Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Why not allow the update into the repos? (Score 4, Informative) 126

by smash (#48227919) Attached to: OwnCloud Dev Requests Removal From Ubuntu Repos Over Security Holes
There are patches to fix the vulnerabilities, they just haven't been backported by the developer to the old version of owncloud. The official owncloud path is to upgrade to the supported release. If Ubuntu want to support the old version, it is up to them to backport fixes to the old version(s) themselves, as the FreeBSD ports team often do with the ports tree.

Comment: Re: Why not allow the update into the repos? (Score 2) 126

by smash (#48227913) Attached to: OwnCloud Dev Requests Removal From Ubuntu Repos Over Security Holes
I don't think you understand how software gets included in a distro. The developer doesn't ask for it to be included generally, it is often packaged by some third party who likes the software and wants a debian/redhat/etc. package for it. The developers distribute via source, if a distro wants to include their own custom package for it, that's their own doing.

Comment: Re:Why not allow the update into the repos? (Score 1) 126

by smash (#48227909) Attached to: OwnCloud Dev Requests Removal From Ubuntu Repos Over Security Holes
The developer may have nothing to do with Ubuntu, packages for distributions are often developed by a third party who takes the official sources and packages it up themselves. The developers often do not package anything directly and have no interest in maintaining packages for other people's operating systems. They distribute via source.

Comment: Re: Packages can't be removed? (Score 1) 126

by smash (#48227897) Attached to: OwnCloud Dev Requests Removal From Ubuntu Repos Over Security Holes
It is up to the package maintainer to backport security fixes if they want them. If they don't want to remove the package fair enough, but they should be popping up copious warnings, and maybe push a package update that alerts via script (even if it doesn't secure the package) that "THIS PACKAGE IS INSECURE AND UNMAINTAINED - it is recommended you deinstall and upgrade via original sources" or similar. This is similar to how FreeBSD ports work.

Comment: seriously... this is news? (Score 3, Insightful) 328

by smash (#48179857) Attached to: Despite Patent Settlement, Apple Pulls Bose Merchandise From Its Stores
Seriously, why the hell would a company sell their competitor's stuff in their own store when they had just been sued by them? Even if they weren't sued, apple have their own line of audio gear now. It's just stupid to promote your competitor's product in your own store.

Comment: Re:it solves some unicode issues (Score 1) 774

by smash (#48118601) Attached to: Systemd Adding Its Own Console To Linux Systems

systemd is written in C. Terse, poorly commented C. The non-type-safe language with an abysmal history of buffer overflows, by a team of muppets responsible for some of the most bug-ridden, garbage the Linux world has ever seen included in a major distribution (Pulse Audio).

Excuse me if my confidence is not there.

Init scripts, be they BSD style or sysV style can be easily customized, extended, replaced or de-bugged by anyone with a modicum of shell scripting experience. They have not proven to be a cross-platform compatibility problem, as systemd has already.

Comment: Re:Why do people care so much? (Score 1) 774

by smash (#48118591) Attached to: Systemd Adding Its Own Console To Linux Systems

In 20 years of dealing with plain text unix log files, I am yet to have corruption in them, certainly not to the point where I could not view the logs at least partially.

The fact that these logs are getting corrupted most likely IS due to systemd, the developers simply don't give a fuck. "Assuming the corruption came from another source" is exactly the problem.

Also, what do you do if files are corrupted? You attempt to at least retrieve partial contents. Log files contain valuable information. Or we would not bother logging it!

Comment: Re:it solves some unicode issues (Score 1) 774

by smash (#48102815) Attached to: Systemd Adding Its Own Console To Linux Systems

And you think re-writing from scratch will produce less bugs? Common rookie mistake. Everyone thinks if only they could re-write they could make something better and less buggy off the bat. That is, in the vast majority of cases due to not fully understanding the problem.

Software gets complex due to fixing edge case bugs as they are discovered. Throwing all of that development away, unless you have a fucking good reason is a bad idea.

I've yet to see any "fucking good reason" for systemd doing the things it does. And definitely no way to force it on everyone as default.

If a listener nods his head when you're explaining your program, wake him up.

Working...