From somenxavier at posteo.net  Fri May  1 13:21:11 2020
From: somenxavier at posteo.net (Xavier B.)
Date: Fri, 1 May 2020 15:21:11 +0200
Subject: [Assist] Put openrc service in dnscrypt-proxy package
Message-ID: <20200501152111.d9dffebb40b1abcd8bd73745@posteo.net>

> dave and erich -
> 
> this was cross-posted on the parabola mailing list
> https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/assist/2020-April/001480.html
> AFAICT it is related to openrc on archarm, and not arch or
> arch32, so it is likely not your concern
> 
> Xavier -
> 
> im not sure why you CC'ed david and erich about this - AFAIK
> neither of them are associated with the archlinuxarm project -
> some of the software in the archlinuxarm repos may have been
> packaged by those people; but that would be because those
> packages were taken directly from the archlinux or archlinux32
> distros - despite the similarity of the names, those (and
> parabola) are all separate projects
> 
> if archlinux or parabola were to add this init-script, i think
> it would be a separate package than dnscryp itself

Sorry for annoyances. I did not know who are mantainers of dnscrypt-proxy package. I simply go to packages search [1] and search for dnscrypt-proxy mantainers. For example [2] points to Erich Eckner <arch32 at eckner dot net>.

Personally, I would include openrc in the package. systemd init scripts are normally include in the package and then it's coherent to do the same for openrc. I feel something abadoned. It seems that systemd has more priority rather than openrc. It's a user perspective thought: many packages include systemd init script but as openrc user, you have to search *-openrc packages. It's not fair.

Xavier

[1] https://www.parabola.nu/packages/?sort=&q=dnscrypt-proxy&maintainer=&flagged=
[2] https://www.parabola.nu/packages/community/i686/dnscrypt-proxy/

From freemor at freemor.ca  Fri May  1 14:11:36 2020
From: freemor at freemor.ca (Freemor)
Date: Fri, 1 May 2020 11:11:36 -0300
Subject: [Assist] Put openrc service in dnscrypt-proxy package
In-Reply-To: <20200501152111.d9dffebb40b1abcd8bd73745@posteo.net>
References: <20200501152111.d9dffebb40b1abcd8bd73745@posteo.net>
Message-ID: <20200501141136.GB13435@freemor.ca>

On Fri, May 01, 2020 at 03:21:11PM +0200, Xavier B. wrote:
> 
> Sorry for annoyances. I did not know who are mantainers of dnscrypt-proxy package. I simply go to packages search [1] and search for dnscrypt-proxy mantainers. For example [2] points to Erich Eckner <arch32 at eckner dot net>.
> 
> Personally, I would include openrc in the package. systemd init scripts are normally include in the package and then it's coherent to do the same for openrc. I feel something abadoned. It seems that systemd has more priority rather than openrc. It's a user perspective thought: many packages include systemd init script but as openrc user, you have to search *-openrc packages. It's not fair.
> 
> Xavier
> 
> [1] https://www.parabola.nu/packages/?sort=&q=dnscrypt-proxy&maintainer=&flagged=
> [2] https://www.parabola.nu/packages/community/i686/dnscrypt-proxy/
> _______________________________________________
> Assist mailing list
> Assist at lists.parabola.nu
> https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/assist

Doing what you suggest would put an onerous burden on Parabola's small dev team
as it would mean adopting ALL packages that have an init script and
re-packaging them to include the OpenRC inits. And there would be user
expectations that they would update in time with the upstream. Which would
require one or more people to monitor those packages on a daily basis and
rebuild then in a swift fashion.

That aside. Open RC is meant to be much more hands on, nuts and bolts,
approach. If you want automagic then you wan systemd. The separate init scripts
allow people to keep their  system lean and to do things like remove the init
scripts without removing the service if they wanted to write their own or start
the service manually. OpenRC is about having very fine grained control over the
init. Not about security/privacy as some people seem to believe.

What you describe as "not fair" many see as "expected behaviour"

What you suggest would require patching/re-writing the upstream OpenRC packages 
to spit the init scripts out as patches for the services so they could then be
added to the service packages. Instead of just building then as they come from
the upstream.



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/assist/attachments/20200501/08b73443/attachment-0001.sig>

From bill-auger at peers.community  Sat May  2 00:47:33 2020
From: bill-auger at peers.community (bill-auger)
Date: Fri, 1 May 2020 20:47:33 -0400
Subject: [Assist] Put openrc service in dnscrypt-proxy package
In-Reply-To: <20200501141136.GB13435@freemor.ca>
References: <20200501152111.d9dffebb40b1abcd8bd73745@posteo.net>
 <20200501141136.GB13435@freemor.ca>
Message-ID: <20200501204733.6b6751eb@parabola>

what Xavier is asking for is surely not as complicated as this
discussion would make it appear to be - an init script is a very
tiny simple thing to add to the system

when some init script is missing for openrc, it is not a case of
priority or favoritism - parabola was built upon arch, and arch
uses systemd - openrc support was added much more recently; but
not every program works with openrc without some special
attention - if no one has asked for openrc support for some
program before; then it has probably not been added yet - almost
every openrc init script in parabola, got there because someone
asked for it specifically - requests just like this one have
been the normal procedure

so what needs to happen exactly, does an init script for this
service exists anywhere, or maybe someone needs to write one?

From freemor at freemor.ca  Sat May  2 01:47:53 2020
From: freemor at freemor.ca (Freemor)
Date: Fri, 1 May 2020 22:47:53 -0300
Subject: [Assist] Put openrc service in dnscrypt-proxy package
In-Reply-To: <20200501204733.6b6751eb@parabola>
References: <20200501152111.d9dffebb40b1abcd8bd73745@posteo.net>
 <20200501141136.GB13435@freemor.ca>
 <20200501204733.6b6751eb@parabola>
Message-ID: <20200502014753.GC13435@freemor.ca>

On Fri, May 01, 2020 at 08:47:33PM -0400, bill-auger wrote:
> what Xavier is asking for is surely not as complicated as this
> discussion would make it appear to be - an init script is a very
> tiny simple thing to add to the system
> 
> when some init script is missing for openrc, it is not a case of
> priority or favoritism - parabola was built upon arch, and arch
> uses systemd - openrc support was added much more recently; but
> not every program works with openrc without some special
> attention - if no one has asked for openrc support for some
> program before; then it has probably not been added yet - almost
> every openrc init script in parabola, got there because someone
> asked for it specifically - requests just like this one have
> been the normal procedure
> 
> so what needs to happen exactly, does an init script for this
> service exists anywhere, or maybe someone needs to write one?
> _______________________________________________
> Assist mailing list
> Assist at lists.parabola.nu
> https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/assist

Probably the easiest thing to do would just be to make all the *-openrc
init script packages a dependency of openrc-base or something similar. That way
they'd all be in place. (save ones that are not built in the current upstream)

This would still require the user to turn them on manually after installing
services unless we rebuilt all the things like sshd etc to have ALPM hooks to
do that.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/assist/attachments/20200501/2fa3b906/attachment.sig>

From leonhenrik.plickat at stud.uni-goettingen.de  Wed May 13 06:49:51 2020
From: leonhenrik.plickat at stud.uni-goettingen.de (Leon Plickat)
Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 08:49:51 +0200
Subject: [Assist] No audio in IceWeasel when joining BigBlueButton conference
Message-ID: <C2PEH0N10PXT.1S416N3J5NE95@tarazed>

Hello,
I currently have a rather annoying issue regarding the IceWeasel
browser shipped with Parabola. When I am trying to join a Conference
on the BigBlueButton platform hosted by my university, I can not hear
any audio. Or to be more precise: I can not hear what anyone is
saying. I can hear the user interface of sounds BBB, I can hear sounds
played in other browser tabs and I can hear any other audio source on
my computer. I set the permissions for the website to allow auto-play
of audio and video.

This issue started last week. Before that, I was able to participate
in BBB conferences just fine. I initially thought it was a temporary
hick-up, as is common in video conference tools, but the issue is
still here a week (and many missed conferences) later and apparently
only affects me.

Maybe this is a WebRTC issue? I remember some time ago that the
defaults of IceWeasel where changed to allow Jitsi to function. Since
BBB is also free software (GPL) and self-hostable, I assumed it would
function as well, which it did until last week. Have the defaults
changed again? I have no idea how to trouble shoot this, especially
since basically all of BBBs official documentation is written for
server administrators, not actual users. I am unable to take part in
any lectures or exercises until this is fixed, so any attempt at
helping is highly appreciated!


Friendly greetings,
Leon Plickat

From bill-auger at peers.community  Wed May 13 07:41:14 2020
From: bill-auger at peers.community (bill-auger)
Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 03:41:14 -0400
Subject: [Assist] No audio in IceWeasel when joining BigBlueButton
 conference
In-Reply-To: <C2PEH0N10PXT.1S416N3J5NE95@tarazed>
References: <C2PEH0N10PXT.1S416N3J5NE95@tarazed>
Message-ID: <20200513034114.7e40ac5e@parabola>

it is probably a general webrtc issue - there is an open bug
report on the bug tracker now[1], about the same problem with
jitsi-meet

iceweasel v76 is in the pipeline now - it has a fix for webrtc[2]
- please do write back if iceweasel v76 has the same problem


[1]: https://labs.parabola.nu/issues/2767
[2]: https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/2020-May/007745.html

From leonhenrik.plickat at stud.uni-goettingen.de  Wed May 13 23:32:09 2020
From: leonhenrik.plickat at stud.uni-goettingen.de (Leon Plickat)
Date: Thu, 14 May 2020 01:32:09 +0200
Subject: [Assist] No audio in IceWeasel when joining BigBlueButton
 conference
In-Reply-To: <20200513034114.7e40ac5e@parabola>
Message-ID: <C2PZSFNKB4TQ.2ZBBEB7Z0JOZR@tarazed>

On Wed May 13, 2020 at 11:41 AM CEST, bill-auger wrote:
> iceweasel v76 is in the pipeline now - it has a fix for webrtc[2]
> - please do write back if iceweasel v76 has the same problem

The new version has indeed resolved the issues I was having. I
successfully took part in two conferences today. Many thanks to
everyone involved.

Friendly greetings,
Leon Plickat