mails so they can be as big as they feel like they
want).
Ultimately, HTML mail to a mailing list like this one is extremely
inconsiderate without adding a thing to the content of the mail.
And since the main point of writing to a mailing list is often to *ask
for a favor* ("please help me with this problem, o knowledgeable
complete strangers"), being inconsiderate is not really a good way to
start. Nor is making the content more difficult to read.
Holly
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Bruno Lustosa
> > So its automatic detection of the features if possible, but USE flags if
> > otherwise.
>
> No. There is no detection. Just assumption that AMD65 will support
> certain extensions.
In other words, -march=athlon64 implies those flags.
--
Bruno Lustosa, aka Lofofora | Email: br...@lustosa.net
Network Administrator/Web Programmer | ICQ: 1406477
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil |
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
kashani
> pain to disable them. Also working 19-20 hour days means I can do
> without (IMHO) needless things like turning off a function that I use. I
>
> And I'd prefer if you didnt call someone you have never ment and know
> nothing about lazy. For your info I'm 19, work 2 Jobs and run a small
> hosting company. That I feel is far from lazy.
>
Is there something especially complicated about going into your settings
in Thunderbird and setting gentoo.org as a domain that prefers text emails?
Or setting up a list only account, like say $username-list, with its own
settings in your MUA and turning off html emails for that account.
That'll keep you from having this same conversation on any of the other
tech lists.
kashani
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Nick Rout
On Mon, 02 May 2005 23:16:34 +0000
Alex A. Smith MCP wrote:
> Humm but when you need HTML email cause you get them,
I cannot understand *why* you need to send html mail in order to receive
it? Thats a non-sequitur.
>A little bit of a
> pain to disable them. Also working 19-20 hour days means I can do
> without (IMHO) needless things like turning off a function that I use. I
> dunno, next we'll be told to stop using HTML on our sites æ´µ
>
> And I'd prefer if you didnt call someone you have never ment and know
> nothing about lazy. For your info I'm 19, work 2 Jobs and run a small
> hosting company. That I feel is far from lazy.
>
> Alex
Frankly, as someone who sees no earthly use for html mail ever, I say
just switch it off globally. However you obviously have your reasons for needing it, and thats your outlook (no pun intended LOL). However, we
would appreciate it being turned off in this list please.
its a one time thing, as kashani has pointed out.
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Travis Rousseau
> Humm but when you need HTML email cause you get them, A little bit of a
> pain to disable them. Also working 19-20 hour days means I can do without
> (IMHO) needless things like turning off a function that I use. I dunno, next
Actually people here just said to leave the html for your sites
>
> And I'd prefer if you didnt call someone you have never ment and know
> nothing about lazy. For your info I'm 19, work 2 Jobs and run a small
> hosting company. That I feel is far from lazy.
time job, go to school, and run a small hosting company (200 clients)
I work hard and know people that work harder than me, besides what the
heck does this have to do with your settings?
If you don't like the rules of the mailing list don't come here.
Travis R.
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Brett I. Holcomb
receive a virus breeding ground in the mail <G> - no HTML!
On Tue, 3 May 2005, Holly Bostick wrote:
> Greg Donald wrote:
>> On 5/2/05, Alex A. Smith MCP <al...@asmhosting.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Time straped as it is, I'll type in what ever my Default Email prog wants
>>> me to
>>
>>
>> Laziness is no excuse. Takes all of 2 seconds to turn it off.
>>
>>
> Just to prove it.... in Thunderbird:
> Messages in HTML format".
>
> Done (just had to do it myself, since I've *finally* got Gentoo
> reinstalled --who missed me ? :) -- and this is thus a new T-bird install).
>
--
Brett I. Holcomb
bretth...@R777charter.net
Registered Linux User #188143
Remove R777 to email
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Calvin Spealman
never should have extended HTML beyond the first version of Mosaic.
This is insane, of course. Progress is a driving force of technology.
I use HTML to style code samples in my postings, and to add some pizaz
when e-mailing friends. Plug, I enjoy the interface for it in GMail.
If your text-only email client can't even strip out html tags,
complain to the developers, not me. Progress should not be held back
by the few who think there is any value in plain text. Instead of
everyone keeping track of where to send plain text and where to send
real text, maybe the recipients should take responsibility for their
own preferences.
I will remember to use plain text for this list, but let it be known
that I don't want to and I shouldn't have to. If i knew I wouldn't get
banned for no good reason at all (and it would be no good reason at
all, mind you), I'd turn the HTML right back on. With XSLT styling, no
less.
We've all got our opinions. That's mine, and I know I don't hold it
alone, not even on this list, so at least cut the arrogent attitudes
about it.
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Marshal Newrock
> I will remember to use plain text for this list, but let it be known
> that I don't want to and I shouldn't have to. If i knew I wouldn't get
> banned for no good reason at all (and it would be no good reason at
> all, mind you), I'd turn the HTML right back on. With XSLT styling, no
> less.
Don't use plain-text for me. Use it for everyone who, in any way, pays
for bandwidth by the byte. This would be people who host servers or have
a pay-for-usage account. HTML email is certainly not adding any value for
these people. Quite the opposite, in fact.
--
That which does not kill me makes me stranger
() The ASCII Ribbon Campaign against HTML Email,
/\ vCards, and proprietary formats.
http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil.shtml
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Travis Rousseau
> by the few who think there is any value in plain text.
lists like this.
2. I like to cheap out on computers $20 or less, i find it alot faster
with out a GUI.
> Instead of
> everyone keeping track of where to send plain text and where to send
> real text, maybe the recipients should take responsibility for their
> own preferences.
Heinz Sporn
Many ML subscribers are getting hundreds of posts every day. So looking
through them takes time / is often a pain in the ass. Everything that
decreases the screening process has great chances to be skipped,
trashed, ignored.
If my brain has to filter lots of stuff to get to the actual
information / question I tend to just press <Del>. Since 99% of all
posters use simple, clean plain text every HTML-post is something
outstanding, needs a second (or third) look - slows me down. You do the
math.
Regards
spox
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Heinz Sporn
SPORN it-freelancing
Mobile: ++43 (0)699 / 127 827 07
Email: heinz...@sporn-it.com
heinz...@utanet.at
Snail: Steyrer Str. 20
A-4540 Bad Hall
Austria / Europe
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Nick Rout
> Done (just had to do it myself, since I've *finally* got Gentoo
> reinstalled --who missed me ? :)
Yeah I was just thinking a couple of days ago, where has that stroppy
Holly gone?
why the reinstall?
--
Nick Rout <ni...@rout.co.nz>
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Neil Bothwick
> Humm but when you need HTML email cause you get them, A little bit of a
> pain to disable them. Also working 19-20 hour days means I can do
> without (IMHO) needless things like turning off a function that I use.
So don't. Just turn it off for this list. Ask yourself, why do you post
here? If you want people to help you, rule 1 is don't piss them off. If
you really want to continue posting in HTML, no one is going to stop you.
Instead, they'll probably ignore you. So look forward to some fruitful
discussions with yourself.
> dunno, next we'll be told to stop using HTML on our sites ¬¬
Here's something you may have thought of. Mail and the web are different
media. HTML is specifically designed for web pages, email has always been
well served by ASCII.
--
Neil Bothwick
Microsoft is to Software as McDonalds is to Cuisine
fire-eyes
> I will remember to use plain text for this list, but let it be known
> that I don't want to and I shouldn't have to.
Nor should I have to tolerate seeing it, and will filter html mail to
this list to the trash.
Which of course means one less (probably more than one) person sees your
question or issue...
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
fire-eyes
> Is there something especially complicated about going into your
> settings
> in Thunderbird and setting gentoo.org as a domain that prefers text
> emails?
He doesn't want to, it's his choice. It is also my choice to filter
mails from him which are also in html to my trash folder.
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Volker Armin Hemmann
you forgot point 6,7,8 (more general but still true):
6) Most html mails are just spam, so a lot of people will discard html mails
automatically as spam.
7) html in mails is a screaming security problem. Nobody, who does not want to
get tricked by a spammer, reads a mail without checking it first for 'bugs',
that costs a lot of time (extra 10 secs per mail minimum).
8) some people hear 'html mails' and think automatically of the worst outlook
and aol users ... ;o)
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Calvin Spealman
just dumb. If you are going to use plain text, at least agree that we
need something better than ASCII. There are people speaking other
languages you know. Thinking we should stick to ASCII is even more a
sign of your stubborness than thinking we should stick to unformatted
text just because you don't like it, even though you can filter the
formatting out and leave the text the way you like it. Oh, but no,
since you don't like it, no one should be able to use it at all. Yeah,
that makes a lot more sense.
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Calvin Spealman
> Why not the sender's for now?
Why not the recipient's for now? One could almost argue free speech
for expressing one's self in HTML, but I won't go there.
If the sender disables HTML, no one gets it. If the recipient disables
HTML, then everyone gets what everyone wants.
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Neil Bothwick
> ASCII? OK... talking about plain text is one thing, but ASCII? That's
> just dumb. If you are going to use plain text, at least agree that we
> need something better than ASCII. There are people speaking other
> languages you know.
I know, bad choice of terminology. I meant plain text, bnot restrictied
to the 7bit ASCII character set.
> Thinking we should stick to ASCII is even more a
> sign of your stubborness than thinking we should stick to unformatted
> text just because you don't like it, even though you can filter the
> formatting out and leave the text the way you like it.
Who said the text should be unformatted? There is a lot you can do with
text to improve the readability and ensure your message is conveyed
correctly, without filling it with useless tags in an effort to firce my
mailer to use your preferences.
> Oh, but no,
> since you don't like it, no one should be able to use it at all. Yeah,
> that makes a lot more sense.
No one said you can't use it, but its use is not welcome on this list
(and many others). You an I are visitors here and as such, good manners
dictate that we should abide by the wishes of our hosts. One of those
wishes is to not use HTML mails.
I'm not saying HTML is wrong, I'm not saying HTML is bad, but it is
inappropriate for this list.
--
Neil Bothwick
What's this script doing? unzip ; touch ; finger ; mount ; gasp ; yes ;
umount ; sleep
Trey Gruel
> HTML, then everyone gets what everyone wants.
and you're still wasting the bandwidth of the server and users.
granted, for the individual user, the bandwidth used isn't that much,
but think about the thousands of messages that the server has to send
out for each mail it gets in. it adds up quick there.
--
trey
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Travis Rousseau
> On 5/3/05, Travis Rousseau <travis....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Why not the sender's for now?
>
> Why not the recipient's for now? One could almost argue free speech
> for expressing one's self in HTML, but I won't go there.
>
now out of courtesy.
> If the sender disables HTML, no one gets it. If the recipient disables
> HTML, then everyone gets what everyone wants.
>
Cliff Rowley
> and you're still wasting the bandwidth of the server and users.
> granted, for the individual user, the bandwidth used isn't that much,
> but think about the thousands of messages that the server has to send
> out for each mail it gets in. it adds up quick there.
This whole thread is a waste of bandwidth ;-)
flog > deadhorse
(tongue in cheek, of course)
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.2 - Release Date: 02/05/2005
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Covington, Chris
not to use HTML. You can't argue against it using technical reasons,
people aren't going to change their minds about it. And there might not
even be strong technical reasons for it anymore: just about all browsers
and email clients support HTML now, including pine and mutt, just about
everyone has a high-speed connection, servers have faster connections,
disks and capacity, etc. but it is the tradition.
Heed the proverb "When in Rome..." - to challenge that tradition is to
go against community values.
---
Chris Covington
IT
Plus One Health Management
75 Maiden Lane Suite 801
NY, NY 10038
646-312-6269
http://www.plusoneactive.com
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Calvin Spealman
a horrible protocol anyway. I'm just saying lets do the best we can
with what we've got. it isn't like the bandwidth is anything at all
compared to the bloated headers and redundant repeating of messages in
every reply.
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Calvin Spealman
but I'm actually very partial to my end of this discussion. I know all
the reasons people have to argue against my point of view here, but I
just find it to be a rather arrogent point of view.
On 5/3/05, Neil Bothwick <ne...@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> Who said the text should be unformatted? There is a lot you can do with
> text to improve the readability and ensure your message is conveyed
> correctly, without filling it with useless tags in an effort to firce my
> mailer to use your preferences.
How is me sending in plain text not forcing my mailer to use your preferences?
> No one said you can't use it, but its use is not welcome on this list
> (and many others). You an I are visitors here and as such, good manners
> dictate that we should abide by the wishes of our hosts. One of those
> wishes is to not use HTML mails.
That's exactly what I have a problem with. The community tries to
claim a love of technology, standards and openess, yet we hold on to
the past in the oddest ways, achieving nothing but to hold back the
rest of us.
> I'm not saying HTML is wrong, I'm not saying HTML is bad, but it is
> inappropriate for this list.
All in all, I'm saying that everyone should have a choice in how they
send and in how they view. And putting the responsibility of the
sender only unfairly forces your preferences on both the sender and on
many of the recipients. But, if the responsibilty was placed in your
hands, those who don't want to receive the HTML, then you could easily
have it filtered out of the e-mails, as easily as I could change my
settings not to send them as HTML, as you request. The difference is
in who the placement of the responsibility affects.
It is unjust is take from all for the sake a few, when the few can
just as easily accomodate themselves without the ill of the all.
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Cliff Rowley
> Let's be honest, that's a fault of e-mail itself, which is inherently
> a horrible protocol anyway. I'm just saying lets do the best we can
> with what we've got. it isn't like the bandwidth is anything at all
> compared to the bloated headers and redundant repeating of messages in
> every reply.
Prhps f w mss t vwls w cn sv sm bndwdth ;-)
Calvin Spealman
idioms for little sensible reason, are more of a challenge to the
community values than anything I can say.
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Steven Susbauer
to compose text messages, the style bars and all that are still there.
If you click bold or italic, it asks you if you want to compose this
message in HTML instead. If Thunderbird and other email clients made it
so easy to switch to HTML when you want it (and not when you're just
writing a little text message), I don't think it would be as much of a
problem.
Neil Bothwick
> I'm sorry if this disagreement has escalated more than it should have,
> but I'm actually very partial to my end of this discussion. I know all
> the reasons people have to argue against my point of view here, but I
> just find it to be a rather arrogent point of view.
What is arrogant about saying "when in Rome..."? Every forum has its
conventions of accepted behaviour. For this forum. those conventions
include non-HTML postings in English.
> > Who said the text should be unformatted? There is a lot you can do
> > with text to improve the readability and ensure your message is
> > conveyed correctly, without filling it with useless tags in an effort
> > to force my mailer to use your preferences.
>
> How is me sending in plain text not forcing my mailer to use your
> preferences?
They are not my preferences, they are the preferences of the list.
There's a big difference. But to take your point, with plain text, each
viewer chooses how their mailer displays it, which font, how large, what
colour etc.
--
Neil Bothwick
Why is the word abbreviation so long?
Greg Donald
> just find it to be a rather arrogent point of view.
Maybe so, but it doesn't change the fact that HTML is not acceptable
on this list.
Go ironfroggy, play with your MS buddies.. leave the arrogance to us.
--
Greg Donald
Zend Certified Engineer
http://destiney.com/
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Dave Nebinger
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Willie Wong
> 8) some people hear 'html mails' and think automatically of the worst outlook
> and aol users ... ;o)
Beg to differ here, but most of the emails I got from my friends
using AOL have properly used MIME-Multipart/Alternative so it has
BOTH a text/plain version and a text/html version. And I command mutt
to choose the text/plain one for MY viewing. The HTML-i-ness only
breaks on people whose mail clients have broken forwards when it
comes to MIME, that attaches a HTML message as part of a plain text
message and marks the whole damn thing as text/plain.
W
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
* Address: 45 Spelman Hall, Princeton University 08544 *
* Phone: x68958 AIM: AngularJerk *
* E-mail: ww...@princeton.edu From: sep.dynalias.net *
----------------------------------------------------------------
Those who jump off a Paris bridge are in Seine.
Sortir en Pantoufles: up 22 days, 2:49
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Willie Wong
> On 5/3/05, Travis Rousseau <travis....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Why not the sender's for now?
>
> Why not the recipient's for now? One could almost argue free speech
> for expressing one's self in HTML, but I won't go there.
let's not let politics get into it.
>
> If the sender disables HTML, no one gets it. If the recipient disables
> HTML, then everyone gets what everyone wants.
>
if sender uses multipart/alternate MIME, everybody gets what everyone
wants. Besides, if you've already wasted bandwidth on HTML tags,
whats a little big more for a copy of the plain text? q=
W
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
* Address: 45 Spelman Hall, Princeton University 08544 *
* Phone: x68958 AIM: AngularJerk *
* E-mail: ww...@princeton.edu From: sep.dynalias.net *
----------------------------------------------------------------
The only skills I have the patience to learn are those that have no real
application in life. -- Calvin
Sortir en Pantoufles: up 22 days, 2:51
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Volker Armin Hemmann
On Tuesday 03 May 2005 18:51, Willie Wong wrote:
> On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 04:40:52PM +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> > 8) some people hear 'html mails' and think automatically of the worst
> > outlook and aol users ... ;o)
>
> Beg to differ here, but most of the emails I got from my friends
> using AOL have properly used MIME-Multipart/Alternative so it has
> BOTH a text/plain version and a text/html version. And I command mutt
> to choose the text/plain one for MY viewing. The HTML-i-ness only
> breaks on people whose mail clients have broken forwards when it
> comes to MIME, that attaches a HTML message as part of a plain text
> message and marks the whole damn thing as text/plain.
>
and still they send html - which is nothing than a waste of bandwith...
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Volker Armin Hemmann
> The bottom line is that on any technical mailing list, it's tradition
> not to use HTML. You can't argue against it using technical reasons,
> people aren't going to change their minds about it. And there might not
> even be strong technical reasons for it anymore: just about all browsers
> and email clients support HTML now, including pine and mutt, just about
> everyone has a high-speed connection, servers have faster connections,
> disks and capacity, etc. but it is the tradition.
>
> Heed the proverb "When in Rome..." - to challenge that tradition is to
> go against community values.
not everybody has high speed, and some of the high speed users are having
volume caps. So please, I like to waste my share of the monthy volume on
downloading, not html-mails....
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Calvin Spealman
Microsoft software? My HTML messages are sent straight from good-ole
gmail.
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Bruno Lustosa
> MS? What makes you think I have anything to do with Microsoft or
> Microsoft software? My HTML messages are sent straight from good-ole
> gmail.
Can we end this thread?
Calvin, the rules of the list are: plain text messages in english.
Please, adhere to the rules, or don't send messages at all.
Thanks
--
Bruno Lustosa, aka Lofofora | Email: br...@lustosa.net
Network Administrator/Web Programmer | ICQ: 1406477
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil |
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Greg Donald
> MS? What makes you think I have anything to do with Microsoft or
> Microsoft software?
The fact that you're a top poster. The fact that you defend HTML emails.
Calvin Spealman
> conventions of accepted behaviour. For this forum. those conventions
> include non-HTML postings in English.
And what did they do in Rome if you did not do as in Rome? They burned
you. Now, that is some arrogence right there.
> They are not my preferences, they are the preferences of the list.
> There's a big difference. But to take your point, with plain text, each
> viewer chooses how their mailer displays it, which font, how large, what
> colour etc.
And, it is against the preferences of this list that I am making my
argument. I'm simply voicing my own opinion that the preferences of
the mailing list, the default, if you will, should be an acceptable
policy of formatted messages, in HTML. If individual users choose to
prefer text, then they are free to view the messages in any way they
see fit. If they want to filter out the HTML and set their own fonts
to view in, as many mailer will allow, so be it.
Furthermore, I want to announce to everyone in this conversation that
I am done with it. I make one little comment and it has been blown out
of proportion. Everyone is getting far too worked up over this,
including myself. I just hope that at least some of you will consider
what I've had to say, and maybe the list maintainers will even take it
into consideration that a policy change might be in order, given
proper care of all the issues and angles invovled.
Have a nice day.
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Cliff Rowley
> MS? What makes you think I have anything to do with Microsoft or
> Microsoft software? My HTML messages are sent straight from good-ole
> gmail.
<sarcasm>Typical blinkered response Calvin. "You're either with us or
against us". I'm sure I've heard that before somewhere...</sarcasm>
I've watched this discussion in the disbelief that people can hold the
views of others in such contempt. I'm actually not fussed either way,
but if pushed I'd say that plain text is probably the better format to
use for a technical mailing list .. however that doesn't mean for a
second that I disagree with your point of view, and I certainly won't
label you as a result - that would just be plain rude.
Personally I believe it's the responsibility of:
- The sender to send in the format deemed acceptable by the host
- The recipient to receive in the format they prefer
- The host to ensure any formatting rules are applied
In other words, there's room for everyone to get what they want - and it
is possible for everyone to play nicely without petty arguments.
Incidentally, I've just been back to the Gentoo mailing lists page, and
re-read my welcome email and there is no mention of any rules against
sending HTML emails. I may be mistaken.
Keziah W
> flog > deadhorse
>
Don't you mean "flog >> deadhorse"?
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Cliff Rowley
> Yes, it is. HTML wastes bandwidth for every message though.
True, I was just trying to inject some light humour into the otherwise
pointless situation :)
>>flog > deadhorse
>
> Don't you mean "flog >> deadhorse"?
:P
Kris
Kristopher W. Baker
kbatm...@yahoo.com
flog > deadhorse
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Keith Gable
> And please turn of HTML for posts in mailing lists.
D'oh, sorry. I keep forgetting to hit the "Plain text" button in Gmail...
--
"Microsoft is a lot better at making money than it is at making good
operating systems."
-- Linus Torvalds
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Robert G. Hays
>Exactly ... but it's still has some amusement value
>Kristopher W. Baker
>kbatm...@yahoo.com
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Cliff Rowley [mailto:cliff...@gmail.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 10:37 AM
>To: gento...@lists.gentoo.org
>Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] No HTML in posts?
>Trey Gruel wrote:
>
>
>>and you're still wasting the bandwidth of the server and users.
>>granted, for the individual user, the bandwidth used isn't that much,
>>but think about the thousands of messages that the server has to send
>>out for each mail it gets in. it adds up quick there.
>>
>>
>This whole thread is a waste of bandwidth ;-)
>flog > deadhorse
>(tongue in cheek, of course)
>
-- <...tongue...> & nose pinched, too! ;)
And at least by flogging a --dead-- horse, we avoid cruelty to animals
whilst still being allowed to vent unhealthy feelings that might
overwise cause unacceptably severe damage like a flame-war or something...
(trying to inject a little more 'amusement' here.)
rgh.
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Robert G. Hays
<snip>
>it isn't like the bandwidth is anything at all
>compared to the bloated headers and redundant repeating of messages in
>every reply.
>
>
<snip>
-- is a good way to control redundancy factor
And sometimes someone skips the original(s), and the later msgs become
interesting, and "someone" needs to catch up.
Sigh, no soution is ever perfect.
Robert G. Hays
>On 5/3/05, Calvin Spealman <ironf...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>On 5/3/05, Travis Rousseau <travis....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>><snip>Why not the sender's for now?
>>>
>>>
>>Why not the recipient's for now?
>>
>>
>>If the sender disables HTML, no one gets it. If the recipient disables
>>HTML, then everyone gets what everyone wants.
>>
>ou know with thunderbird you can set it per address?
>Travis R.
>
When sending to gentoo-user@[...]gentoo.org ?!?
Perhaps this list needs to have a configuration setting?
Probably not...
Calvin Spealman
original topic so I want to make myself clear on what I actually meant
here.
E-mails have unique identifiers, and replies include information in
the header as to the identifier(s) of the original messages. Thus, if
you have the messages (or access to a service archiving them) you
could reconstruct the entire thread from just a single message.
A protocol or format could even be created to designate where and how
other messages are quoted, without actually including the content.
This would be especially useful for very large messages and replying
to multiple messages at once.
Always there is room to move forward, so find the door that need's
unlocked and break it down.
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Robert G. Hays
with this *entire* feature, -and- getting everyone to update to said
newer versions *or* programs if/When! -their- favorite didn't get
updated for this.
That said, it sounds like a FINE idea to me.
Now, where'd I put that blamed crowbar?
rgh.
Calvin Spealman
easy to hide quoted emails, move to see the original ones, etc (to add
incentives to use the protocol), then support for it can grow until
everyone will have updated just over time. once you know someone's
reader has support for it, because they send you emails using it, you
can send to them without the old inline-quoted version.
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Walter Dnes
> then support for it can grow until everyone will have updated just
> over time. once you know someone's reader has support for it, because
> they send you emails using it, you can send to them without the old
> inline-quoted version.
AAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHH NNNNNNNOOOOOOO!!!!!!
You know what we'll end up with??? "This email best viewed with
Internet Explorer 6.5 at 800X600 resolution and 16,000,000 with Active-X
and Schlockwave-Trash enabled". I do *NOT* want to have to go out and
buy Windows in order to be able to read email.
Secondly, I can read today's text email with a 15 or 20 year old email
client. (X)HTML doesn't work that way. It's always changing. Try
reading most web pages with a 5-year-old browser and see what I mean. I
should *NOT* have to change my email client every few months to keep up
with deliberate incompatabilities thrown in by Microsoft.
--
Walter Dnes <walt...@waltdnes.org>
An infinite number of monkeys pounding away on keyboards will
eventually produce a report showing that Windows is more secure,
and has a lower TCO, than linux.
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Calvin Spealman
should be a free and open standard.
2) If you are going 20, 15, or even only 5 years without upgrading
your software, then you deserve to be the victim of every single
exploit and hole discoved in that software and patched within that
time, if you couldn't be bothered to do a simple upgrade.
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Holly Bostick
> 1) I don't see how this should have anything to do with Microsoft, it
> should be a free and open standard.
ROFL....! Yeah, so should text documents, but as soon as I do any simple
formatting to it (oh, no, not bold text!!!), it's not so free and open
anymore (*.rtf, *.doc). As soon as you have any "standard" that's used
by more that 3 people (making it "mass usage"), Microsoft *is* involved,
and you can't just blow that off like it's not the reality that most
every computer user has find some way to live with.
> 2) If you are going 20, 15, or even only 5 years without upgrading
> your software, then you deserve to be the victim of every single
> exploit and hole discoved in that software and patched within that
> time, if you couldn't be bothered to do a simple upgrade.
Right, because I control every single email client I might ever use.
Suppose I travel a lot for business-- I can't make the hotel or Internet
cafe upgrade.
Suppose I use a company-provided laptop for business and I have no
rights to install or upgrade software. Suppose those responsible for
upgrading the software on my company-provided laptop are slackers, and
it's just all-around better to not submit the forms required to get an
upgrade authorized, since I would then lose the use of the laptop (and
probably have to use an even worse "loaner") for 1.5 months just to get
this "non-essential" upgrade.
*Suppose I live in an underdeveloped country* and I'm lucky to have a
donated 486 that someone richer than me gave to the Peace Corps.
In that case, I may not even have the option to upgrade, as my hardware
doesn't support the upgrade. And there are a lot of people who don't
have good Internet access, so are really limited to whatever software is
on the CD that they got-- if they got a CD at all and the donating
facility didn't just pre-install the PC in the first place.
Really, think. Every single person in the world does not have the
advantages or capabilities that you do-- isn't that punishment enough
without you 1) blaming them further ("it's their fault if they don't
upgrade") and 2) preventing them from becoming better human beings (sic)
by way of your deathless wisdom (sic) by making that wisdom unavailable
to them because you *must* disseminate that wisdom in a format that they
cannot access?
Holly
>
> On 5/7/05, Walter Dnes <walt...@waltdnes.org> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, May 07, 2005 at 04:56:09PM +0000, Calvin Spealman wrote
>>
>>
>>>then support for it can grow until everyone will have updated just
>>>over time. once you know someone's reader has support for it, because
>>>they send you emails using it, you can send to them without the old
>>>inline-quoted version.
>>
>> AAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHH NNNNNNNOOOOOOO!!!!!!
>>
>> You know what we'll end up with??? "This email best viewed with
>>Internet Explorer 6.5 at 800X600 resolution and 16,000,000 with Active-X
>>and Schlockwave-Trash enabled". I do *NOT* want to have to go out and
>>buy Windows in order to be able to read email.
>>
>> Secondly, I can read today's text email with a 15 or 20 year old email
>>client. (X)HTML doesn't work that way. It's always changing. Try
>>reading most web pages with a 5-year-old browser and see what I mean. I
>>should *NOT* have to change my email client every few months to keep up
>>with deliberate incompatabilities thrown in by Microsoft.
>>
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Calvin Spealman
ideas. Upgrades aren't evil. If someone complained about a bug, the
first thing you'd do is tell them to upgrade to the newest version.
And I did suggest the multipart protocols to be used, unless you knew
the capabilities of the recipient. And, no, MS does not have to be
involved. There are plenty of standards they act like they don't even
know about!
I'm tired of everyone being so blatently rude in their defensive
stances over simple suggestions of improvement. For some reason, I've
noticed these actions move prevalently in regards to email protocols
and formats. The W3C wants to release a new version of HTML? No one
complains (mostly). Someone wants to create a new e-mail standard, or
expand an existing one? Off with their heads!
Going by the way everyone reacts to these ideas, one would come to the
conclusion that we should all still run nothing but command lines and
pass our information around on FTP and Gopher servers.
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Sami Samhuri
get my 2 cents in here. Response inlined below...
* On Sun May-08-2005 at 08:44:08 PM +0000, Calvin Spealman said:
[...]
> I'm tired of everyone being so blatently rude in their defensive
> stances over simple suggestions of improvement.
Clearly 'improvement' is subjective. Hence the differing opinions.
> For some reason, I've noticed these actions move prevalently in
> regards to email protocols and formats. The W3C wants to release a new
> version of HTML? No one complains (mostly). Someone wants to create a
> new e-mail standard, or expand an existing one? Off with their heads!
I have to disagree here. If you read RFC 822[1] (1982) and then take a
look at RFC 2822[2] (2001) then you'll see that there have been changes
and updates to the e-mail standard. If you care to create a new one then
go ahead and do it. If people like it then they will start to use it.
It's as simple as that. Perhaps instead of trying to extend a standard
that was created to send text around you should be trying to form a new
standard altogether; I'm not really sure what you're trying to push for
here.
Apparently the ability to attach any file you wish to an e-mail is good
enough for most people and this really is a non-issue. If you care to
have fancy formatting or whatever else then attach a document in any
format you like and if people want to read it they will. If someone's
e-mail client displays certain attached files inline with the message
than that's fine with me. In certain cases I think this even makes a lot
of sense (e.g. images). I just don't see why this isn't good enough to
get your fancy formatting.
Outlook does this with HTML and we all know what a horrible mess that
has created, but I think if you're really keen on this and adapt a mail
client to automatically display certain types of attachments (without
being a huge security risk!) then people may adopt it; but that is all
speculation.
To cut to the point all I'm trying to say is that e-mail has the
capability to do what you want, you just need to figure out an
appropriate file format for this purpose and then push to get clients to
automatically display these files. If the majority like it then it will
be used.
> Going by the way everyone reacts to these ideas, one would come to the
> conclusion that we should all still run nothing but command lines and
> pass our information around on FTP and Gopher servers.
<troll>
Transferring files using the File Transfer Protocol -- silly us!
</troll>
Sorry for that, but it's hard to take that last sentence seriously
seeing as it's a patently false conclusion. I'm running X right now with
loads of cool GUI apps and (for one example) I use the WWW to share all
sorts of information, so I don't know what you're worrying about.
[1] http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc822.html
[2] http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2822.html
* Alternatively, you can also get these files in plain ASCII text from an
FTP server at... never mind. </more trolling>
--
Sami Samhuri
Neil Bothwick
> If the mailers follow the proper multipart protocols and also make it
> easy to hide quoted emails, move to see the original ones, etc (to add
> incentives to use the protocol), then support for it can grow until
> everyone will have updated just over time. once you know someone's
> reader has support for it, because they send you emails using it, you
> can send to them without the old inline-quoted version.
If each quoted mail is a separate message part, how the hell are you
suppose to interleave your comments with the points you are replying to?
This sounds like another idea to add new "standards" in order to make
mail less usable.
--
Neil Bothwick
If you catch an exploding manhole cover, you can keep it.
Dave Nebinger
> easy to hide quoted emails, move to see the original ones, etc (to add
> incentives to use the protocol), then support for it can grow until
> everyone will have updated just over time. once you know someone's
> reader has support for it, because they send you emails using it, you
> can send to them without the old inline-quoted version.
[snip]
Calvin, you're whole problem appears to be that the email on the list should
be modified to support your own desires. Posting in html because you prefer
it. Top posting to responses rather than scrolling to the bottom of the
quoted text (thus actually viewing the quoted text and snipping the
unnecessary parts).
You're looking at years worth of standards that have been built up and
saying after all of that time they need to be changed.
Fine - if you feel so strongly about it post an RFC and follow the normal
process for having standards changed. Your effort to post on this list will
not convince anyone nor would it make any substantial change.
Simply put, the list just works. And it works because we have all agreed on
how we're going to make it work. If you want to be part of the process and
want to live under the established standard that we're all happy with, fine
and welcome.
But if all you want to do is rant over how we're not doing things the way
you think they should be done, then maybe the email list is not for you. Go
to the forums where you can use HTML to your hearts content.
But don't keep trying to drag the list OT to justify your narrow position on
how the email list should work.
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Calvin Spealman
original messages to quote.
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Neil Bothwick
> The replies would include instructions for which sections of the
> original messages to quote.
From where would it get those instructions when the person proposing the
method can't even place his replies in context?
--
Neil Bothwick
Theory is when you know everything, but nothing works.
Reality is when everything works, but you don't know why.
However, usually theory and reality are mixed together :
Nothing works, and nobody knows why not.
Calvin Spealman
> Calvin, you're whole problem appears to be that the email on the list should
> be modified to support your own desires. Posting in html because you prefer
> it. Top posting to responses rather than scrolling to the bottom of the
> quoted text (thus actually viewing the quoted text and snipping the
> unnecessary parts).
No, my whole problem is that all I wanted to do was make an off handed
comment about one or two or my own, personal thoughts and opinions, in
reply to something mentioned by another member of this list. However,
everyone misinterprets this as me saying everying is wrong and I know
how to make it right. I'm just expressing an opinion, everyone, so
chill a little bit, OK? If you don't agree, thats fine. As a matter of
fact, that's great. This is what we call freedom of speech, and we are
all free to practice this right. I'm happy to be able to, and happy
for you to be able to, but not when it comes in the form of trying to
silence someone else's rights of free speech.
> You're looking at years worth of standards that have been built up and
> saying after all of that time they need to be changed.
Yeah, things change. This is the nature of things. You say the
standards have been "built up" over the years? This is because small
_changes_ were made to them. That's all I'm talking about, doing more
of what has been done for years. For decades, even.
> Fine - if you feel so strongly about it post an RFC and follow the normal
> process for having standards changed. Your effort to post on this list will
> not convince anyone nor would it make any substantial change.
Well, of course. But, who would post an RFC until the idea was more
solid? Maybe I felt the need to get some opinions on the thoughts
before hand. Maybe see what I might want to add or to change about the
ideas before trying something like that. Maybe I simply don't have the
time, but still have the ideas.
> Simply put, the list just works. And it works because we have all agreed on
> how we're going to make it work. If you want to be part of the process and
> want to live under the established standard that we're all happy with, fine
> and welcome.
So you say both follow normal channels to get the standard changes,
and live with them as they are like everyone else does.. Which is it?
Pick one. No, don't. I don't like the one I think you would pick.
> But if all you want to do is rant over how we're not doing things the way
> you think they should be done, then maybe the email list is not for you. Go
> to the forums where you can use HTML to your hearts content.
Rant? Me? No. The replies I have gotten, now those are some rants.
And, no, I don't think I'll go to the forums, much. I hate the Web too
much.
> But don't keep trying to drag the list OT to justify your narrow position on
> how the email list should work.
I've tried to stop these OT threads, but everytime I do, someone says
something that I have to defend myself on. I want this to be the last
message I post in this manner. I want to talk about how my video
playback is completely botched. I want to help others configure their
new systems. I want to gather tips and suggestions for interesting
setups and clever tricks at optimizing my network. What I don't want
to do is argue with anyone about our opinions, which are inherently
supposed to be different, but which I am forced to defend when it is
taken as anything but just that: my opinion, not me saying what _your_
opinion should be.
Now, everyone, please. Just calm down. Live and let live, and
understand I'm just saying "hey, this is what I think", and the most I
ever expected back was "yeah, well this is what i think", not "no,
that isn't what you should think, think what everyone else thinks. you
shouldnt think that, because you shouldnt try to change what everyone
thinks, you cant do that. now, think what we tell you to or go away!"
Now, please, don't reply to this.
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Holly Bostick
>>You're looking at years worth of standards that have been built up and
>>saying after all of that time they need to be changed.
>
>
> Yeah, things change.
Two words: the wheel.
Holly
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Robert G. Hays
Holly Bostick wrote:
><snip>
>
Thank you, Holly... Pretty well written, vigorously as such should have
been, and the point*S* are all correct & we all need to understand &
*remember*; its called civilized behaviour.
I enjoyed reading that. It's going to be saved in my local folders.
The final item is that if someone wants to only speak to those who hold
certain beliefs/habits in common with themselves, that is their *right*,
too.
Thank you, Holly.
Robert G. Hays
>Calvin Spealman schreef:
>
>
>>On 5/9/05, Dave Nebinger <dneb...@joat.com> wrote:
>>
>>>You're looking at years worth of standards that have been built up and
>>>saying after all of that time they need to be changed.
>>>
>>>
>>Yeah, things change.
>>
>>
>Two words: the wheel.
>Holly
>
Holly, Again, well said.
Calvin made good, reasonable points. His last and your previous wee the
best two in this whole list.
(I love to be able to say something nice! <grin>)
Signing offa this one!
James Colannino
>>Simply put, the list just works. And it works because we have all agreed on
>>how we're going to make it work. If you want to be part of the process and
>>want to live under the established standard that we're all happy with, fine
>>and welcome.
>>
>>
>
>So you say both follow normal channels to get the standard changes,
>and live with them as they are like everyone else does.. Which is it?
>Pick one. No, don't. I don't like the one I think you would pick.
>
>
No, it's saying that you follow accepted convention until such a time
that convention is changed through appropriate means. For example, in a
governing body such as the Senate, you can motion for a change in
standard procedure, but until the motion is voted on, approved by the
majority and becomes accepted as the new standard procedure, you are
still obliged to follow the old one.
Moreover, when functioning as a part of a group, you should function in
a way that is agreed upon by the majority. You may believe that your
way is better or more efficient, but no matter how innovative you feel
your ideas are (and you may very well have innovative ideas), if you
work against the grain of the majority, you do nothing more than upset
the group and ultimately make the group less efficient.
In short, it's a matter of etiquette. Yes, etiquette changes with time,
but it's a gradual change that moves with the tide of the majority, not
a sudden shift in behavior by an individual or by a select few.
Disclaimer: no disrespect is intended. Just throwing my 2 cents in :)
James
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
> On Mon, 02 May 2005 21:00:30 +0000, Alex A. Smith MCP wrote:
> > Time straped as it is, I'll type in what ever my Default Email prog
> > wants me to, asking people to turn it off wont work much, better to
> > make a better argument and ask the developers to dist it without html
> > as default.
>
> Remember that when you ask a question in HTML and the person that really
> knows the answer does even read it because he is too "time straped" to
> sort the message from the decorations.
While I can't say I answer that many questions here, I am one of those
troublesome users that refuses to read HTML email, even though my client
(KMail or Firefox/Horde, depending on where I'm at) supports it. [I turn
support off, as both a security precaution and personal preference.]
I don't even read HTML replies to my own questions. I figure anyone that
won't turn off HTML for mailing list posts couldn't possibly provide me
with any useful information. ;)
--
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
bs...@volumehost.com
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Peng
> On Monday 02 May 2005 04:33 pm, Neil Bothwick <ne...@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 02 May 2005 21:00:30 +0000, Alex A. Smith MCP wrote:
>>
>>>Time straped as it is, I'll type in what ever my Default Email prog
>>>wants me to, asking people to turn it off wont work much, better to
>>>make a better argument and ask the developers to dist it without html
>>>as default.
>>
>>Remember that when you ask a question in HTML and the person that really
>>knows the answer does even read it because he is too "time straped" to
>>sort the message from the decorations.
>
>
> While I can't say I answer that many questions here, I am one of those
> troublesome users that refuses to read HTML email, even though my client
> (KMail or Firefox/Horde, depending on where I'm at) supports it. [I turn
> support off, as both a security precaution and personal preference.]
>
> I don't even read HTML replies to my own questions. I figure anyone that
> won't turn off HTML for mailing list posts couldn't possibly provide me
> with any useful information. ;)
How is HTML a security risk? JavaScript could be, I suppose, but HTML?
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
David Stanek
One thing that frustrates me about HTML email is the fact that
people put ping tags in it. Not much of a security issue, but I
wouldn't like it if I accidentially opened up spam only to confirm
my email address.
As far as security, if the browser supports Java or JavaScript then
bad things can happen. Or possibly an exploit for the HTML rendering
engine. Many more chances for bad things to happen...thats why I use
Mutt-ng :D
--
David Stanek
www.roninds.net
GPG keyID #6272EDAF on http://pgp.mit.edu
Key fingerprint = 8BAA 7E11 8856 E148 6833 655A 92E2 3E00 6272 EDAF
Peng
> On Sat, May 21, 2005 at 07:52:59PM -0400, Peng wrote:
>
>>On 05/21/05 16:26, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
>>
>>>On Monday 02 May 2005 04:33 pm, Neil Bothwick <ne...@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 02 May 2005 21:00:30 +0000, Alex A. Smith MCP wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Time straped as it is, I'll type in what ever my Default Email prog
>>>>>wants me to, asking people to turn it off wont work much, better to
>>>>>make a better argument and ask the developers to dist it without html
>>>>>as default.
>>>>
>>>>Remember that when you ask a question in HTML and the person that really
>>>>knows the answer does even read it because he is too "time straped" to
>>>>sort the message from the decorations.
>>>
>>>While I can't say I answer that many questions here, I am one of those troublesome users that refuses to read HTML email, even though my client (KMail or Firefox/Horde,
>>>depending on where I'm at) supports it. [I turn support off, as both a security precaution and personal preference.]
>>>I don't even read HTML replies to my own questions. I figure anyone that won't turn off HTML for mailing list posts couldn't possibly provide me with any useful information. ;)
>>
>>How is HTML a security risk? JavaScript could be, I suppose, but HTML?
>
>
> people put ping tags in it. Not much of a security issue, but I
> wouldn't like it if I accidentially opened up spam only to confirm
> my email address.
>
> As far as security, if the browser supports Java or JavaScript then
> bad things can happen. Or possibly an exploit for the HTML rendering
> engine. Many more chances for bad things to happen...thats why I use
> Mutt-ng :D
"ping tags"? What do you mean? Just an image or something that loads off
of the server and confirms your email address or an actual tag or what?
Meh. I do not have JavaScript enabled in Thunderbird, and I don't even
know if it can have Java support. And I'm just not too worried about an
HTML vulnerability. And if there is one, I'm quite sure Mozilla will fix
it promptly.
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Qian Qiao
Have you had any chance to read your emails under a command line
environment? I bet you won't like it, :P
-- Joe
--
Money can't buy everything.
Sometimes money can't even buy a gun...
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
A. Khattri
> Meh. I do not have JavaScript enabled in Thunderbird, and I don't even
> know if it can have Java support. And I'm just not too worried about an
> HTML vulnerability. And if there is one, I'm quite sure Mozilla will fix
> it promptly.
I dont know why people are even discussing this. Posting in HTML is an
absolute NO NO. It ignores those people that dont have (or want) HTML
support in their email software and is poor netiquette.
--
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list
Ciaran McCreesh
wrote:
They're discussing it because no-one has yet requested that infra block
all HTML emails to the list.
--
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron)
Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org
Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm
Volker Armin Hemmann
> | I dont know why people are even discussing this. Posting in HTML is an
> | absolute NO NO. It ignores those people that dont have (or want) HTML
> | support in their email software and is poor netiquette.
>
> They're discussing it because no-one has yet requested that infra block
> all HTML emails to the list.
that means, if someone (like me) requests blocking of html-mails on the
list-servers, this discussion will be gone? (well of course.. when no
html-mails are coming through, nobody can dsiscuss them...)
Then I request blocking all html-mails!
Take that, stupid discussion!
;)
--
gento...@gentoo.org mailing list