From lukeshu at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 1 03:21:52 2016 From: lukeshu at sbcglobal.net (Luke Shumaker) Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2016 23:21:52 -0400 Subject: [Dev] [FYI] changes to [repo] HTTP In-Reply-To: <1469831497.2532.1@plebeian.isacdaavid.info> References: <877fc416jx.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <1469831497.2532.1@plebeian.isacdaavid.info> Message-ID: <87popt5g33.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 18:31:37 -0400, "Isaac David" isacdaavid at isacdaavid.info wrote: > I was wondering, where does that all leave my pseudo-mirror? If I > understand your PHP handler correctly my mirror does not figure > in repomirror's pool (rightly so because the redirect process > could loop indefinitely or something). Do you recommend that I keep > caching results from repo using ?noredirect, use repomirror to > distribute the load, or move to an entirely different tier-1 mirror? I think that is good; cache using ?noredirect, then send to repomirror if you don't have it. I don't know how complicated it would be, but it might be even better to cache from repomirror; just as long as you follow the redirects. So the cached reply would actually be from one of the other mirrors; but have repomirror tell you which one. -- Happy hacking, ~ Luke Shumaker From blade.vp2020 at gmail.com Mon Aug 1 16:31:32 2016 From: blade.vp2020 at gmail.com (Ali Abdul Ghani) Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 09:31:32 -0700 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: > * Use NetworkManager (CLI) instead of Netctl. the Unix system design principle is, if it ain?t broke, don?t fix it. Netctl that comes with distribution is simple enough, well-understood enough, and stress-tested enough that you really don?t want to mess with it to get actual work done. have fun and be free ali miracle 2016-07-31 10:59 ??????-07:00, Luke Shumaker : > On Sat, 30 Jul 2016 23:24:00 -0400, > coadde wrote: >> Hi guys, i would make some changes in the new server, however i would >> propose it to be discussed under consensus first: >> >> * Remove SSL certificates to be more KISS and adhocratic. > > What? > > Both servers now allow you to just drop files in > `/etc/ssl/misc/certbot-get.d/`, then run `sudo -u keys > /etc/ssl/misc/certbot-get`; as described on the wiki[0]. > > [0]: > https://wiki.parabola.nu/Hacking:Servers/Winston#issuance.2C_renewal.2C_and_installation > >> * Use a TOX server as XMPP replacement. > > no comment > >> * Use our own DNS server. > > Been on the todo list forever; go for it. > >> * Use NetworkManager (CLI) instead of Netctl. > > What!? Why? KISS! > >> * Improve IPv6 security against IoT and RFID (keep link-local IPv6 in >> anonymous -> "fe80::") >> * Add firewall >> * Add TOR, DNSCrypt and VPN to increase security. >> * Testing against all type of attacks to check our security settings is >> ok. > _______________________________________________ > Dev mailing list > Dev at lists.parabola.nu > https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev > -- Emacs is the ground. We run around and act silly on top of it, and when we die, may our remnants grace its ongoing incrementation. From g4jc at openmailbox.org Mon Aug 1 21:52:32 2016 From: g4jc at openmailbox.org (Luke) Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 17:52:32 -0400 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> Message-ID: On 07/30/2016 11:24 PM, coadde wrote: > Hi guys, i would make some changes in the new server, however i would > propose it to be discussed under consensus first: > > * Remove SSL certificates to be more KISS and adhocratic. No idea what this means, but we should keep our TLS certs and all mirrors should be required to have HTTPS. Would also be nice to have a means of verifying the fingerprint of the certs. > * Use a TOX server as XMPP replacement. +1. Simple to use, works on my slow internet, and doesn't require a central server (XMPP does require a centralized server, although it is "federated" meaning we could setup our own. Tox is still more reliable imo.) > * Use our own DNS server. +1, but you have to make sure it isn't publicly accessible otherwise we'll be getting hammered with random reflection attacks. We could include any of the public OpenNIC non-logging servers as default in /etc/resolv.conf. > * Use NetworkManager (CLI) instead of Netctl. Netctl is pretty solid, I no longer use network manager on anything other than my laptop due to the heavy bloatware. > * Improve IPv6 security against IoT and RFID (keep link-local IPv6 in > anonymous -> "fe80::") Not sure what RFID has to do with our Parabola server? But improving IPv6 security sounds good. > * Add firewall +1 - IPTables should be setup to prevent at least basic script-kiddie DDoS attempts. > * Add TOR, DNSCrypt and VPN to increase security. I could see a TOR Hidden Service and/or VPN into the server for developers as being useful. However, unless we are planning to surf around using the main server as a VPN (probably not a good idea?) there isn't much need for DNSCrypt as others mentioned. This can be done client-side. > * Testing against all type of attacks to check our security settings is ok. +1. We should have someone audit the server for any vulnerabilities. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Dev mailing list > Dev at lists.parabola.nu > https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 801 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From emulatorman at riseup.net Mon Aug 1 22:23:29 2016 From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Andr=c3=a9_Silva?=) Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 19:23:29 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> Message-ID: On 08/01/2016 06:52 PM, Luke wrote: > On 07/30/2016 11:24 PM, coadde wrote: >> Hi guys, i would make some changes in the new server, however i would >> propose it to be discussed under consensus first: >> >> * Remove SSL certificates to be more KISS and adhocratic. > No idea what this means, but we should keep our TLS certs and all > mirrors should be required to have HTTPS. > Would also be nice to have a means of verifying the fingerprint of the > certs. +1 about Luke opinion. >> * Use a TOX server as XMPP replacement. > +1. Simple to use, works on my slow internet, and doesn't require a > central server (XMPP does require a centralized server, although it is > "federated" meaning we could setup our own. Tox is still more reliable imo.) I think TOX has option to register account to toxme.io. Since i don't know about it, could be it useful to create a server? >> * Use our own DNS server. > +1, but you have to make sure it isn't publicly accessible otherwise > we'll be getting hammered with random reflection attacks. We could > include any of the public OpenNIC non-logging servers as default in > /etc/resolv.conf. +1 >> * Use NetworkManager (CLI) instead of Netctl. > Netctl is pretty solid, I no longer use network manager on anything > other than my laptop due to the heavy bloatware. Netctl is pretty solid, but no portable since it is adapted only for systemd. If we have plans to move to OpenRC or another one (eg. gnudmd (called now as GNU Shepherd)), we should looking for alternatives (eg. NetworkManager). >> * Improve IPv6 security against IoT and RFID (keep link-local IPv6 in >> anonymous -> "fe80::") > Not sure what RFID has to do with our Parabola server? But improving > IPv6 security sounds good. +1 >> * Add firewall > +1 - IPTables should be setup to prevent at least basic script-kiddie > DDoS attempts. +1 >> * Add TOR, DNSCrypt and VPN to increase security. > I could see a TOR Hidden Service and/or VPN into the server for > developers as being useful. However, unless we are planning to surf > around using the main server as a VPN (probably not a good idea?) there > isn't much need for DNSCrypt as others mentioned. This can be done > client-side. +1 >> * Testing against all type of attacks to check our security settings is ok. > +1. We should have someone audit the server for any vulnerabilities. +1, i suggest use linux-libre-audit for it. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From emulatorman at riseup.net Mon Aug 1 22:26:05 2016 From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Andr=c3=a9_Silva?=) Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 19:26:05 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> Message-ID: On 08/01/2016 07:23 PM, Andr? Silva wrote: >>> * Testing against all type of attacks to check our security settings is ok. >> +1. We should have someone audit the server for any vulnerabilities. > > +1, i suggest use linux-libre-audit for it. In this case, since it is a server, i could create a modified version of linux-libre-lts with AUDIT support called linux-libre-lts-audit, what do you think guys? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From fauno at endefensadelsl.org Mon Aug 1 23:04:15 2016 From: fauno at endefensadelsl.org (fauno) Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2016 20:04:15 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> Message-ID: <87wpk0rt00.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Andr? Silva writes: > [ Unknown signature status ] > On 08/01/2016 07:23 PM, Andr? Silva wrote: >>>> * Testing against all type of attacks to check our security settings is ok. >>> +1. We should have someone audit the server for any vulnerabilities. >> >> +1, i suggest use linux-libre-audit for it. > > In this case, since it is a server, i could create a modified version of > linux-libre-lts with AUDIT support called linux-libre-lts-audit, what do > you think guys? what about grsec? -- http://utopia.partidopirata.com.ar/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 584 bytes Desc: not available URL: From g4jc at openmailbox.org Mon Aug 1 23:15:09 2016 From: g4jc at openmailbox.org (Luke) Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 19:15:09 -0400 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: <87wpk0rt00.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87wpk0rt00.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: On 08/01/2016 07:04 PM, fauno wrote: > Andr? Silva writes: > >> [ Unknown signature status ] >> On 08/01/2016 07:23 PM, Andr? Silva wrote: >>>>> * Testing against all type of attacks to check our security settings is ok. >>>> +1. We should have someone audit the server for any vulnerabilities. >>> +1, i suggest use linux-libre-audit for it. >> In this case, since it is a server, i could create a modified version of >> linux-libre-lts with AUDIT support called linux-libre-lts-audit, what do >> you think guys? > what about grsec? > grsec would probably be better for the server, but what does the audit kernel do? I meant literally audit it, as in run nmap and other tools to scan for vulnerabilities... -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 801 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From coadde at riseup.net Mon Aug 1 23:25:42 2016 From: coadde at riseup.net (coadde) Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 20:25:42 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> Message-ID: <2eeeede4-d1c1-97b6-67c4-096be4715d61@riseup.net> On 08/01/2016 07:23 PM, Andr? Silva wrote: > On 08/01/2016 06:52 PM, Luke wrote: >> On 07/30/2016 11:24 PM, coadde wrote: >>> Hi guys, i would make some changes in the new server, however i would >>> propose it to be discussed under consensus first: >>> >>> * Remove SSL certificates to be more KISS and adhocratic. >> No idea what this means, but we should keep our TLS certs and all >> mirrors should be required to have HTTPS. >> Would also be nice to have a means of verifying the fingerprint of the >> certs. > > +1 about Luke opinion. OK, i don't know much about tls :( >>> * Use a TOX server as XMPP replacement. >> +1. Simple to use, works on my slow internet, and doesn't require a >> central server (XMPP does require a centralized server, although it is >> "federated" meaning we could setup our own. Tox is still more reliable imo.) > > I think TOX has option to register account to toxme.io. Since i don't > know about it, could be it useful to create a server? It could creates a user to speech in groups and conferences with TOX And "toxcore" contains the service "tox-bootstrapd (Tox DHT Bootstrap)", to use as node and DHT[0][1] [0]:https://wiki.tox.chat/users/nodes [1]:https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Tox#Run_a_node >>> * Use NetworkManager (CLI) instead of Netctl. >> Netctl is pretty solid, I no longer use network manager on anything >> other than my laptop due to the heavy bloatware. > > Netctl is pretty solid, but no portable since it is adapted only for > systemd. If we have plans to move to OpenRC or another one (eg. gnudmd > (called now as GNU Shepherd)), we should looking for alternatives (eg. > NetworkManager). +1, NetworkManager is easy to use it with "nmcli" command and contains most of options, example: nmcli commands: nmcli c add help # help to create any type of network nmcli c add type ethernet ifname eth10 con-name "Ethernet_Server" \ autoconnect yes \ ip4 10.0.0.1/24 gw4 10.0.0.1 # create the "Ethernet_Server" nmcli c show # show all networks nmcli c edit "Ethernet_Server" # edit the selected network in interactive mode nmcli c up "Ethernet_Server" # to connect the selected network nmcli c down "Ethernet_Server" # to disconnect the selected network nmcli d status # show interfaces nmcli d wifi # show SSID wifis and status nmcli -a d wifi connect "SSID" # create and enter the selected SSID wifi configuration file like: /etc/NetworkManager/system-connections/"Ethernet_Server" -------------------------------------------------------- [connection] id=Ethernet_Server uuid=ffffffff-ffff-ffff-ffff-ffffffffffff type=ethernet permissions= secondaries= [ethernet] mac-address-blacklist= [ipv4] address1=10.0.0.1/24,10.0.0.1 dns=127.0.0.1; dns-search= method=manual [ipv6] addr-gen-mode=stable-privacy address1=fd09::/64,fd09::1 dns= dns-search= method=manual -------------------------------------------------------- >>> * Testing against all type of attacks to check our security settings is ok. >> +1. We should have someone audit the server for any vulnerabilities. > > +1, i suggest use linux-libre-audit for it. > > In this case, since it is a server, i could create a modified version of > linux-libre-lts with AUDIT support called linux-libre-lts-audit, what do > you think guys? +1 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From emulatorman at riseup.net Mon Aug 1 23:33:38 2016 From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Andr=c3=a9_Silva?=) Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 20:33:38 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87wpk0rt00.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: On 08/01/2016 08:15 PM, Luke wrote: > On 08/01/2016 07:04 PM, fauno wrote: >> Andr? Silva writes: >> >>> [ Unknown signature status ] >>> On 08/01/2016 07:23 PM, Andr? Silva wrote: >>>>>> * Testing against all type of attacks to check our security settings is ok. >>>>> +1. We should have someone audit the server for any vulnerabilities. >>>> +1, i suggest use linux-libre-audit for it. >>> In this case, since it is a server, i could create a modified version of >>> linux-libre-lts with AUDIT support called linux-libre-lts-audit, what do >>> you think guys? >> what about grsec? >> > grsec would probably be better for the server, but what does the audit > kernel do? I meant literally audit it, as in run nmap and other tools to > scan for vulnerabilities... AUDIT support is useful for debugging, however it is disabled in default kernels for performance reasons. btw, grsec would probable be better for the server too. i agree about it. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From coadde at riseup.net Mon Aug 1 23:36:29 2016 From: coadde at riseup.net (coadde) Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 20:36:29 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87wpk0rt00.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: <9518ea74-ec50-fb91-a790-8fe1ad8fa097@riseup.net> On 08/01/2016 08:33 PM, Andr? Silva wrote: > On 08/01/2016 08:15 PM, Luke wrote: >> On 08/01/2016 07:04 PM, fauno wrote: >>> Andr? Silva writes: >>> >>>> [ Unknown signature status ] >>>> On 08/01/2016 07:23 PM, Andr? Silva wrote: >>>>>>> * Testing against all type of attacks to check our security settings is ok. >>>>>> +1. We should have someone audit the server for any vulnerabilities. >>>>> +1, i suggest use linux-libre-audit for it. >>>> In this case, since it is a server, i could create a modified version of >>>> linux-libre-lts with AUDIT support called linux-libre-lts-audit, what do >>>> you think guys? >>> what about grsec? >>> >> grsec would probably be better for the server, but what does the audit >> kernel do? I meant literally audit it, as in run nmap and other tools to >> scan for vulnerabilities... > > AUDIT support is useful for debugging, however it is disabled in default > kernels for performance reasons. > > btw, grsec would probable be better for the server too. i agree about it. +1 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From coadde at riseup.net Tue Aug 2 00:00:27 2016 From: coadde at riseup.net (coadde) Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 21:00:27 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> On 08/01/2016 01:31 PM, Ali Abdul Ghani wrote: >> * Use NetworkManager (CLI) instead of Netctl. > the Unix system design principle is, if it ain?t broke, don?t fix it. > Netctl that comes with distribution is simple enough, well-understood > enough, and stress-tested enough that you really don?t want to mess > with it to get actual work done. > have fun and be free > ali miracle GNU's Not Unix! and Systemd doesn't respect UNIX principle :) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de Tue Aug 2 08:08:47 2016 From: pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de (pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 10:08:47 +0200 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> Message-ID: <616b2500-9fb7-009a-e8c2-7a9073d4e8e5@pelzflorian.de> On 08/01/2016 11:52 PM, Luke wrote: > On 07/30/2016 11:24 PM, coadde wrote: >> * Add TOR, DNSCrypt and VPN to increase security. > I could see a TOR Hidden Service and/or VPN into the server for > developers as being useful. However, unless we are planning to surf > around using the main server as a VPN (probably not a good idea?) there > isn't much need for DNSCrypt as others mentioned. This can be done > client-side. Why use a TOR Hidden Service? Hidden Services hide the server, not the client, and the Parabola server does not need to be hidden. TOR should be installed on the client, not the server. Similarly, IPv6 privacy extensions are not needed for a public server. I?m not quite sure what the plan was about VPN. Do you want the server to be a VPN client or a VPN server? Regards, Florian Pelz -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de Tue Aug 2 08:09:28 2016 From: pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de (pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 10:09:28 +0200 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> Message-ID: On 08/02/2016 02:00 AM, coadde wrote: > On 08/01/2016 01:31 PM, Ali Abdul Ghani wrote: > GNU's Not Unix! and Systemd doesn't respect UNIX principle :) > Yes it does respect them, but more importantly Arch uses systemd and supporting another build system means a lot of work. Either way, I don?t think the choice netctl vs NetworkManager matters very much for a server. Regards, Florian Pelz -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de Tue Aug 2 08:09:42 2016 From: pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de (pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 10:09:42 +0200 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> Message-ID: On 08/01/2016 11:52 PM, Luke wrote: >> * Use a TOX server as XMPP replacement. > +1. Simple to use, works on my slow internet, and doesn't require a > central server (XMPP does require a centralized server, although it is > "federated" meaning we could setup our own. Tox is still more reliable imo.) As a user, I presume this is for private communication between developers? I?m not quite sure how Parabola uses XMPP right now. I haven?t used Tox, but the advantage of not using a centralized server mostly means that you don?t need to worry about the server being offline. Is it even possible for Tox to support delivery of messages to offline users in the future? AFAIK XMPP as a protocol could in theory be used without a central server. I don?t understand why they do not simply use XMPP with GPG for a uniform standard. Since for Parabola this is about software and not protocols, it probably does not matter much. I don?t think Tox as a protocol is the right direction though. Regards, Florian Pelz -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From hellekin at gnu.org Tue Aug 2 08:43:28 2016 From: hellekin at gnu.org (hellekin) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 08:43:28 +0000 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> Message-ID: On 08/02/2016 08:09 AM, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote: > On 08/02/2016 02:00 AM, coadde wrote: >> On 08/01/2016 01:31 PM, Ali Abdul Ghani wrote: >> GNU's Not Unix! and Systemd doesn't respect UNIX principle :) >> > > Yes it does respect them, but more importantly Arch uses systemd and > supporting another build system means a lot of work. Either way, I don?t > think the choice netctl vs NetworkManager matters very much for a server. > Although I don't like systemd, as Arch *development tools* are bound to systemd, why not use that? It has systemd-networkd, which should be more than sufficient. You only have ethernet running there, right? NetworkManager sounds like useless bloatware in that context. https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/systemd-networkd == hk From coadde at riseup.net Tue Aug 2 13:30:07 2016 From: coadde at riseup.net (coadde) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 10:30:07 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> Message-ID: <7e425dad-b197-af8b-dcad-f3d628f8fb1e@riseup.net> On 08/02/2016 05:43 AM, hellekin wrote: > On 08/02/2016 08:09 AM, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote: >> On 08/02/2016 02:00 AM, coadde wrote: >>> On 08/01/2016 01:31 PM, Ali Abdul Ghani wrote: >>> GNU's Not Unix! and Systemd doesn't respect UNIX principle :) >>> >> >> Yes it does respect them, but more importantly Arch uses systemd and >> supporting another build system means a lot of work. Either way, I don?t >> think the choice netctl vs NetworkManager matters very much for a server. >> > > Although I don't like systemd, as Arch *development tools* are bound to > systemd, why not use that? It has systemd-networkd, which should be > more than sufficient. You only have ethernet running there, right? > NetworkManager sounds like useless bloatware in that context. I not mention any *development tools* or any *build system* and Parabola uses LibreTools created and maintained by LukeShu. Nectl, NetworkManager and Networkd are network managers software and i only mention for it. Arch is the GNU/Linux distribution that officially uses only Systemd. Systemd is more that init system with includes udev, logind, journald, networkd, systemd-boot, etc. And it's only compatible with GNU/Linux. Netctl is only useful with Systemd and only is used in Arch-based distributions. And Netctl are maintained by Arch (the GNU/Linux distribution). Therefore, i wish use NetworkManager to the server, due is intended for all users and is portable for any init systems and any operating systems, if not, any new users that comes from others distributions and/or others operating systems to Parabola needs re-study and getting used a specific software that is limited by specific operating system and/or specific distribution, in this case Netctl. Then, if the server uses the Systemd by default, i prefer systemd-networkd as a minor option since it is the default option provided by Systemd. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de Tue Aug 2 14:01:03 2016 From: pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de (pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 16:01:03 +0200 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: <7e425dad-b197-af8b-dcad-f3d628f8fb1e@riseup.net> References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> <7e425dad-b197-af8b-dcad-f3d628f8fb1e@riseup.net> Message-ID: <179b8f01-6025-b0a7-1a32-f73e9b4fb135@pelzflorian.de> On 08/02/2016 03:30 PM, coadde wrote: > [?] > > Therefore, i wish use NetworkManager to the server, due is intended for > all users and is portable for any init systems and any operating > systems, if not, any new users that comes from others distributions > and/or others operating systems to Parabola needs re-study and getting > used a specific software that is limited by specific operating system > and/or specific distribution, in this case Netctl. > > [?] > Are you talking about the Parabola project?s package/Web/? servers or about an install ISO? Because I don?t know which new users you mean. Maybe I misunderstood. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From emulatorman at riseup.net Tue Aug 2 14:11:02 2016 From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Andr=c3=a9_Silva?=) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 11:11:02 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: <7e425dad-b197-af8b-dcad-f3d628f8fb1e@riseup.net> References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> <7e425dad-b197-af8b-dcad-f3d628f8fb1e@riseup.net> Message-ID: On 08/02/2016 10:30 AM, coadde wrote: > Then, if the server uses the Systemd by default, i prefer > systemd-networkd as a minor option since it is the default option > provided by Systemd. +1, I think systemd-networkd should be more than sufficient because only have ethernet running in our server, more KISS and adaptable for future Parabola maintainers that comes from another non Arch-based distros. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From emulatorman at riseup.net Tue Aug 2 14:13:26 2016 From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Andr=c3=a9_Silva?=) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 11:13:26 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: <179b8f01-6025-b0a7-1a32-f73e9b4fb135@pelzflorian.de> References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> <7e425dad-b197-af8b-dcad-f3d628f8fb1e@riseup.net> <179b8f01-6025-b0a7-1a32-f73e9b4fb135@pelzflorian.de> Message-ID: <63c70389-fe83-9365-c6b3-e966f1f61722@riseup.net> On 08/02/2016 11:01 AM, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote: > On 08/02/2016 03:30 PM, coadde wrote: >> [?] >> >> Therefore, i wish use NetworkManager to the server, due is intended for >> all users and is portable for any init systems and any operating >> systems, if not, any new users that comes from others distributions >> and/or others operating systems to Parabola needs re-study and getting >> used a specific software that is limited by specific operating system >> and/or specific distribution, in this case Netctl. >> >> [?] >> > > Are you talking about the Parabola project?s package/Web/? servers or > about an install ISO? Because I don?t know which new users you mean. > Maybe I misunderstood. He means about future maintainers for Parabola server that comes from another non Arch-based distros. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From fauno at endefensadelsl.org Tue Aug 2 14:54:18 2016 From: fauno at endefensadelsl.org (fauno) Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2016 11:54:18 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> <7e425dad-b197-af8b-dcad-f3d628f8fb1e@riseup.net> Message-ID: <87r3a7rzl1.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Andr? Silva writes: > [ Unknown signature status ] > On 08/02/2016 10:30 AM, coadde wrote: >> Then, if the server uses the Systemd by default, i prefer >> systemd-networkd as a minor option since it is the default option >> provided by Systemd. > > +1, I think systemd-networkd should be more than sufficient because only > have ethernet running in our server, more KISS and adaptable for future > Parabola maintainers that comes from another non Arch-based distros. or just put the necessary `ip` commands on /etc/rc.lulz :D -- .o?) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 584 bytes Desc: not available URL: From pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de Tue Aug 2 16:30:29 2016 From: pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de (pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 18:30:29 +0200 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: <63c70389-fe83-9365-c6b3-e966f1f61722@riseup.net> References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> <7e425dad-b197-af8b-dcad-f3d628f8fb1e@riseup.net> <179b8f01-6025-b0a7-1a32-f73e9b4fb135@pelzflorian.de> <63c70389-fe83-9365-c6b3-e966f1f61722@riseup.net> Message-ID: On 08/02/2016 04:13 PM, Andr? Silva wrote: > On 08/02/2016 11:01 AM, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote: >> Are you talking about the Parabola project?s package/Web/? servers or >> about an install ISO? Because I don?t know which new users you mean. >> Maybe I misunderstood. > > He means about future maintainers for Parabola server that comes from > another non Arch-based distros. > Thank you for the clarification. I thought so, but wasn?t sure anymore. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From nobody at parabola.nu Tue Aug 2 17:44:20 2016 From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification) Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2016 17:44:20 -0000 Subject: [Dev] Orphan Libre package [iceweasel] marked out-of-date Message-ID: <20160802174420.1700.6018@parabola.nu> eliotime3000 at openmailbox.org wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date: * iceweasel 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/iceweasel/ * iceweasel 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/iceweasel/ * iceweasel-debug 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/iceweasel-debug/ * iceweasel-debug 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/iceweasel-debug/ The user provided the following additional text: Firefox 48 has been released. Please consider upgrade to the actual Iceweasel release channel now. From nobody at parabola.nu Tue Aug 2 17:45:40 2016 From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification) Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2016 17:45:40 -0000 Subject: [Dev] Orphan Libre package [iceweasel-l10n-es-ar] marked out-of-date Message-ID: <20160802174540.1699.36132@parabola.nu> eliotime3000 at openmailbox.org wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date: * iceweasel-l10n-ach 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-ach/ * iceweasel-l10n-af 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-af/ * iceweasel-l10n-an 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-an/ * iceweasel-l10n-ar 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-ar/ * iceweasel-l10n-as 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-as/ * iceweasel-l10n-ast 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-ast/ * iceweasel-l10n-az 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-az/ * iceweasel-l10n-be 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-be/ * iceweasel-l10n-bg 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-bg/ * iceweasel-l10n-bn-bd 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-bn-bd/ * iceweasel-l10n-bn-in 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-bn-in/ * iceweasel-l10n-br 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-br/ * iceweasel-l10n-bs 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-bs/ * iceweasel-l10n-ca 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-ca/ * iceweasel-l10n-cs 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-cs/ * iceweasel-l10n-cy 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-cy/ * iceweasel-l10n-da 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-da/ * iceweasel-l10n-de 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-de/ * iceweasel-l10n-dsb 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-dsb/ * iceweasel-l10n-el 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-el/ * iceweasel-l10n-en-gb 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-en-gb/ * iceweasel-l10n-en-za 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-en-za/ * iceweasel-l10n-eo 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-eo/ * iceweasel-l10n-es-ar 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-es-ar/ * iceweasel-l10n-es-cl 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-es-cl/ * iceweasel-l10n-es-es 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-es-es/ * iceweasel-l10n-es-mx 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-es-mx/ * iceweasel-l10n-et 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-et/ * iceweasel-l10n-eu 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-eu/ * iceweasel-l10n-fa 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-fa/ * iceweasel-l10n-ff 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-ff/ * iceweasel-l10n-fi 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-fi/ * iceweasel-l10n-fr 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-fr/ * iceweasel-l10n-fy-nl 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-fy-nl/ * iceweasel-l10n-ga-ie 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-ga-ie/ * iceweasel-l10n-gd 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-gd/ * iceweasel-l10n-gl 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-gl/ * iceweasel-l10n-gn 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-gn/ * iceweasel-l10n-gu-in 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-gu-in/ * iceweasel-l10n-he 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-he/ * iceweasel-l10n-hi-in 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-hi-in/ * iceweasel-l10n-hr 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-hr/ * iceweasel-l10n-hsb 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-hsb/ * iceweasel-l10n-hu 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-hu/ * iceweasel-l10n-hy-am 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-hy-am/ * iceweasel-l10n-id 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-id/ * iceweasel-l10n-is 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-is/ * iceweasel-l10n-it 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-it/ * iceweasel-l10n-ja 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-ja/ * iceweasel-l10n-kk 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-kk/ * iceweasel-l10n-km 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-km/ * iceweasel-l10n-kn 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-kn/ * iceweasel-l10n-ko 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-ko/ * iceweasel-l10n-lij 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-lij/ * iceweasel-l10n-lt 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-lt/ * iceweasel-l10n-lv 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-lv/ * iceweasel-l10n-mai 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-mai/ * iceweasel-l10n-mk 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-mk/ * iceweasel-l10n-ml 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-ml/ * iceweasel-l10n-mr 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-mr/ * iceweasel-l10n-ms 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-ms/ * iceweasel-l10n-nb-no 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-nb-no/ * iceweasel-l10n-nl 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-nl/ * iceweasel-l10n-nn-no 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-nn-no/ * iceweasel-l10n-or 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-or/ * iceweasel-l10n-pa-in 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-pa-in/ * iceweasel-l10n-pl 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-pl/ * iceweasel-l10n-pt-br 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-pt-br/ * iceweasel-l10n-pt-pt 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-pt-pt/ * iceweasel-l10n-rm 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-rm/ * iceweasel-l10n-ro 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-ro/ * iceweasel-l10n-ru 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-ru/ * iceweasel-l10n-si 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-si/ * iceweasel-l10n-sk 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-sk/ * iceweasel-l10n-sl 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-sl/ * iceweasel-l10n-son 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-son/ * iceweasel-l10n-sq 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-sq/ * iceweasel-l10n-sr 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-sr/ * iceweasel-l10n-sv-se 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-sv-se/ * iceweasel-l10n-ta 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-ta/ * iceweasel-l10n-te 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-te/ * iceweasel-l10n-th 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-th/ * iceweasel-l10n-tr 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-tr/ * iceweasel-l10n-uk 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-uk/ * iceweasel-l10n-uz 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-uz/ * iceweasel-l10n-vi 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-vi/ * iceweasel-l10n-xh 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-xh/ * iceweasel-l10n-zh-cn 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-zh-cn/ * iceweasel-l10n-zh-tw 1:47.0.1.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-zh-tw/ The user provided the following additional text: Firefox 48 has been released. Please consider update the Iceweasel release channel as soon as possible. From lukeshu at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 2 18:44:08 2016 From: lukeshu at sbcglobal.net (Luke Shumaker) Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2016 14:44:08 -0400 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> Message-ID: <874m73qadj.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> On Tue, 02 Aug 2016 04:43:28 -0400, hellekin wrote: > NetworkManager sounds like useless bloatware in that context. NetworkManager is useless bloatware in any context. -- Happy hacking, ~ Luke Shumaker From lukeshu at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 2 19:09:06 2016 From: lukeshu at sbcglobal.net (Luke Shumaker) Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2016 15:09:06 -0400 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: <87r3a7rzl1.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> <7e425dad-b197-af8b-dcad-f3d628f8fb1e@riseup.net> <87r3a7rzl1.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: <871t27q97x.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> On Tue, 02 Aug 2016 10:54:18 -0400, fauno wrote: > [1 ] > [1.1 ] > Andr? Silva writes: > > > [ Unknown signature status ] > > On 08/02/2016 10:30 AM, coadde wrote: > >> Then, if the server uses the Systemd by default, i prefer > >> systemd-networkd as a minor option since it is the default option > >> provided by Systemd. > > > > +1, I think systemd-networkd should be more than sufficient because only > > have ethernet running in our server, more KISS and adaptable for future > > Parabola maintainers that comes from another non Arch-based distros. > > or just put the necessary `ip` commands on /etc/rc.lulz :D Are you the one who wrote the original `/etc/network.sh` for winston.parabola.nu? On one hand, yes, KISS. On the other, nothing warned you about the typo. -- Happy hacking, ~ Luke Shumaker From coadde at riseup.net Tue Aug 2 19:23:43 2016 From: coadde at riseup.net (coadde) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 16:23:43 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: <8737mnq9e3.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> <7e425dad-b197-af8b-dcad-f3d628f8fb1e@riseup.net> <8737mnq9e3.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: On 08/02/2016 04:05 PM, Luke Shumaker wrote: > On Tue, 02 Aug 2016 10:11:02 -0400, > Andr? Silva wrote: >> On 08/02/2016 10:30 AM, coadde wrote: >>> Then, if the server uses the Systemd by default, i prefer >>> systemd-networkd as a minor option since it is the default option >>> provided by Systemd. >> >> +1, I think systemd-networkd should be more than sufficient because only >> have ethernet running in our server, more KISS and adaptable for future >> Parabola maintainers that comes from another non Arch-based distros. > > systemd-networkd is sufficient, but is harder to configure and has a > more verbose configuration than netctl. Especially if you want to > have DNS in that config too. > > Netctl is really small and really simple. > > The file in `/etc/netctl/` is damn close to the table you'd see in a > VPS control panel. Make it simple. (see attached screenshot of > winston.parabola.nu's VPS control panel side-by-side with the netctl > configuration) > Netctl and Systemd are bloatware -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de Tue Aug 2 19:26:13 2016 From: pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de (pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 21:26:13 +0200 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: <874m73qadj.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> <874m73qadj.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: On 08/02/2016 08:44 PM, Luke Shumaker wrote: > On Tue, 02 Aug 2016 04:43:28 -0400, > hellekin wrote: >> NetworkManager sounds like useless bloatware in that context. > > NetworkManager is useless bloatware in any context. > NetworkManager is easy to use and sufficiently versatile for laptops/tablets when one wants to quickly change network settings with a GUI (e.g. for wireless, internet sharing, ?). For a server I don?t think it really matters; all of them work and are easy to set up. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From fauno at endefensadelsl.org Tue Aug 2 19:27:10 2016 From: fauno at endefensadelsl.org (fauno) Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2016 16:27:10 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: <871t27q97x.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> <7e425dad-b197-af8b-dcad-f3d628f8fb1e@riseup.net> <87r3a7rzl1.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <871t27q97x.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: <87a8gvrmy9.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Luke Shumaker writes: >> >> or just put the necessary `ip` commands on /etc/rc.lulz :D > > Are you the one who wrote the original `/etc/network.sh` for > winston.parabola.nu? nope > On one hand, yes, KISS. On the other, nothing warned you about the > typo. what typo? -- P) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 584 bytes Desc: not available URL: From emulatorman at riseup.net Tue Aug 2 19:36:12 2016 From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Andr=c3=a9_Silva?=) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 16:36:12 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: <87r3a7rzl1.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> <7e425dad-b197-af8b-dcad-f3d628f8fb1e@riseup.net> <87r3a7rzl1.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: On 08/02/2016 11:54 AM, fauno wrote: > Andr? Silva writes: > >> [ Unknown signature status ] >> On 08/02/2016 10:30 AM, coadde wrote: >>> Then, if the server uses the Systemd by default, i prefer >>> systemd-networkd as a minor option since it is the default option >>> provided by Systemd. >> >> +1, I think systemd-networkd should be more than sufficient because only >> have ethernet running in our server, more KISS and adaptable for future >> Parabola maintainers that comes from another non Arch-based distros. > > or just put the necessary `ip` commands on /etc/rc.lulz :D i think it is the best way :D -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From coadde at riseup.net Tue Aug 2 19:38:01 2016 From: coadde at riseup.net (coadde) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 16:38:01 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: <87a8gvrmy9.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> <7e425dad-b197-af8b-dcad-f3d628f8fb1e@riseup.net> <87r3a7rzl1.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <871t27q97x.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <87a8gvrmy9.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: On 08/02/2016 04:27 PM, fauno wrote: > Luke Shumaker writes: >>> >>> or just put the necessary `ip` commands on /etc/rc.lulz :D >> >> Are you the one who wrote the original `/etc/network.sh` for >> winston.parabola.nu? > > nope I wrote /etc/network.sh -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From emulatorman at riseup.net Tue Aug 2 19:50:32 2016 From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Andr=c3=a9_Silva?=) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 16:50:32 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> Message-ID: On 08/01/2016 07:23 PM, Andr? Silva wrote: > On 08/01/2016 06:52 PM, Luke wrote: >> On 07/30/2016 11:24 PM, coadde wrote: >>> * Use a TOX server as XMPP replacement. >> +1. Simple to use, works on my slow internet, and doesn't require a >> central server (XMPP does require a centralized server, although it is >> "federated" meaning we could setup our own. Tox is still more reliable imo.) > > I think TOX has option to register account to toxme.io. Since i don't > know about it, could be it useful to create a server? I was thinking about it and prefer we keep our XMPP server (even if TOX is the chosen one) since there are users using it yet, in my case i have a lot of contacts from my XMPP parabola.nu account :( BTW, is there a way to upgrade our XMPP certs since it is using the CAcert ones? :P -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From emulatorman at riseup.net Tue Aug 2 20:01:05 2016 From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Andr=c3=a9_Silva?=) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 17:01:05 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> <7e425dad-b197-af8b-dcad-f3d628f8fb1e@riseup.net> <87r3a7rzl1.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <871t27q97x.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <87a8gvrmy9.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: <2b1bdfc9-4af4-040c-00a3-9cfc97cf0b90@riseup.net> On 08/02/2016 04:38 PM, coadde wrote: > On 08/02/2016 04:27 PM, fauno wrote: >> Luke Shumaker writes: >>>> >>>> or just put the necessary `ip` commands on /etc/rc.lulz :D >>> >>> Are you the one who wrote the original `/etc/network.sh` for >>> winston.parabola.nu? >> >> nope > > I wrote /etc/network.sh I paid attention network.sh has been deleted for somebody, is there a way to recover or re-write it again? Since i read fauno suggestion, i prefer put the necessary 'ip' commands in some specific file since is the most simple and KISS way for all us. Since my point of view, i don't like NetworkManager and Netctl for servers. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From coadde at riseup.net Tue Aug 2 20:06:48 2016 From: coadde at riseup.net (coadde) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 17:06:48 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: <2b1bdfc9-4af4-040c-00a3-9cfc97cf0b90@riseup.net> References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> <7e425dad-b197-af8b-dcad-f3d628f8fb1e@riseup.net> <87r3a7rzl1.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <871t27q97x.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <87a8gvrmy9.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <2b1bdfc9-4af4-040c-00a3-9cfc97cf0b90@riseup.net> Message-ID: <09405142-a91c-60cd-cb24-10f82564ae39@riseup.net> On 08/02/2016 05:01 PM, Andr? Silva wrote: > On 08/02/2016 04:38 PM, coadde wrote: >> On 08/02/2016 04:27 PM, fauno wrote: >>> Luke Shumaker writes: >>>>> >>>>> or just put the necessary `ip` commands on /etc/rc.lulz :D >>>> >>>> Are you the one who wrote the original `/etc/network.sh` for >>>> winston.parabola.nu? >>> >>> nope >> >> I wrote /etc/network.sh > > I paid attention network.sh has been deleted for somebody, is there a > way to recover or re-write it again? > > Since i read fauno suggestion, i prefer put the necessary 'ip' commands > in some specific file since is the most simple and KISS way for all us. > Since my point of view, i don't like NetworkManager and Netctl for servers. I can't recover network.sh, but i can rewrite it. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From lukeshu at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 2 21:13:17 2016 From: lukeshu at sbcglobal.net (Luke Shumaker) Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2016 17:13:17 -0400 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: <87a8gvrmy9.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> <7e425dad-b197-af8b-dcad-f3d628f8fb1e@riseup.net> <87r3a7rzl1.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <871t27q97x.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <87a8gvrmy9.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: <87wpjyq3gy.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> On Tue, 02 Aug 2016 15:27:10 -0400, fauno wrote: > [1 ] > [1.1 ] > Luke Shumaker writes: > >> > >> or just put the necessary `ip` commands on /etc/rc.lulz :D > > > > Are you the one who wrote the original `/etc/network.sh` for > > winston.parabola.nu? > > nope > > > On one hand, yes, KISS. On the other, nothing warned you about the > > typo. > > what typo? I don't remember, but one of the commands was failing "silently". I suppose if the commands had all been chained with `&&` or it had `set -e` or something, then it would have been fine. But at the end of the day, having to think about the error cases is simply harder and more error prone than just using netctl. -- Happy hacking, ~ Luke Shumaker From lukeshu at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 2 21:14:12 2016 From: lukeshu at sbcglobal.net (Luke Shumaker) Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2016 17:14:12 -0400 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: <2b1bdfc9-4af4-040c-00a3-9cfc97cf0b90@riseup.net> References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> <7e425dad-b197-af8b-dcad-f3d628f8fb1e@riseup.net> <87r3a7rzl1.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <871t27q97x.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <87a8gvrmy9.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <2b1bdfc9-4af4-040c-00a3-9cfc97cf0b90@riseup.net> Message-ID: <87vaziq3ff.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> On Tue, 02 Aug 2016 16:01:05 -0400, Andr? Silva wrote: > [1 ] > [1.1 Re: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers ] > [1.1.1 ] > On 08/02/2016 04:38 PM, coadde wrote: > > On 08/02/2016 04:27 PM, fauno wrote: > >> Luke Shumaker writes: > >>>> > >>>> or just put the necessary `ip` commands on /etc/rc.lulz :D > >>> > >>> Are you the one who wrote the original `/etc/network.sh` for > >>> winston.parabola.nu? > >> > >> nope > > > > I wrote /etc/network.sh > > I paid attention network.sh has been deleted for somebody, is there a > way to recover or re-write it again? All of `/etc` is in git. -- Happy hacking, ~ Luke Shumaker From lukeshu at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 2 21:20:00 2016 From: lukeshu at sbcglobal.net (Luke Shumaker) Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2016 17:20:00 -0400 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> <7e425dad-b197-af8b-dcad-f3d628f8fb1e@riseup.net> <87r3a7rzl1.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <871t27q97x.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <87a8gvrmy9.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: <87twf2q35r.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> On Tue, 02 Aug 2016 15:38:01 -0400, coadde wrote: > I wrote /etc/network.sh Ok! Can you explain these two lines to me? I didn't see the point in them. ip neighbour replace 93.95.226.249 lladdr 52:54:5d:5f:e2:f9 nud permanent dev eth0 ip addr del fe80::5054:5dff:fe5f:e2f9 dev eth0 Also, the netmask was wrong; the VPS-control-panel-specified 255.255.255.128 is equivalent to /25, not /24. I don't remember which command had the error in it though. -- Happy hacking, ~ Luke Shumaker From lukeshu at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 2 21:34:17 2016 From: lukeshu at sbcglobal.net (Luke Shumaker) Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2016 17:34:17 -0400 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> <874m73qadj.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: <87shumq2hy.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> On Tue, 02 Aug 2016 15:26:13 -0400, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote: > [1 ] > [1.1 Re: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers ] > [1.1.1 ] > On 08/02/2016 08:44 PM, Luke Shumaker wrote: > > On Tue, 02 Aug 2016 04:43:28 -0400, > > hellekin wrote: > >> NetworkManager sounds like useless bloatware in that context. > > > > NetworkManager is useless bloatware in any context. > > NetworkManager is easy to use and sufficiently versatile for > laptops/tablets when one wants to quickly change network settings with a > GUI (e.g. for wireless, internet sharing, ?). For a server I don?t think > it really matters; all of them work and are easy to set up. I have a netctl "GUI"[1]. The only time I think NetworkManager could provide anything of value over it is the GUI for joining an WPA-EAP network; since netctl's `wifi-menu` doesn't support them. And then, when I've reluctantly installed NetworkManager to set up these, I just port the NetworkManager config over to netctl. Why doing this is worth it over just using NetworkManager: - You won't open your laptop and find the screen filled with (litterally) 200 messages informing you that it failed to connect to whatever wifi network. - It won't segfault if gnome-keyring isn't installed. - You'll never get weird error messages about "Error -14" that when you track them down, you find the comment "// XXX: TODO: we should probably have proper error handling" - When your wifi card craps out and you replace it, you won't find that all of your saved wifi networks mysteriously don't work anymore. - When you get a new laptop and copy over the configuration, you won't find that all of your saved wifi networks mysteriously don't work anymore. [1]: https://lukeshu.com/git/dotfiles/tree/.config/wmii-hg/rbar_wifi -- Happy hacking, ~ Luke Shumaker From coadde at riseup.net Tue Aug 2 21:40:43 2016 From: coadde at riseup.net (coadde) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 18:40:43 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> Message-ID: <857a3add-1681-1f9e-61cd-493a3f7cf66a@riseup.net> On 08/02/2016 05:09 AM, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote: > On 08/01/2016 11:52 PM, Luke wrote: >>> * Use a TOX server as XMPP replacement. >> +1. Simple to use, works on my slow internet, and doesn't require a >> central server (XMPP does require a centralized server, although it is >> "federated" meaning we could setup our own. Tox is still more reliable imo.) > > As a user, I presume this is for private communication between > developers? I?m not quite sure how Parabola uses XMPP right now. > > I haven?t used Tox, but the advantage of not using a centralized server > mostly means that you don?t need to worry about the server being > offline. Is it even possible for Tox to support delivery of messages to > offline users in the future? AFAIK XMPP as a protocol could in theory be > used without a central server. I don?t understand why they do not simply > use XMPP with GPG for a uniform standard. > > Since for Parabola this is about software and not protocols, it probably > does not matter much. I don?t think Tox as a protocol is the right > direction though. For minor situation i suggest to create TOX client in the server: * run the TOX client as service * create the "parabola" user * create the "parabola" group from the "parabola" user * permits all Parabola hackers to access the "parabola" group, due it's permits to use it as conferences * and optional i suggest to create pbot-like script in the "parabola" user, it's useful -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From coadde at riseup.net Tue Aug 2 21:42:29 2016 From: coadde at riseup.net (coadde) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 18:42:29 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: <616b2500-9fb7-009a-e8c2-7a9073d4e8e5@pelzflorian.de> References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <616b2500-9fb7-009a-e8c2-7a9073d4e8e5@pelzflorian.de> Message-ID: On 08/02/2016 05:08 AM, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote: > On 08/01/2016 11:52 PM, Luke wrote: >> On 07/30/2016 11:24 PM, coadde wrote: >>> * Add TOR, DNSCrypt and VPN to increase security. >> I could see a TOR Hidden Service and/or VPN into the server for >> developers as being useful. However, unless we are planning to surf >> around using the main server as a VPN (probably not a good idea?) there >> isn't much need for DNSCrypt as others mentioned. This can be done >> client-side. > > Why use a TOR Hidden Service? Hidden Services hide the server, not the > client, and the Parabola server does not need to be hidden. TOR should > be installed on the client, not the server. > > Similarly, IPv6 privacy extensions are not needed for a public server. > > I?m not quite sure what the plan was about VPN. Do you want the server > to be a VPN client or a VPN server? OK, DNSCrypt is not recommended. VPN is useless as security, but use VPN like SSH is better option. TOR is needed only for output network (like downloads), but not as a server (for input networks) IPv6 privacy extensions is only useful with link-local networks (fe80::). link-local network is only useful with local networks, i prefer to disable it for security. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From lukeshu at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 2 21:51:50 2016 From: lukeshu at sbcglobal.net (Luke Shumaker) Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2016 17:51:50 -0400 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> <7e425dad-b197-af8b-dcad-f3d628f8fb1e@riseup.net> Message-ID: <87oa5aq1op.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> On Tue, 02 Aug 2016 10:11:02 -0400, Andr? Silva wrote: > On 08/02/2016 10:30 AM, coadde wrote: > > Then, if the server uses the Systemd by default, i prefer > > systemd-networkd as a minor option since it is the default option > > provided by Systemd. > > +1, I think systemd-networkd should be more than sufficient because only > have ethernet running in our server, more KISS and adaptable for future > Parabola maintainers that comes from another non Arch-based distros. systemd-networkd is sufficient, but is harder to configure and has a more verbose configuration than netctl. Especially if you want to have DNS in that config too. Netctl is really small and really simple. The file in `/etc/netctl/` is damn close to the table you'd see in a VPS control panel. Make it simple. (see attached screenshot of winston.parabola.nu's VPS control panel side-by-side with the netctl configuration) [list seems to be rejecting the image attachment: https://lukeshu.com/dump/1470164309.png ] -- Happy hacking, ~ Luke Shumaker From coadde at riseup.net Tue Aug 2 22:08:17 2016 From: coadde at riseup.net (coadde) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 19:08:17 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: <87twf2q35r.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> <7e425dad-b197-af8b-dcad-f3d628f8fb1e@riseup.net> <87r3a7rzl1.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <871t27q97x.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <87a8gvrmy9.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <87twf2q35r.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: <6ed2ece1-766a-1955-a8b6-060d08699c01@riseup.net> On 08/02/2016 06:20 PM, Luke Shumaker wrote: > On Tue, 02 Aug 2016 15:38:01 -0400, > coadde wrote: >> I wrote /etc/network.sh > > Ok! > > Can you explain these two lines to me? I didn't see the point in them. > > ip neighbour replace 93.95.226.249 lladdr 52:54:5d:5f:e2:f9 nud permanent dev eth0 > ip addr del fe80::5054:5dff:fe5f:e2f9 dev eth0 "ip neighbour" is equivalent ARP on IPv4 and NDP on IPv6, i set it to permanent on eth0 interface, due it avoid MAC spoofing[0]. "ip addr del fe80::5054:5dff:fe5f:e2f9 dev eth0" it removes the unused and unsecured link-local address[1][2][3]. [0]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAC_spoofing [1]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_address#Stateless_address_autoconfiguration [2]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link-local_address#IPv6 [3]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_of_Things#Unique_addressability_of_things > Also, the netmask was wrong; the VPS-control-panel-specified > 255.255.255.128 is equivalent to /25, not /24. I put "/25", but the command "ip" may failed the connection. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de Wed Aug 3 07:30:03 2016 From: pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de (pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 09:30:03 +0200 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: <87shumq2hy.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> <874m73qadj.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <87shumq2hy.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: <5e95b45d-4de8-332e-e6fa-0a439ec795e9@pelzflorian.de> On 08/02/2016 11:34 PM, Luke Shumaker wrote: > I have a netctl "GUI"[1]. The only time I think NetworkManager could > provide anything of value over it is the GUI for joining an WPA-EAP > network; since netctl's `wifi-menu` doesn't support them. And then, > when I've reluctantly installed NetworkManager to set up these, I just > port the NetworkManager config over to netctl. > > Why doing this is worth it over just using NetworkManager: > [?] You clearly have more (negative) experience with NetworkManager than I do. Either way, we do want something like NetworkManager?s GUI/Dbus interfaces/? to exist for typical users who don?t want to write their own bash script. I see why you don?t want it on the server, even though it probably won?t mess up plain Ethernet. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de Wed Aug 3 07:29:42 2016 From: pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de (pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)) Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 09:29:42 +0200 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <616b2500-9fb7-009a-e8c2-7a9073d4e8e5@pelzflorian.de> Message-ID: On 08/02/2016 11:42 PM, coadde wrote: > OK, DNSCrypt is not recommended. > VPN is useless as security, but use VPN like SSH is better option. Would someone use a VPN offered by the server (other than SSH itself)? Is it needed/useful to someone? > TOR is needed only for output network (like downloads), but not as a > server (for input networks) > TOR is probably better than no TOR for downloads. The added secrecy still probably is not that important for a Parabola server, but if you are willing to set it up, I won?t say no. It may make some targeted attacks harder. > IPv6 privacy extensions is only useful with link-local networks (fe80::). > link-local network is only useful with local networks, i prefer to > disable it for security. > I don?t understand how it adds security here. Parabola servers don?t need to avoid tracking their IP, do they? Especially if you add TOR for downloads. Do you mean that other devices in the same local network need more effort to attack the Parabola server? Thank you for your work on this. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From emulatorman at riseup.net Thu Aug 4 06:29:38 2016 From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Andr=c3=a9_Silva?=) Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 03:29:38 -0300 Subject: [Dev] Fwd: [Maintenance] Cron chronic bash -c 'db-import-archlinux-pkg 2>&1' In-Reply-To: <20160803231321.A3D86C0B97@repo.parabola.nu> References: <20160803231321.A3D86C0B97@repo.parabola.nu> Message-ID: Are there issues in the syncing related to permissions? -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: [Maintenance] Cron chronic bash -c 'db-import-archlinux-pkg 2>&1' Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 00:13:21 +0100 (BST) From: (Cron Daemon) To: maintenance at lists.parabola.nu ==> 776 packages in blacklist receiving file list ... rsync: opendir "/.~tmp~" (in archlinux) failed: Permission denied (13) rsync: opendir "/pool/community/.~tmp~" (in archlinux) failed: Permission denied (13) rsync: opendir "/pool/packages/.~tmp~" (in archlinux) failed: Permission denied (13) rsync: opendir "/core/os/i686/.~tmp~" (in archlinux) failed: Permission denied (13) rsync: opendir "/core/os/x86_64/.~tmp~" (in archlinux) failed: Permission denied (13) rsync: opendir "/extra/os/i686/.~tmp~" (in archlinux) failed: Permission denied (13) rsync: opendir "/extra/os/x86_64/.~tmp~" (in archlinux) failed: Permission denied (13) rsync: opendir "/community/os/i686/.~tmp~" (in archlinux) failed: Permission denied (13) rsync: opendir "/community/os/x86_64/.~tmp~" (in archlinux) failed: Permission denied (13) rsync: opendir "/community-testing/os/i686/.~tmp~" (in archlinux) failed: Permission denied (13) rsync: opendir "/community-testing/os/x86_64/.~tmp~" (in archlinux) failed: Permission denied (13) done -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de Thu Aug 4 07:35:57 2016 From: pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de (pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)) Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 09:35:57 +0200 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: <57a25791.02ebca0a.cdaa7.0fd1@mx.google.com> References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> <874m73qadj.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <87shumq2hy.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <5e95b45d-4de8-332e-e6fa-0a439ec795e9@pelzflorian.de> <57a25791.02ebca0a.cdaa7.0fd1@mx.google.com> Message-ID: I?m replying to the list. On 08/03/2016 10:40 PM, Joshua Haase wrote: > [2016-08-03 09:30] "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" >> >> You clearly have more (negative) experience with NetworkManager than I >> do. Either way, we do want something like NetworkManager?s GUI/Dbus >> interfaces/? to exist for typical users who don?t want to write their >> own bash script. I see why you don?t want it on the server, even though >> it probably won?t mess up plain Ethernet. > > Why do typical users would need to mess up with Parabola's server network config? > Sorry, I went off-topic on this. What I meant to say is, NetworkManager is a good choice for a laptop. Any of netctl/networkd/? will hopefully continue to work without maintenance until the server hardware changes. Again, I don?t think it matters for a server, but since Luke has reasons not to want NetworkManager, we can simply use systemd-networkd or even a shell script. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From fauno at endefensadelsl.org Thu Aug 4 13:33:33 2016 From: fauno at endefensadelsl.org (fauno) Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2016 10:33:33 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [News] Parabola will take part in Software e Cultura no Brasil In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <87oa58psk2.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Andr? Silva writes: > [ Unknown signature status ] > Today we're announcing that Parabola will take part in the first edition > of Software e Cultura no Brasil [0], the Free Software seminary > organized by the Federal University of ABC (Portuguese: Universidade > Federal do ABC, UFABC)[1] in S?o Bernardo do Campo, Brazil on August > 15-16 2016. > > This year?s edition, Parabola will have its official seminary at August > 16, 10:00 hrs (UTC-3) in Brazilian Portuguese language. The speaker will > be again our Parabola dev called Andr? Silva (known as Emulatorman)[2]. > > By the way, we want to thank Murilo Machado and the Federal University > of ABC for the support to cover our expenses for this seminary. congrats! -- :{ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 584 bytes Desc: not available URL: From fauno at endefensadelsl.org Thu Aug 4 13:31:00 2016 From: fauno at endefensadelsl.org (fauno) Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2016 10:31:00 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-18] change mailman admins Message-ID: <87r3a4psob.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> hey! i've been mailman admin for a long time and i receive blocked messages all the time, but i don't have the time myself to decide wether to approbe them or not, or make necessary changes. can someone else volunteer? ideally it should be three persons and none of them doing anything else for parabola (i'll block emulatorman, coadde and lukeshu for instance :P) changes that should be made: * "message sent to maillist from a non-member" sometimes arrives from people that's subscribed. no idea how to solve this without losing messages except by forcing re-suscription on people (it happens for me on other lists, maybe a mailman bug?). automatic messages from several services, external and internal, are blocked by this too, ie mails from different cronjobs @parabola.nu and let's encrypt expiry notices. * "message too big" the default 40kb limit is for the pre-cambric era there's also too much spam/malware hitting *-owner at lists.parabola.nu which makes them bounce back and forth between my antispam and parabola.nu. this last month i've been trying out rspamd+rmilter and it works really well. i uploaded them to abslibre/pcr but i don't have a working chroot to package them. -- :{ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 584 bytes Desc: not available URL: From emulatorman at riseup.net Fri Aug 5 00:16:33 2016 From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Andr=c3=a9_Silva?=) Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 21:16:33 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [News] Parabola will take part in Software e Cultura no Brasil In-Reply-To: <87oa58psk2.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> References: <87oa58psk2.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: On 08/04/2016 10:33 AM, fauno wrote: > Andr? Silva writes: > >> [ Unknown signature status ] >> Today we're announcing that Parabola will take part in the first edition >> of Software e Cultura no Brasil [0], the Free Software seminary >> organized by the Federal University of ABC (Portuguese: Universidade >> Federal do ABC, UFABC)[1] in S?o Bernardo do Campo, Brazil on August >> 15-16 2016. >> >> This year?s edition, Parabola will have its official seminary at August >> 16, 10:00 hrs (UTC-3) in Brazilian Portuguese language. The speaker will >> be again our Parabola dev called Andr? Silva (known as Emulatorman)[2]. >> >> By the way, we want to thank Murilo Machado and the Federal University >> of ABC for the support to cover our expenses for this seminary. > > congrats! If Parabola wasn't made by you and its community along these years, i wouldn't be here for Parabola too, then i want to thank you and community for all you done for Parabola to build it up and set it on its way, one of the best Free as in Freedom distros has ever know!! :) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From nobody at parabola.nu Fri Aug 5 07:24:39 2016 From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification) Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2016 07:24:39 -0000 Subject: [Dev] Orphan Libre package [icedove-l10n-en-gb] marked out-of-date Message-ID: <20160805072439.1700.36632@parabola.nu> alessi at robertalessi.net wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date: * icedove-l10n-ar 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-ar/ * icedove-l10n-ast 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-ast/ * icedove-l10n-be 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-be/ * icedove-l10n-bg 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-bg/ * icedove-l10n-bn-bd 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-bn-bd/ * icedove-l10n-br 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-br/ * icedove-l10n-ca 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-ca/ * icedove-l10n-cs 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-cs/ * icedove-l10n-cy 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-cy/ * icedove-l10n-da 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-da/ * icedove-l10n-de 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-de/ * icedove-l10n-dsb 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-dsb/ * icedove-l10n-el 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-el/ * icedove-l10n-en-gb 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-en-gb/ * icedove-l10n-en-us 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-en-us/ * icedove-l10n-es-ar 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-es-ar/ * icedove-l10n-es-es 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-es-es/ * icedove-l10n-et 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-et/ * icedove-l10n-eu 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-eu/ * icedove-l10n-fi 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-fi/ * icedove-l10n-fr 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-fr/ * icedove-l10n-fy-nl 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-fy-nl/ * icedove-l10n-ga-ie 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-ga-ie/ * icedove-l10n-gd 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-gd/ * icedove-l10n-gl 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-gl/ * icedove-l10n-he 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-he/ * icedove-l10n-hr 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-hr/ * icedove-l10n-hsb 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-hsb/ * icedove-l10n-hu 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-hu/ * icedove-l10n-hy-am 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-hy-am/ * icedove-l10n-id 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-id/ * icedove-l10n-is 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-is/ * icedove-l10n-it 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-it/ * icedove-l10n-ja 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-ja/ * icedove-l10n-ko 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-ko/ * icedove-l10n-lt 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-lt/ * icedove-l10n-nb-no 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-nb-no/ * icedove-l10n-nl 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-nl/ * icedove-l10n-nn-no 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-nn-no/ * icedove-l10n-pa-in 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-pa-in/ * icedove-l10n-pl 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-pl/ * icedove-l10n-pt-br 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-pt-br/ * icedove-l10n-pt-pt 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-pt-pt/ * icedove-l10n-rm 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-rm/ * icedove-l10n-ro 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-ro/ * icedove-l10n-ru 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-ru/ * icedove-l10n-si 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-si/ * icedove-l10n-sk 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-sk/ * icedove-l10n-sl 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-sl/ * icedove-l10n-sq 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-sq/ * icedove-l10n-sr 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-sr/ * icedove-l10n-sv-se 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-sv-se/ * icedove-l10n-ta-lk 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-ta-lk/ * icedove-l10n-tr 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-tr/ * icedove-l10n-uk 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-uk/ * icedove-l10n-vi 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-vi/ * icedove-l10n-zh-cn 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-zh-cn/ * icedove-l10n-zh-tw 1:45.2.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icedove-l10n-zh-tw/ The user provided the following additional text: The language packs are set to the previous release of icedove. Thank you very much! -- Robert From hahj87 at gmail.com Fri Aug 5 16:21:27 2016 From: hahj87 at gmail.com (Joshua Haase (xihh)) Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2016 11:21:27 -0500 Subject: [Dev] Packages missing on repo? Message-ID: <57a4bdb6.cc69ca0a.dde15.58e1@mx.google.com> Hi! I was trying to update my build chroot in order to build some packages and found that my buildroot cannot be updated. Does anyone notice the same behavior? If so: - Do you know why this happens? - Is any help needed/wanted to solve this problem? ----- [joshpar at onyx ~]$ sudo arch-chroot /home/build/root pacman -Su [sudo] password for joshpar: Sorry, try again. [sudo] password for joshpar: :: Starting full system upgrade... resolving dependencies... looking for conflicting packages... Packages (47) bash-4.3.046-1 binutils-2.26.1-1 ca-certificates-mozilla-3.25-1 curl-7.50.0-1 e2fsprogs-1.43.1-2 expat-2.2.0-1 fakeroot-1.21-1 file-5.28-1 findutils-4.6.0-2 flex-2.6.1-1 gawk-4.1.3-2 gcc-6.1.1-3 gcc-libs-6.1.1-3 gdbm-1.12-2 gettext-0.19.8.1-2 glibc-2.23-5 gmp-6.1.1-1 gnupg-2.1.14-1 gnutls-3.4.14-1 gpgme-1.6.0-3 groff-1.22.3-7 guile-2.0.12-1 libarchive-3.2.1-2 libassuan-2.4.3-1 libatomic_ops-7.4.4-1 libffi-3.2.1-2 libgcrypt-1.7.2-1 libgpg-error-1.24-1 libidn-1.33-1 libksba-1.3.4-2 libsasl-2.1.26-8 libsystemd-231-1.parabola1 libsystemd-standalone-231-1.parabola1 libtasn1-4.9-2 libudev-231-1.parabola1 libunistring-0.9.6-2 make-4.2.1-1 nss-myhostname-231-1.parabola1 nss-mymachines-231-1.parabola1 nss-resolve-231-1.parabola1 pam-1.3.0-1 parabola-keyring-20160801-1 pcre-8.39-1 pkg-config-0.29.1-2 readline-6.3.008-4 sudo-1.8.17.p1-1 tzdata-2016f-1 Total Download Size: 55.49 MiB Total Installed Size: 341.96 MiB Net Upgrade Size: 0.84 MiB :: Proceed with installation? [Y/n] y :: Retrieving packages... error: failed retrieving file 'glibc-2.23-5-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz' from redirector.parabola.nu : The requested URL returned error: 404 warning: failed to retrieve some files error: failed retrieving file 'gcc-libs-6.1.1-3-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz' from redirector.parabola.nu : The requested URL returned error: 404 warning: failed to retrieve some files error: failed retrieving file 'binutils-2.26.1-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz' from redirector.parabola.nu : The requested URL returned error: 404 warning: failed to retrieve some files error: failed retrieving file 'gcc-6.1.1-3-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz' from redirector.parabola.nu : The requested URL returned error: 404 warning: failed to retrieve some files error: failed to commit transaction (unexpected error) Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded. From lukeshu at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 5 18:04:37 2016 From: lukeshu at sbcglobal.net (Luke Shumaker) Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2016 14:04:37 -0400 Subject: [Dev] Packages missing on repo? In-Reply-To: <57a4bdb6.cc69ca0a.dde15.58e1@mx.google.com> References: <57a4bdb6.cc69ca0a.dde15.58e1@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <87k2fvozwq.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> On Fri, 05 Aug 2016 12:21:27 -0400, Joshua Haase (xihh) wrote: > Hi! > > I was trying to update my build chroot in order to build some packages and found that my buildroot cannot be updated. > > Does anyone notice the same behavior? > > If so: > > - Do you know why this happens? > - Is any help needed/wanted to solve this problem? redirector.parabola.ne redirects you to a random Arch mirror for files that are directly imported from Arch. This is sometimes nice, because there's a solid chance that an Arch mirror will be faster than a Parabola mirror. However, it isn't stateful; it is possible for Arch mirrors to get out-of-sync with Parabola; causing what you are seeing. If you are interested in another redirector-like service that keeps track of mirror states, to redirect you to a mirror that it knows has the file; check out repomirror.parabola.nu. Or just repo.parabola.nu, as it now redirects you to repomirror unless it sees "noredirect" in the HTTP query string. However, it does not ever send you to Arch mirrors. -- Happy hacking, ~ Luke Shumaker From nobody at parabola.nu Fri Aug 5 19:12:29 2016 From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification) Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2016 19:12:29 -0000 Subject: [Dev] Orphan Pcr package [utox] marked out-of-date Message-ID: <20160805191229.1700.82376@parabola.nu> fturco at fastmail.fm wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date: * utox 0.9.7-1 [pcr] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/pcr/i686/utox/ * utox 0.9.7-1 [pcr] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/pcr/x86_64/utox/ The user provided the following additional text: Version 0.9.8 is out: https://github.com/GrayHatter/uTox/releases/tag/v0.9.8 From isacdaavid at isacdaavid.info Fri Aug 5 21:32:45 2016 From: isacdaavid at isacdaavid.info (Isaac David) Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2016 16:32:45 -0500 Subject: [Dev] Packages missing on repo? In-Reply-To: <57a4bdb6.cc69ca0a.dde15.58e1@mx.google.com> References: <57a4bdb6.cc69ca0a.dde15.58e1@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <1470432765.1051.1@plebeian.isacdaavid.info> In addition to Luke's remarks, when using redirector.parabola.nu it's a good idea to have it repeated a few times in a row in your mirrorlist. This is to increase the chances that redirector.parabola.nu will take you to a different Arch mirror that happens to contain the package you requested. Last time I checked there were 10 different Arch mirrors available to redirector.parabola.nu, cycled at the rate of one per second. From lukeshu at sbcglobal.net Sun Aug 7 14:59:49 2016 From: lukeshu at sbcglobal.net (Luke Shumaker) Date: Sun, 07 Aug 2016 10:59:49 -0400 Subject: [Dev] Packages missing on repo? In-Reply-To: <1470432765.1051.1@plebeian.isacdaavid.info> References: <57a4bdb6.cc69ca0a.dde15.58e1@mx.google.com> <1470432765.1051.1@plebeian.isacdaavid.info> Message-ID: <87h9awpqu2.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> On Fri, 05 Aug 2016 17:32:45 -0400, Isaac David wrote: > Last time I checked there were 10 different Arch > mirrors available to redirector.parabola.nu, cycled > at the rate of one per second. You are right about having 10 mirrors, but it actually uses the last digit of millisecond timestamp to decide which to use; i.e. cycled one per millisecond. -- Happy hacking, ~ Luke Shumaker From nobody at parabola.nu Sun Aug 7 18:45:09 2016 From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification) Date: Sun, 07 Aug 2016 18:45:09 -0000 Subject: [Dev] Orphan Libre package [texlive-latexextra] marked out-of-date Message-ID: <20160807184509.4115.79305@parabola.nu> raphael_costa at ymail.com wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date: * texlive-latexextra 2015.38831-1.parabola1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/texlive-latexextra/ The user provided the following additional text: Arch updated Latex to version 2016, currently this package conflicts with texlive-science From hellekin at gnu.org Mon Aug 8 10:41:37 2016 From: hellekin at gnu.org (hellekin) Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2016 10:41:37 +0000 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> <874m73qadj.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <87shumq2hy.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <5e95b45d-4de8-332e-e6fa-0a439ec795e9@pelzflorian.de> <57a25791.02ebca0a.cdaa7.0fd1@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <8e0d6e79-484e-ad97-8de6-ba5d76655700@gnu.org> On 08/04/2016 07:35 AM, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote: > > Again, I don?t think it matters for a server, but since Luke has reasons not to want > NetworkManager, we can simply use systemd-networkd or even a shell script. > IMO it does: putting unneeded dependencies on a server augments its attack surface. Putting X11 dependencies on a server is calling for the server to be compromised. YMMV. == hk From pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de Mon Aug 8 11:52:00 2016 From: pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de (pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)) Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2016 13:52:00 +0200 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: <8e0d6e79-484e-ad97-8de6-ba5d76655700@gnu.org> References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <87twf56652.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <3cc18403-7372-19a5-eb02-b2b7e0f4cc10@riseup.net> <874m73qadj.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <87shumq2hy.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net> <5e95b45d-4de8-332e-e6fa-0a439ec795e9@pelzflorian.de> <57a25791.02ebca0a.cdaa7.0fd1@mx.google.com> <8e0d6e79-484e-ad97-8de6-ba5d76655700@gnu.org> Message-ID: <78879b9f-7236-f169-b16c-aa327a640ea0@pelzflorian.de> On 08/08/2016 12:41 PM, hellekin wrote: > On 08/04/2016 07:35 AM, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote: >> >> Again, I don?t think it matters for a server, but since Luke has reasons not to want >> NetworkManager, we can simply use systemd-networkd or even a shell script. >> > > IMO it does: putting unneeded dependencies on a server augments its > attack surface. Putting X11 dependencies on a server is calling for the > server to be compromised. YMMV. > `pactree networkmanager` does not show anything X11 for me. Even if it did you would not need to actually run X11. Also I don?t think it is that dangerous to remote-administer your server via X11 + SSH-tunneled VNC (but again, it?s not necessary). However, since we are talking about Parabola?s main servers, an excess of caution may be appropriate. The consensus seems to be not to use NetworkManager and I agree. From hellekin at gnu.org Mon Aug 8 11:54:27 2016 From: hellekin at gnu.org (hellekin) Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2016 11:54:27 +0000 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-10] increasing security in Parabola, servers In-Reply-To: <857a3add-1681-1f9e-61cd-493a3f7cf66a@riseup.net> References: <58c496d7-bf56-a3ea-7224-115a1714c6c5@riseup.net> <857a3add-1681-1f9e-61cd-493a3f7cf66a@riseup.net> Message-ID: <2dce8585-8a4f-97ed-b632-993698a306c1@gnu.org> On 08/02/2016 09:40 PM, coadde wrote: > > For minor situation i suggest to create TOX client in the server: > * run the TOX client as service > Tox security was not reviewed. I proposed a security audit be conducted some months ago to irungentoo but he thought it was too early. I think it's a bad idea, security-wise, to run a Tox client on the server at this point. == hk From emulatorman at riseup.net Tue Aug 9 20:44:30 2016 From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Andr=c3=a9_Silva?=) Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 17:44:30 -0300 Subject: [Dev] About EOMA68 video presentation license Message-ID: <02a15d2e-30db-f5e9-9f48-634c4fb472be@riseup.net> Hi Luke, i will make a conference about Parabola at the Federal University of ABC (Portuguese: Universidade Federal do ABC, UFABC) in S?o Bernardo do Campo, Brazil in the next week. [0] I would use your main EOMA68 video presentation from crowdsupply page [1] to talk about Libre Tea Computer Card with Parabola pre-installed, therefore i would know what is its license? I mean it because have plans to make a customized video to add EOMA presentation in combination with some features about our distro, even artwork such as GNU and Bola cartoons, etc. Happy hacking, Andr?. [0]:https://www.parabola.nu/news/parabola-will-take-part-in-software-e-cultura-no-brasil/ [1]:https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68/micro-desktop -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From fauno at endefensadelsl.org Wed Aug 10 17:29:05 2016 From: fauno at endefensadelsl.org (fauno) Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 14:29:05 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-18] change mailman admins In-Reply-To: <87r3a4psob.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> References: <87r3a4psob.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: <87wpjo7cta.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> bump fauno writes: > [ Unknown signature status ] > > hey! i've been mailman admin for a long time and i receive blocked > messages all the time, but i don't have the time myself to decide wether > to approbe them or not, or make necessary changes. > > can someone else volunteer? ideally it should be three persons and none > of them doing anything else for parabola (i'll block emulatorman, coadde > and lukeshu for instance :P) > > changes that should be made: > > * "message sent to maillist from a non-member" sometimes arrives from > people that's subscribed. no idea how to solve this without losing > messages except by forcing re-suscription on people (it happens for me > on other lists, maybe a mailman bug?). > > automatic messages from several services, external and internal, are > blocked by this too, ie mails from different cronjobs @parabola.nu and > let's encrypt expiry notices. > > * "message too big" the default 40kb limit is for the pre-cambric era > > > there's also too much spam/malware hitting *-owner at lists.parabola.nu > which makes them bounce back and forth between my antispam and > parabola.nu. > > this last month i've been trying out rspamd+rmilter and it works really > well. i uploaded them to abslibre/pcr but i don't have a working chroot > to package them. > > > -- > :{ > _______________________________________________ > Dev mailing list > Dev at lists.parabola.nu > https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev -- D -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 584 bytes Desc: not available URL: From emulatorman at riseup.net Thu Aug 11 13:51:33 2016 From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Andr=c3=a9_Silva?=) Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2016 10:51:33 -0300 Subject: [Dev] About EOMA68 video presentation license In-Reply-To: References: <02a15d2e-30db-f5e9-9f48-634c4fb472be@riseup.net> Message-ID: <6ef3909f-33ab-f45f-d828-ed20182241e7@riseup.net> On 08/10/2016 01:40 AM, lkcl . wrote: > ok so we got permission, eric from crowdsupply explained that actually > what they do is assign the campaign organisers the right to use the > videos that they produce, especially for promotion, which is great. > so yes please go to it! :) Thanks! > now, andre, i have a special favour to ask, it's because many people > really do not actually truly understand what software libre really is > about. i wanted to reach out to you to explain some insights i have > learned from chris (thinkpenguin.com, my sponsor) and from watching dr > stallman be verbally attacked and abused during questions at hopeconf > 2016. > > people genuinely genuinely believe that to be committed to software > libre is some sort of zealous idealistic extremism - a form of mental > illness, even - which is not only downright rude but is totally wrong. > the people who believe this see a committment to ethical standards: > they don't like to be reminded that they made a conscious or > subconscious decision to COMPROMISE on ethical standards, and, rather > than admit that to themselves, they go into all-out ATTACK. blame the > other person instead of accepting responsibility. works a charm. > > in talking to chris i have come to learn that a committment to > software libre results very simply in hardware that JUST WORKS. i > told people i think it was about 200 to 300 times: "hassle-free > computing: stuff that just works. thinkpenguin do the research... so > that you don't have to". and *everybody* i said that to got it > immediately. > > some examples: they sell ttyACM modems. not to linux users... but to > windows users!! people who have windows xp tend to live in remote > areas, where broadband is not profitable. they have old conexant > soft-modems. they upgrade to windows 7... only to find that the > drivers aren't maintained for windows 7! why? because... it's not > profitable. now they're totally disconnected from the internet. so > they phone up chris and say, "thank god you have ttyACM hard-modems - > please sell me one!" > > they sell PCIe-to-USB3 cards that they've researched work > out-of-the-box and do not require firmware. > > they sell AR9271 802.11n USB WIFI modems that they spent 2 years > walking atheros through the process of releasing the ath9k_htc > firmware that goes into the libre firmware repositories. > > and guess what? the only support calls that they get are down to > flaky customer hardware (usually extremely poor quality laptops that > the customer ows where the USB controllers are not properly > functional) and to "whitelisting" in proprietary BIOSes (usually WIFI > cards so that Dell and IBM can sell you expensive whitelisted PCIe > products at a huge markup). > > it's the same with printers: they pre-vet the printers.... and the USB > Audio dongles... and the Hauppaug USB TV tuners... all these things > *just work* because they've gone to a lot of trouble to find them, > check them, track down the firmware and make sure it's libre. > > 12 years ago i bought *six* soft-modems in a row, taking every single > one back to the shop because none of them worked with linux. that was > 2 days travel-time wasted. > > *this* is what software libre is really about, on a really practical > level. not even anything really to do with conspiracy theories or > spying and so on, although we know now that that's not actually > conspiracy but that it *really does* happen. we also know that 900 > million qualcomm-based android devices are soon going to end up in > landfill. > > what we really do not hear enough about is that if you respect > software freedom and use libre hardware, the driver incompatibility > issues that everyone over the past 10-15 years has associated with > hardware and put up with despite really really hating it.... all those > issues disappear. > > i know you truly understand this, because you run libre software down > to the bedrock of your computing devices, but please can i urge you to > consider making it a really key point of your talk so that more people > can get the message that there really is a way to have less problems > with their computers. > > l. > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From emulatorman at riseup.net Thu Aug 11 14:29:45 2016 From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Andr=c3=a9_Silva?=) Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2016 11:29:45 -0300 Subject: [Dev] About EOMA68 video presentation license In-Reply-To: <6ef3909f-33ab-f45f-d828-ed20182241e7@riseup.net> References: <02a15d2e-30db-f5e9-9f48-634c4fb472be@riseup.net> <6ef3909f-33ab-f45f-d828-ed20182241e7@riseup.net> Message-ID: On 08/11/2016 10:51 AM, Andr? Silva wrote: >> now, andre, i have a special favour to ask, it's because many people >> really do not actually truly understand what software libre really is >> about. i wanted to reach out to you to explain some insights i have >> learned from chris (thinkpenguin.com, my sponsor) and from watching dr >> stallman be verbally attacked and abused during questions at hopeconf >> 2016. >> >> people genuinely genuinely believe that to be committed to software >> libre is some sort of zealous idealistic extremism - a form of mental >> illness, even - which is not only downright rude but is totally wrong. >> the people who believe this see a committment to ethical standards: >> they don't like to be reminded that they made a conscious or >> subconscious decision to COMPROMISE on ethical standards, and, rather >> than admit that to themselves, they go into all-out ATTACK. blame the >> other person instead of accepting responsibility. works a charm. >> >> in talking to chris i have come to learn that a committment to >> software libre results very simply in hardware that JUST WORKS. i >> told people i think it was about 200 to 300 times: "hassle-free >> computing: stuff that just works. thinkpenguin do the research... so >> that you don't have to". and *everybody* i said that to got it >> immediately. >> >> some examples: they sell ttyACM modems. not to linux users... but to >> windows users!! people who have windows xp tend to live in remote >> areas, where broadband is not profitable. they have old conexant >> soft-modems. they upgrade to windows 7... only to find that the >> drivers aren't maintained for windows 7! why? because... it's not >> profitable. now they're totally disconnected from the internet. so >> they phone up chris and say, "thank god you have ttyACM hard-modems - >> please sell me one!" >> >> they sell PCIe-to-USB3 cards that they've researched work >> out-of-the-box and do not require firmware. >> >> they sell AR9271 802.11n USB WIFI modems that they spent 2 years >> walking atheros through the process of releasing the ath9k_htc >> firmware that goes into the libre firmware repositories. >> >> and guess what? the only support calls that they get are down to >> flaky customer hardware (usually extremely poor quality laptops that >> the customer ows where the USB controllers are not properly >> functional) and to "whitelisting" in proprietary BIOSes (usually WIFI >> cards so that Dell and IBM can sell you expensive whitelisted PCIe >> products at a huge markup). >> >> it's the same with printers: they pre-vet the printers.... and the USB >> Audio dongles... and the Hauppaug USB TV tuners... all these things >> *just work* because they've gone to a lot of trouble to find them, >> check them, track down the firmware and make sure it's libre. >> >> 12 years ago i bought *six* soft-modems in a row, taking every single >> one back to the shop because none of them worked with linux. that was >> 2 days travel-time wasted. >> >> *this* is what software libre is really about, on a really practical >> level. not even anything really to do with conspiracy theories or >> spying and so on, although we know now that that's not actually >> conspiracy but that it *really does* happen. we also know that 900 >> million qualcomm-based android devices are soon going to end up in >> landfill. >> >> what we really do not hear enough about is that if you respect >> software freedom and use libre hardware, the driver incompatibility >> issues that everyone over the past 10-15 years has associated with >> hardware and put up with despite really really hating it.... all those >> issues disappear. >> >> i know you truly understand this, because you run libre software down >> to the bedrock of your computing devices, but please can i urge you to >> consider making it a really key point of your talk so that more people >> can get the message that there really is a way to have less problems >> with their computers. Ok Luke, thanks for your suggestion, since my point of view the current paradigm around the world is "technocracy", our goal is that hardware and software should be adapted for the user, not other way they are doing currently. It is similar than a bed, a client and user should buy a bed adapted for his/her body, if you buy a bike for your son, you should buy a one adapted for kids, not for adults, therefore all things around the world should works in that way, however in computing concepts, some companies puts an idea that we have to follow what they are doing and we should adapt to them under imprinting (psychology) under an effect called Baby duck syndrome [0]. It's ridiculous, we are losing our rights and freedom to choose our way and have our own control in our lives and things that are using. Parabola goal is give the full control for their users thought Free Software, but it is not enough, hardware needs go to the same way. This is the way we should manage to change the paradigm and make others out of that brainwashing bubble made by those companies that have interest to have control of our lives. It i will talk in that conference. [0]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imprinting_(psychology)#Baby_duck_syndrome -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From emulatorman at riseup.net Thu Aug 11 15:40:19 2016 From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Andr=c3=a9_Silva?=) Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2016 12:40:19 -0300 Subject: [Dev] About EOMA68 video presentation license In-Reply-To: References: <02a15d2e-30db-f5e9-9f48-634c4fb472be@riseup.net> <6ef3909f-33ab-f45f-d828-ed20182241e7@riseup.net> Message-ID: On 08/11/2016 12:01 PM, lkcl . wrote: > time to wake up, ehn? +1 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From nobody at parabola.nu Fri Aug 12 00:50:20 2016 From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification) Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 00:50:20 -0000 Subject: [Dev] Orphan Libre package [linux-libre] marked out-of-date Message-ID: <20160812005020.16664.88504@parabola.nu> eliotime3000 at openmailbox.org wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date: * linux-libre 4.6.5_gnu-1 [libre] (armv7h): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/armv7h/linux-libre/ * linux-libre 4.6.5_gnu-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre/ * linux-libre 4.6.5_gnu-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre/ * linux-libre-docs 4.6.5_gnu-1 [libre] (armv7h): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/armv7h/linux-libre-docs/ * linux-libre-docs 4.6.5_gnu-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre-docs/ * linux-libre-docs 4.6.5_gnu-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre-docs/ * linux-libre-headers 4.6.5_gnu-1 [libre] (armv7h): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/armv7h/linux-libre-headers/ * linux-libre-headers 4.6.5_gnu-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre-headers/ * linux-libre-headers 4.6.5_gnu-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre-headers/ The user provided the following additional text: Arch linux updated the kernel to 4.7 in release branch. Please, update to 4.7 the linux-libre kernel. http://linux-libre.fsfla.org/pub/linux-libre/releases/ From mariqueerta at bastardi.net Fri Aug 12 17:29:00 2016 From: mariqueerta at bastardi.net (mariqueerta at bastardi.net) Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 17:29:00 +0000 Subject: [Dev] Hi! Message-ID: Buenassssssss, saludos a tods! From nobody at parabola.nu Fri Aug 12 18:19:22 2016 From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification) Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 18:19:22 -0000 Subject: [Dev] Orphan Pcr package [emacs-magit-git] marked out-of-date Message-ID: <20160812181922.16664.52043@parabola.nu> sakhmatd at riseup.net wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date: * emacs-magit-git 20121106-1 [pcr] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/pcr/any/emacs-magit-git/ The user provided the following additional text: Does not work with current Emacs, see https://github.com/magit/magit/issues/684 Fixed in most recent release. From mariqueerta at bastardi.net Fri Aug 12 19:13:00 2016 From: mariqueerta at bastardi.net (mariqueerta at bastardi.net) Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 19:13:00 +0000 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-18] change mailman admins In-Reply-To: <87r3a4psob.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> References: <87r3a4psob.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: Hi! I offer me like one of volunteers that you demand, Fauno. If you (guys) are agree with that, I'll begin when you make me admin. I'm a Parabola user (i3wm and openrc) and I opened the gnusocial group again in gnusocial.net. I always wanted to help to the Parabola project and this is one way that I can do it. Well, Regards! :) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- hey! i've been mailman admin for a long time and i receive blocked messages all the time, but i don't have the time myself to decide wether to approbe them or not, or make necessary changes. can someone else volunteer? ideally it should be three persons and none of them doing anything else for parabola (i'll block emulatorman, coadde and lukeshu for instance :P) changes that should be made: * "message sent to maillist from a non-member" sometimes arrives from people that's subscribed. no idea how to solve this without losing messages except by forcing re-suscription on people (it happens for me on other lists, maybe a mailman bug?). automatic messages from several services, external and internal, are blocked by this too, ie mails from different cronjobs @parabola.nu and let's encrypt expiry notices. * "message too big" the default 40kb limit is for the pre-cambric era there's also too much spam/malware hitting *-owner at lists.parabola.nu which makes them bounce back and forth between my antispam and parabola.nu. this last month i've been trying out rspamd+rmilter and it works really well. i uploaded them to abslibre/pcr but i don't have a working chroot to package them. -- :/{ /-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 584 bytes Desc: not available URL: From nobody at parabola.nu Sat Aug 13 20:14:46 2016 From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification) Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2016 20:14:46 -0000 Subject: [Dev] Orphan Libre package [linux-libre-grsec] marked out-of-date Message-ID: <20160813201446.16664.96387@parabola.nu> invivo at sdf.org wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date: * linux-libre-grsec 4.6.5_gnu.201607312210-1 [libre] (armv7h): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/armv7h/linux-libre-grsec/ * linux-libre-grsec 4.6.5_gnu.201607312210-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre-grsec/ * linux-libre-grsec 4.6.5_gnu.201607312210-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre-grsec/ * linux-libre-grsec-docs 4.6.5_gnu.201607312210-1 [libre] (armv7h): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/armv7h/linux-libre-grsec-docs/ * linux-libre-grsec-docs 4.6.5_gnu.201607312210-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre-grsec-docs/ * linux-libre-grsec-docs 4.6.5_gnu.201607312210-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre-grsec-docs/ * linux-libre-grsec-headers 4.6.5_gnu.201607312210-1 [libre] (armv7h): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/armv7h/linux-libre-grsec-headers/ * linux-libre-grsec-headers 4.6.5_gnu.201607312210-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre-grsec-headers/ * linux-libre-grsec-headers 4.6.5_gnu.201607312210-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre-grsec-headers/ The user provided the following additional text: Grsecurity has released the 4.7 patches. From isacdaavid at isacdaavid.info Sun Aug 14 05:30:43 2016 From: isacdaavid at isacdaavid.info (Isaac David) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 00:30:43 -0500 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-18] change mailman admins In-Reply-To: <87r3a4psob.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> References: <87r3a4psob.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> Message-ID: <1471152643.1222.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Le jeu. 4 ao?t 2016 ? 8:31, fauno a ?crit : >hey! i've been mailman admin for a long time and i receive blocked >messages all the time, but i don't have the time myself to decide wether >to approbe them or not, or make necessary changes. > >can someone else volunteer? ideally it should be three persons and none >of them doing anything else for parabola (i'll block emulatorman, coadde >and lukeshu for instance :P) what does it take to moderate a mailing list? I'm not familiar with mailman. Also, what is considered an acceptable response time to approve/reject mails? >this last month i've been trying out rspamd+rmilter and it works really >well. i uploaded them to abslibre/pcr but i don't have a working chroot >to package them. I dared to package them, look them up ;) PD to everyone: I'll also use the occasion to apologise for all the arm-related noise hitting maintenance at lists as of lately. Right now I'm testing a small change to db-import-archlinuxarm that will put an end to those nasty errors; seems to work under my dbscripts+parabolaweb installation. I'll bring your attention back soon, here or at labs, to let you review my solution. - -- isacdaavid -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJXsAGTAAoJEDNGbhLse6lDRmIQAIuYRiplizlZXMgSyk917CH3 DjZqbPd8jJ9DuvBMBacfgW8d9748+xnXzfg5KGcZE4J4lg/fPzp4pSQ7ummy4BOY 36AsRZZX6hCCKF55ZdWRFW/0e59HQSqHL62MMEjcCgwdvyOekD+kAVhruIec+oxZ hBn4U8uNs820dRilbKZvdIaTWSDDiRfhwn4yaRfY0GgoqxawCVkbwMrYy0INmHBk q7UxHyy/tUQn4kbOeqVq4DVfIRcm3KzUi6+X7CltdF71loa6A7rVOt6eEC9Az/qP CDH05VmrGbnLZ+RmhfkTZ2jEjPc89zgZDq0x8mkjEQM4FL/Sq7TMDncz+UdbVoeM +gE8UfokPnvoLNd/L5KpLliR0HAIH+Hd9Wg5oRglB2ick9tND4wd4/BpYoMit0E+ nb2gU15dIJ9aQUOBVRUvrdrNO8EHwdjTHEjSPnUCRhHkL4Sxm3+HBXv7Yu+aKXUz Wzf+k/A8NZq5yYwuor9awzTcCoXiw1AcCCUYQFIM6OhnV3Re+Gtu2ibGjZZdBboW DRpju5Z5vLN1Q3W1fyr4mCnKSLOp7Y1N3K7ZRa83agiHCoq21jvc3odH7gUfyrn2 5o3VCMxJEhaOHljA2ot1gOa0Bay7Rlv/QFR+mcaHq6GO+NU8qGd3Z4pvYT7mHd2S 7UdoTEiHYNW6YpPjEJio =slXz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From emulatorman at riseup.net Sun Aug 14 06:51:55 2016 From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Andr=c3=a9_Silva?=) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 03:51:55 -0300 Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-18] change mailman admins In-Reply-To: <1471152643.1222.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info> References: <87r3a4psob.fsf@endefensadelsl.org> <1471152643.1222.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info> Message-ID: <3dccb8b8-aa21-c9e6-35a7-e7b2f90e876d@riseup.net> On 08/14/2016 02:30 AM, Isaac David wrote: > PD to everyone: > I'll also use the occasion to apologise for all the arm-related > noise hitting maintenance at lists as of lately. Right now I'm testing > a small change to db-import-archlinuxarm that will put an end to > those nasty errors; seems to work under my dbscripts+parabolaweb > installation. I'll bring your attention back soon, here or at labs, > to let you review my solution. Cool, don't forget let us know :) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From tct at ceata.org Sun Aug 14 08:53:00 2016 From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic) Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 11:53:00 +0300 Subject: [Dev] Feedback for parabola-mate-2016.07.27-dual.iso Message-ID: <57B0316C.4060006@ceata.org> Hello Parabola hackers, I've recently tested parabola-mate-2016.07.27-dual.iso and I like that it's cutting-edge, simple and gets the job done. I've also noted down few negative points I would like to contribute as feedback: 1. LightDM is not polished (especially the menus of NetworkManager applet, main and right-click menus in applications such as AbiWord, right-click menu in IceWeasel: missing padding and hover highlighting of menu items, different font sizes in the same menu etc.) I assume MATE/LightDM is preferred because it's light, but I suggest Parabola also offers an ISO with better looks DE/DM (and also popular applications such as LibreOffice) 2. there is a typo in the CLI installer, "Repite root password" instead of "Repeat root password". I'm not sure if "Repite" can be found in some other places as well, I recommend checking. 3. although I've installed the optional "Live DVD Desktop Applications" IceWeasel can't display correctly monospaced sections of a web page (such as 
 blocks of code, mailing list archives or web directory
index) because the system lacks the DejaVu Sans Mono font.

I fixed this by installing ttf-dejavu package. I suggest including it by
default.

4. I was happy the free firmware for ath9k_htc was installed by default
(I could simply plug Tehnoetic WiFi N150/N300 USB adapters and connect
to Internet on my desktop), but I couldn't find the package for carl9170
free firmware needed by the recently added dual-band Tehnoetic WiFi
adapater, as one customer reported in the Reviews tab of the product page:

Quoting: "As of this writing, the GPLv2 carl9170 firmware is not
included in Parabola GNU/Linux-libre, so you will have to manually
download the free firmware before it can be used."
- https://tehnoetic.com/tet-n300db

Isn't the carl9170 free firmware packaged in Arch? Could you include it
in Parabola?

I believe Parabola has the potential to be as user-friendly as Trisquel
and the project could really use the popularity that this could bring.

Thank GNU,
Tiberiu

--
https://ceata.org
https://tehnoetic.com


From emulatorman at riseup.net  Sun Aug 14 11:11:58 2016
From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Andr=c3=a9_Silva?=)
Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 08:11:58 -0300
Subject: [Dev] Feedback for parabola-mate-2016.07.27-dual.iso
In-Reply-To: <57B0316C.4060006@ceata.org>
References: <57B0316C.4060006@ceata.org>
Message-ID: 

On 08/14/2016 05:53 AM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
> I assume MATE/LightDM is preferred because it's light, but I suggest
> Parabola also offers an ISO with better looks DE/DM (and also popular
> applications such as LibreOffice)

If you want, we could add LibreOffice in the next version.

> 2. there is a typo in the CLI installer, "Repite root password" instead
> of "Repeat root password". I'm not sure if "Repite" can be found in some
> other places as well, I recommend checking.

Oh, it was a mistake :P I will fix it too, thanks for let me know :)

> 3. although I've installed the optional "Live DVD Desktop Applications"
> IceWeasel can't display correctly monospaced sections of a web page
> (such as 
 blocks of code, mailing list archives or web directory
> index) because the system lacks the DejaVu Sans Mono font.
> 
> I fixed this by installing ttf-dejavu package. I suggest including it by
> default.

Great, i will add ttf-dejavu package then.

> 4. I was happy the free firmware for ath9k_htc was installed by default
> (I could simply plug Tehnoetic WiFi N150/N300 USB adapters and connect
> to Internet on my desktop), but I couldn't find the package for carl9170
> free firmware needed by the recently added dual-band Tehnoetic WiFi
> adapater, as one customer reported in the Reviews tab of the product page:
> 
> Quoting: "As of this writing, the GPLv2 carl9170 firmware is not
> included in Parabola GNU/Linux-libre, so you will have to manually
> download the free firmware before it can be used."
> - https://tehnoetic.com/tet-n300db
> 
> Isn't the carl9170 free firmware packaged in Arch? Could you include it
> in Parabola?

AFAIK Arch firmware packages don't meet Parabola's policies with regard
to building the package from source. Could you give us the source code
to begin the packaging for Parabola?

> I believe Parabola has the potential to be as user-friendly as Trisquel
> and the project could really use the popularity that this could bring.

Thanks Tiberiu for the feedback since gives us the chance to improve our
free as in freedom ISOs for the community :)


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: 

From tct at ceata.org  Sun Aug 14 12:42:05 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 15:42:05 +0300
Subject: [Dev] Feedback for parabola-mate-2016.07.27-dual.iso
In-Reply-To: 
References: <57B0316C.4060006@ceata.org>
 
Message-ID: <57B0671D.2090700@ceata.org>

On 14.08.2016 14:11, Andr? Silva wrote:
> On 08/14/2016 05:53 AM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
>> I assume MATE/LightDM is preferred because it's light, but I suggest
>> Parabola also offers an ISO with better looks DE/DM (and also popular
>> applications such as LibreOffice)
> 
> If you want, we could add LibreOffice in the next version.

If more users want that, of course.

IMO, Parabola could learn from Trisquel's experience and provide
different flavors.

https://trisquel.info/en/download

Parabola with Mate/LightDM can be considered Parabola Light. Similar to
Trisquel Mini (LXDE)

An ISO of Parabola with GNOME 3 could be considered default Parabola.
And the KDE flavor could be named Parabola KDE.

Or the other way around, Parabola with KDE could be the default
Parabola. While Parabola GNOME could be the GNOME 3 flavor.

On the other hand, GNOME is part of GNU, so maybe you would like
Parabola with GNOME 3 to be default Parabola.

I would like very much to be able to recommend novice GNU users Parabola
with a more polished Desktop Environment/Display Manager.

AFAIK, MATE can look awesome too. That could be default Parabola. I
don't know which is the Display Manager for that, but I guess it can't
be LightDM. :-) Trisquel 8 is likely to use MATE:

https://trisquel.info/en/forum/freedom-fridays-development-updates-3

> AFAIK Arch firmware packages don't meet Parabola's policies with regard
> to building the package from source. Could you give us the source code
> to begin the packaging for Parabola?

I believe this is the one:

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/users/drivers/carl9170.fw

Thank GNU,
Tiberiu

--
https://ceata.org
https://tehnoetic.com


From tct at ceata.org  Sun Aug 14 18:05:05 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 21:05:05 +0300
Subject: [Dev] Feedback for parabola-mate-2016.07.27-dual.iso
In-Reply-To: <57B0316C.4060006@ceata.org>
References: <57B0316C.4060006@ceata.org>
Message-ID: <57B0B2D1.90107@ceata.org>

On 14.08.2016 11:53, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
> 3. although I've installed the optional "Live DVD Desktop Applications"
> IceWeasel can't display correctly monospaced sections of a web page
> (such as 
 blocks of code, mailing list archives or web directory
> index) because the system lacks the DejaVu Sans Mono font.

A BitTorrent client is also missing. I was trying to download the
Parabola ISO on my desktop (and best is using the torrent/magnet links)
and couldn't find any BitTorrent client installed locally. Options for
GTK are extra/transmission-gtk or extra/deluge. I recommend including
one of those two in the optional "Live DVD Desktop Applications".

Thanks,
Tiberiu

--
https://ceata.org
https://tehnoetic.com


From nobody at parabola.nu  Mon Aug 15 02:17:59 2016
From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification)
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 02:17:59 -0000
Subject: [Dev] Orphan Libre package [icecat-noscript] marked out-of-date
Message-ID: <20160815021759.1344.45833@parabola.nu>

jc_gargma at iserlohn-fortress.net wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date:


* icecat-noscript 2.9.0.11-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icecat-noscript/


The user provided the following additional text:

Current noscript stable is 2.9.0.14



From nobody at parabola.nu  Mon Aug 15 02:19:17 2016
From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification)
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 02:19:17 -0000
Subject: [Dev] Orphan Libre package [icecat-ublock-origin] marked out-of-date
Message-ID: <20160815021917.1343.99072@parabola.nu>

jc_gargma at iserlohn-fortress.net wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date:


* icecat-ublock-origin 1.6.8-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/icecat-ublock-origin/


The user provided the following additional text:

Current uBlock Origin Stable is 1.8.4



From nobody at parabola.nu  Mon Aug 15 10:53:39 2016
From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification)
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 10:53:39 -0000
Subject: [Dev] Orphan Pcr package [yacy] marked out-of-date
Message-ID: <20160815105339.1344.94007@parabola.nu>

public at autistici.org wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date:


* yacy 1.82-2 [pcr] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/pcr/any/yacy/


The user provided the following additional text:

Version 1.90 has come out in July.
http://yacy.net/release_notes/YaCy_Release_1_90.html



From contact at paulk.fr  Mon Aug 15 16:46:18 2016
From: contact at paulk.fr (Paul Kocialkowski)
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 18:46:18 +0200
Subject: [Dev] [PATCH abslibre] pacman: Get architecture from CARCH instead
 of auto
Message-ID: <20160815164618.9855-1-contact@paulk.fr>

Auto architecture detection is not valid for armv7h, as the kernel
reports armv7l as machine.

ALARM uses CARCH instead, which fixes the issue.

Signed-off-by: Paul Kocialkowski 
---
 libre/pacman/pacman.conf.armv7h | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/libre/pacman/pacman.conf.armv7h b/libre/pacman/pacman.conf.armv7h
index de321af..748ff21 100644
--- a/libre/pacman/pacman.conf.armv7h
+++ b/libre/pacman/pacman.conf.armv7h
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ HoldPkg     = pacman glibc
 #XferCommand = /usr/bin/wget --passive-ftp -c -O %o %u
 #CleanMethod = KeepInstalled
 #UseDelta    = 0.7
-Architecture = auto
+Architecture = @CARCH@
 
 # Pacman won't upgrade packages listed in IgnorePkg and members of IgnoreGroup
 #IgnorePkg   =
-- 
2.9.0



From contact at paulk.fr  Mon Aug 15 17:09:39 2016
From: contact at paulk.fr (Paul Kocialkowski)
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 19:09:39 +0200
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
Message-ID: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr>

Hi, it appears that there is some misleading information in the?EOMA68 news:

* "New Libre Hardware Crowdfunding Project"

Saying that the hardware is libre or free is an overstatement. The integrated
circuits are not libre, so the whole hardware (which covers both integrated
circuits and circuit boards) is not. The circuit board may be libre, but I
couldn't find the circuit board layout description files. Note that schematics
don't make the circuit board libre, but only documented.

I think the title should be reworked, depending on whether the circuit board
design is libre or not.

* "Respects your freedom"

It is an overstatement to say that the computer can respect freedom. The
computer is composed of both hardware and software aspects. Hardware does not
respect its users freedom (see above). In addition, the hardware has at least
one major feature that cannot work with free software: its GPU. Thus, we can't
say that its software aspects respects freedom (despite being a candidate to
receive the FSF's RYF certification).

Thus, it would be more accurate to say that the device is free-software-
friendly, which is vague enough to not be contradictory with the facts.

Of course, this situation is much better than many other computers out there,
that can't even startup without proprietary software.

What do you think about making those changes?

Sidenote: I am very happy to see projects such as the EOMA68 come to life, as
they are really moving things forward. However, I also care very much about
providing accurate information, especially after what happened with Purism.

Cheers,

-- 
Paul Kocialkowski, developer of low-level free software for embedded devices

Website: https://www.paulk.fr/
Coding blog: https://code.paulk.fr/
Git repositories: https://git.paulk.fr/ https://git.code.paulk.fr/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

From lovell.joshyyy at gmail.com  Mon Aug 15 17:49:03 2016
From: lovell.joshyyy at gmail.com (Josh Branning)
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 18:49:03 +0100
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr>
Message-ID: <57B2008F.5020402@gmail.com>

On 15/08/16 18:09, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> Hi, it appears that there is some misleading information in the EOMA68 news:
>
> * "New Libre Hardware Crowdfunding Project"
>
> Saying that the hardware is libre or free is an overstatement. The integrated
> circuits are not libre, so the whole hardware (which covers both integrated
> circuits and circuit boards) is not.

Not 100%. Though at the moment, it is very difficult to get 100% libre 
hardware, if you are including things such as reproducible HDLs for CPUs.

It is only fairly recently that people are able to run 100% free 
software, and that didn't go from 0 to 100% free within the space of a 
few years, it took much chiselling away, removing and replacing the bits 
that were proprietary, piece by piece.

>The circuit board may be libre, but I
> couldn't find the circuit board layout description files. Note that schematics
> don't make the circuit board libre, but only documented.

Neither could I find these things.

http://rhombus-tech.net/faq/#index14h2

>
> I think the title should be reworked, depending on whether the circuit board
> design is libre or not.
>
> * "Respects your freedom"
>
> It is an overstatement to say that the computer can respect freedom. The
> computer is composed of both hardware and software aspects. Hardware does not
> respect its users freedom (see above). In addition, the hardware has at least
> one major feature that cannot work with free software: its GPU. Thus, we can't
> say that its software aspects respects freedom (despite being a candidate to
> receive the FSF's RYF certification).

I agree.

>
> Thus, it would be more accurate to say that the device is free-software-
> friendly, which is vague enough to not be contradictory with the facts.
>
> Of course, this situation is much better than many other computers out there,
> that can't even startup without proprietary software.
>

I agree.

> What do you think about making those changes?
>
> Sidenote: I am very happy to see projects such as the EOMA68 come to life, as
> they are really moving things forward. However, I also care very much about
> providing accurate information, especially after what happened with Purism.
>
> Cheers,
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> Dev at lists.parabola.nu
> https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev
>



From contact at paulk.fr  Mon Aug 15 17:55:35 2016
From: contact at paulk.fr (Paul Kocialkowski)
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 19:55:35 +0200
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <57B2008F.5020402@gmail.com>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2008F.5020402@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1471283735.1130.3.camel@paulk.fr>

Hi,

Le lundi 15 ao?t 2016 ? 18:49 +0100, Josh Branning a ?crit?:
> On 15/08/16 18:09, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> > 
> > Hi, it appears that there is some misleading information in the EOMA68 news:
> > 
> > * "New Libre Hardware Crowdfunding Project"
> > 
> > Saying that the hardware is libre or free is an overstatement. The
> > integrated
> > circuits are not libre, so the whole hardware (which covers both integrated
> > circuits and circuit boards) is not.
> 
> Not 100%. Though at the moment, it is very difficult to get 100% libre?
> hardware, if you are including things such as reproducible HDLs for CPUs.

Indeed, I don't know of a single device that has free hardware currently.
However, this is no excuse to pretend it's the case!

> It is only fairly recently that people are able to run 100% free?
> software, and that didn't go from 0 to 100% free within the space of a?
> few years, it took much chiselling away, removing and replacing the bits?
> that were proprietary, piece by piece.

Definitely, I also believe this is the way to go: liberating software one step
at a time!

> > The circuit board may be libre, but I
> > couldn't find the circuit board layout description files. Note that
> > schematics
> > don't make the circuit board libre, but only documented.
> 
> Neither could I find these things.
> 
> http://rhombus-tech.net/faq/#index14h2

So I guess this means it's not going to be a free circuit board. Too bad.
The article should definitely be updated to reflect that, then.

> > I think the title should be reworked, depending on whether the circuit board
> > design is libre or not.
> > 
> > * "Respects your freedom"
> > 
> > It is an overstatement to say that the computer can respect freedom. The
> > computer is composed of both hardware and software aspects. Hardware does
> > not
> > respect its users freedom (see above). In addition, the hardware has at
> > least
> > one major feature that cannot work with free software: its GPU. Thus, we
> > can't
> > say that its software aspects respects freedom (despite being a candidate to
> > receive the FSF's RYF certification).
> 
> I agree.
> 
> > 
> > 
> > Thus, it would be more accurate to say that the device is free-software-
> > friendly, which is vague enough to not be contradictory with the facts.
> > 
> > Of course, this situation is much better than many other computers out
> > there,
> > that can't even startup without proprietary software.
> > 
> 
> I agree.
> 
> > 
> > What do you think about making those changes?

Someone who can modify the article should speak up when a consensus was reached
here. In the meantime, I'm around for discussing this!

Cheers,

-- 
Paul Kocialkowski, developer of low-level free software for embedded devices

Website: https://www.paulk.fr/
Coding blog: https://code.paulk.fr/
Git repositories: https://git.paulk.fr/ https://git.code.paulk.fr/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

From tct at ceata.org  Mon Aug 15 18:04:10 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 21:04:10 +0300
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr>
Message-ID: <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>

Hi,

I'm not a Parabola hacker and I only speak for myself. I believe Paul
refers to this news entry at parabola.nu:

https://www.parabola.nu/news/new-libre-hardware-crowdfunding-project-with-parabola-pre-installed/

On 15.08.2016 20:09, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> * "New Libre Hardware Crowdfunding Project"
> 
> Saying that the hardware is libre or free is an overstatement.
[...]
> I think the title should be reworked, depending on whether the circuit board
> design is libre or not.

I agree. AFAIR the circuit board design is being withheld for now, and
the designer has promised to release it at a later date (presumably
under a libre license).

Quoting from the campaign page:

"The only exception to this rule to release everything in advance is the
PCB CAD files for the Computer Card. We?re planning to release the PCB
CAD files for the Computer card once sufficient units are hit that
ensures any third party manufacturing runs will not undermine the
project?s development or stability."
- https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68/micro-desktop

> It is an overstatement to say that the computer can respect freedom. 
[...]
> the hardware has at least
> one major feature that cannot work with free software: its GPU. Thus, we can't
> say that its software aspects respects freedom (despite being a candidate to
> receive the FSF's RYF certification).

I agree with this too.

> Thus, it would be more accurate to say that the device is free-software-
> friendly, which is vague enough to not be contradictory with the facts.

I'm not really a big fan of the "free-software-friendly" term, exactly
because it's vague (laking a definition/criteria) and it doesn't really
tell users much regarding how respecting of software freedom that piece
of hardware is. That's why a wide range of hardware projects feel at
liberty to promote themselves as "free-software-friendly".

> Of course, this situation is much better than many other computers out there,
> that can't even startup without proprietary software.

I agree. Instead of using the term "software-freedom-respecting" or
saying it "respects your freedom" or that it "respects your software
freedom", probably a better choice of words and accurate presentation is
that this hardware is RYF-certifiable by FSF or that it has been allowed
by FSF the provisional use of the RYF certification mark, to quote Joshua:

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreplanet-discuss/2016-06/msg00213.html

> Sidenote: I am very happy to see projects such as the EOMA68 come to life, as
> they are really moving things forward. However, I also care very much about
> providing accurate information, especially after what happened with Purism.

I agree and I am happy too to see such an important project implemented!

Thanks,
Tiberiu

--
https://ceata.org
https://tehnoetic.com


From tct at ceata.org  Mon Aug 15 18:45:37 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 21:45:37 +0300
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <1471285424.1130.8.camel@replicant.us>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
 <1471285424.1130.8.camel@replicant.us>
Message-ID: <57B20DD1.2030109@ceata.org>

On 15.08.2016 21:23, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> Le lundi 15 ao?t 2016 ? 21:04 +0300, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic a ?crit :
>> On 15.08.2016 20:09, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

>>> Thus, it would be more accurate to say that the device is free-software-
>>> friendly, which is vague enough to not be contradictory with the facts.
>>
>> I'm not really a big fan of the "free-software-friendly" term, exactly
>> because it's vague (laking a definition/criteria) and it doesn't really
>> tell users much regarding how respecting of software freedom that piece
>> of hardware is. That's why a wide range of hardware projects feel at
>> liberty to promote themselves as "free-software-friendly".
> 
> Indeed, it's not very precise, but I don't think that's the goal here. I think
> vague statements are fine as long as they are clearly recognized as such.

It depends on the targeted audience. If that is the general public, I'm
sure that the average user doesn't clearly recognize this term as vague.

I believe the targeted audience of the Parabola blog is not only
educated users/free software activists/developers, but the general
public/average computer user.

I can draw a parallel between "free-software-friendly" hardware and
Android as "open-source" system. Although "open-source" has a
definition, it's a long definition of 10 points and OSI intentionally is
lax with the use of this term, to offer companies an alternative to the
strict free software term defined and protected by FSF, to avoid the
misleading of users.

Thanks,
Tiberiu

--
https://ceata.org
https://tehnoetic.com


From lkcl at lkcl.net  Mon Aug 15 19:15:00 2016
From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton)
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 20:15:00 +0100
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
Message-ID: 

---
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68


On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm not a Parabola hacker and I only speak for myself. I believe Paul
> refers to this news entry at parabola.nu:
>
> https://www.parabola.nu/news/new-libre-hardware-crowdfunding-project-with-parabola-pre-installed/
>
> On 15.08.2016 20:09, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
>> * "New Libre Hardware Crowdfunding Project"
>>
>> Saying that the hardware is libre or free is an overstatement.
> [...]
>> I think the title should be reworked, depending on whether the circuit board
>> design is libre or not.
>
> I agree. AFAIR the circuit board design is being withheld for now,


that's incorrect.. or misleading.  the PCB SCHematic file is available
as a PDF and i have only just, a few hours ago, asked people to aid
and assist in a review.

the PCB layout file - the complex part that, if somebody were to use
it to **RIGHT NOW** place an order for 500 PCBs thus throwing this
entire campaign into jeapoardy.... yes.

l.


From contact at paulk.fr  Mon Aug 15 19:22:16 2016
From: contact at paulk.fr (Paul Kocialkowski)
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 21:22:16 +0200
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
Message-ID: <1471288936.1177.6.camel@paulk.fr>

Resending with the right address, please don't CC my Replicant address since
this is not directly related to Replicant.

Hi,

Le lundi 15 ao?t 2016 ? 21:04 +0300, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic a ?crit?:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I'm not a Parabola hacker and I only speak for myself. I believe Paul
> refers to this news entry at parabola.nu:
> 
> https://www.parabola.nu/news/new-libre-hardware-crowdfunding-project-with-para
> bola-pre-installed/

That is correct, thanks for pointing it out, I forgot to mention it.

> 
> On 15.08.2016 20:09, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > * "New Libre Hardware Crowdfunding Project"
> > 
> > Saying that the hardware is libre or free is an overstatement.
> [...]
> > 
> > 
> > I think the title should be reworked, depending on whether the circuit board
> > design is libre or not.
> 
> I agree. AFAIR the circuit board design is being withheld for now, and
> the designer has promised to release it at a later date (presumably
> under a libre license).
> 
> Quoting from the campaign page:
> 
> "The only exception to this rule to release everything in advance is the
> PCB CAD files for the Computer Card. We?re planning to release the PCB
> CAD files for the Computer card once sufficient units are hit that
> ensures any third party manufacturing runs will not undermine the
> project?s development or stability."
> - https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68/micro-desktop

Good to know! Then I feel that the blog post should either state that or not
comment on the hardware aspects.

> 
> > 
> > Thus, it would be more accurate to say that the device is free-software-
> > friendly, which is vague enough to not be contradictory with the facts.
> 
> I'm not really a big fan of the "free-software-friendly" term, exactly
> because it's vague (laking a definition/criteria) and it doesn't really
> tell users much regarding how respecting of software freedom that piece
> of hardware is. That's why a wide range of hardware projects feel at
> liberty to promote themselves as "free-software-friendly".

Indeed, it's not very precise, but I don't think that's the goal here. I think
vague statements are fine as long as they are clearly recognized as such.

Specific points about the A20 platform can be dug out from:
http://www.fsf.org/resources/hw/single-board-computers

> 
> > 
> > Of course, this situation is much better than many other computers out
> > there,
> > that can't even startup without proprietary software.
> 
> I agree. Instead of using the term "software-freedom-respecting" or
> saying it "respects your freedom" or that it "respects your software
> freedom", probably a better choice of words and accurate presentation is
> that this hardware is RYF-certifiable by FSF or that it has been allowed
> by FSF the provisional use of the RYF certification mark, to quote Joshua:
> 
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreplanet-discuss/2016-06/msg00213.html

Yes, that is fine too IMO.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

From contact at paulk.fr  Mon Aug 15 19:23:01 2016
From: contact at paulk.fr (Paul Kocialkowski)
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 21:23:01 +0200
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <57B20DD1.2030109@ceata.org>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
 <1471285424.1130.8.camel@replicant.us> <57B20DD1.2030109@ceata.org>
Message-ID: <1471288981.1177.7.camel@paulk.fr>

Resending with the right address, please don't CC my Replicant address since
this is not directly related to Replicant.

Le lundi 15 ao?t 2016 ? 21:45 +0300, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic a ?crit?:
> On 15.08.2016 21:23, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > Le lundi 15 ao?t 2016 ? 21:04 +0300, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic a ?crit :
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On 15.08.2016 20:09, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Thus, it would be more accurate to say that the device is free-software-
> > > > friendly, which is vague enough to not be contradictory with the facts.
> > > 
> > > I'm not really a big fan of the "free-software-friendly" term, exactly
> > > because it's vague (laking a definition/criteria) and it doesn't really
> > > tell users much regarding how respecting of software freedom that piece
> > > of hardware is. That's why a wide range of hardware projects feel at
> > > liberty to promote themselves as "free-software-friendly".
> > 
> > Indeed, it's not very precise, but I don't think that's the goal here. I
> > think
> > vague statements are fine as long as they are clearly recognized as such.
> 
> It depends on the targeted audience. If that is the general public, I'm
> sure that the average user doesn't clearly recognize this term as vague.
> 
> I believe the targeted audience of the Parabola blog is not only
> educated users/free software activists/developers, but the general
> public/average computer user.

I mean that the precise wording "free-software-friendly" is intrinsically vague,
so I doubt that anyone will understand it as an equivalent of "fully free
software" or "freedom-respecting".

So the question is whether it's good to use vague wording. I think that e.g. for
the news title, it would be fine. Of course, a link to RYF and the single-board-
computers page could shed some more lights for anyone interested.

-- 
Paul Kocialkowski, developer of low-level free software for embedded devices

Website: https://www.paulk.fr/
Coding blog: https://code.paulk.fr/
Git repositories: https://git.paulk.fr/ https://git.code.paulk.fr/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

From contact at paulk.fr  Mon Aug 15 19:23:19 2016
From: contact at paulk.fr (Paul Kocialkowski)
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 21:23:19 +0200
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: 
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
 
Message-ID: <1471288999.1177.8.camel@paulk.fr>

Resending with the right address, please don't CC my Replicant address since
this is not directly related to Replicant.

Hi,

Le lundi 15 ao?t 2016 ? 20:15 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton a ?crit?:
> 
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic 
> wrote:
> > 
> > On 15.08.2016 20:09, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > * "New Libre Hardware Crowdfunding Project"
> > > 
> > > Saying that the hardware is libre or free is an overstatement.
> > [...]
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I think the title should be reworked, depending on whether the circuit
> > > board design is libre or not.
> > 
> > I agree. AFAIR the circuit board design is being withheld for now,
> 
> that's incorrect.. or misleading.??the PCB SCHematic file is available
> as a PDF and i have only just, a few hours ago, asked people to aid
> and assist in a review.

A pdf schematics is documentation about the hardware, it is not a source format
of the circuit board design. It does not make the circuit board free.

> 
> the PCB layout file - the complex part that, if somebody were to use
> it to **RIGHT NOW** place an order for 500 PCBs thus throwing this
> entire campaign into jeapoardy.... yes.

Then it is fair to say that the circuit board design is not free at this point
but may be freed later.

-- 
Paul Kocialkowski, developer of low-level free software for embedded devices

Website: https://www.paulk.fr/
Coding blog: https://code.paulk.fr/
Git repositories: https://git.paulk.fr/ https://git.code.paulk.fr/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

From tct at ceata.org  Mon Aug 15 19:29:36 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 22:29:36 +0300
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: 
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
 
Message-ID: <57B21820.4040203@ceata.org>



On 15.08.2016 22:15, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> ---
> crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
> 
> 
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic  wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm not a Parabola hacker and I only speak for myself. I believe Paul
>> refers to this news entry at parabola.nu:
>>
>> https://www.parabola.nu/news/new-libre-hardware-crowdfunding-project-with-parabola-pre-installed/
>>
>> On 15.08.2016 20:09, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
>>> * "New Libre Hardware Crowdfunding Project"
>>>
>>> Saying that the hardware is libre or free is an overstatement.
>> [...]
>>> I think the title should be reworked, depending on whether the circuit board
>>> design is libre or not.
>>
>> I agree. AFAIR the circuit board design is being withheld for now,
> 
> 
> that's incorrect.. or misleading.  the PCB SCHematic file is available
> as a PDF and i have only just, a few hours ago, asked people to aid
> and assist in a review.
> 
> the PCB layout file - the complex part that, if somebody were to use
> it to **RIGHT NOW** place an order for 500 PCBs thus throwing this
> entire campaign into jeapoardy.... yes.

Thank you for the response, Luke. Please note that in his original
message on this thread, Paul specifically asked about the design source
files and not the schematics.

On 15.08.2016 20:09, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> The circuit board may be libre, but I couldn't find the circuit board
> layout description files. Note that schematics don't make the circuit
> board libre, but only documented.

That is why I believe my statement you quoted above is correct and not
misleading (especially in the context of Paul's question).

Thanks,
Tiberiu

--
https://ceata.org
https://tehnoetic.com


From lkcl at lkcl.net  Mon Aug 15 19:38:43 2016
From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton)
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 20:38:43 +0100
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <1471288999.1177.8.camel@paulk.fr>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
 
 <1471288999.1177.8.camel@paulk.fr>
Message-ID: 

---
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68


On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 8:23 PM, Paul Kocialkowski  wrote:
> Resending with the right address, please don't CC my Replicant address since
> this is not directly related to Replicant.
>
> Hi,
>
> Le lundi 15 ao?t 2016 ? 20:15 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton a ?crit :
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > On 15.08.2016 20:09, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > * "New Libre Hardware Crowdfunding Project"
>> > >
>> > > Saying that the hardware is libre or free is an overstatement.
>> > [...]
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > I think the title should be reworked, depending on whether the circuit
>> > > board design is libre or not.
>> >
>> > I agree. AFAIR the circuit board design is being withheld for now,
>>
>> that's incorrect.. or misleading.  the PCB SCHematic file is available
>> as a PDF and i have only just, a few hours ago, asked people to aid
>> and assist in a review.
>
> A pdf schematics is documentation about the hardware, it is not a source format
> of the circuit board design. It does not make the circuit board free.

 *sigh*.  there are variants available if you look.  there's even a
GPL'd KiCAD repository available with an early design.  KiCAD turned
out to be a waste of time so i was forced to use proprietary software
as it contains the necessary design rules verification for
inexperienced PCB design engineers to do a decent job.  the files are
huge, i can't maintain git revision control on them properly, and i'm
annoyed about it.

 apologies paul - i'm tired, i'm massively stretched, i'm reaching a
threshold on what i can cope with, so i'm winding down answers so i
can conserve energy to get the hundreds of tasks needed to be
completed prepared and up and running.

 if you or anybody else would like to help with that, i am more than
happy to give them all the access to whatever they want so it can get
done.

 l.


From contact at paulk.fr  Mon Aug 15 20:15:54 2016
From: contact at paulk.fr (Paul Kocialkowski)
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 22:15:54 +0200
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: 
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
 
 <1471288999.1177.8.camel@paulk.fr>
 
Message-ID: <1471292154.3443.5.camel@paulk.fr>

Le lundi 15 ao?t 2016 ? 20:38 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton a ?crit?:
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 8:23 PM, Paul Kocialkowski  wrote:
> > 
> > Resending with the right address, please don't CC my Replicant address since
> > this is not directly related to Replicant.
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Le lundi 15 ao?t 2016 ? 20:15 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton a ?crit :
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic 
> > > wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > On 15.08.2016 20:09, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > * "New Libre Hardware Crowdfunding Project"
> > > > > 
> > > > > Saying that the hardware is libre or free is an overstatement.
> > > > [...]
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > I think the title should be reworked, depending on whether the circuit
> > > > > board design is libre or not.
> > > > 
> > > > I agree. AFAIR the circuit board design is being withheld for now,
> > > 
> > > that's incorrect.. or misleading.??the PCB SCHematic file is available
> > > as a PDF and i have only just, a few hours ago, asked people to aid
> > > and assist in a review.
> > 
> > A pdf schematics is documentation about the hardware, it is not a source
> > format
> > of the circuit board design. It does not make the circuit board free.
> 
> ?*sigh*.??there are variants available if you look.??there's even a
> GPL'd KiCAD repository available with an early design.??KiCAD turned
> out to be a waste of time so i was forced to use proprietary software
> as it contains the necessary design rules verification for
> inexperienced PCB design engineers to do a decent job.??the files are
> huge, i can't maintain git revision control on them properly, and i'm
> annoyed about it.

Those details are not very relevant here. The question is whether the source
form of the circuit board as sold are free or not. Based on the elements I grasp
from your answers and what was reported in this thread, the answer is visibly
no.

I don't want to waste your time here, so either I'm wrong and those sources are
free, either I'm not wrong and they're not.

Please make it clear if I'm wrong, otherwise there is no further need to discuss
this matter.

> ?apologies paul - i'm tired, i'm massively stretched, i'm reaching a
> threshold on what i can cope with, so i'm winding down answers so i
> can conserve energy to get the hundreds of tasks needed to be
> completed prepared and up and running.

I understand -- what I'm asking calls for a binary yes/no answer here, no need
for any long explanation.

> ?if you or anybody else would like to help with that, i am more than
> happy to give them all the access to whatever they want so it can get
> done.

I'm sure what "that" refers to. You said you don't want these sources released
at this point (unless I misunderstood). What is there left for us to do?

-- 
Paul Kocialkowski, developer of low-level free software for embedded devices

Website: https://www.paulk.fr/
Coding blog: https://code.paulk.fr/
Git repositories: https://git.paulk.fr/ https://git.code.paulk.fr/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

From tct at ceata.org  Tue Aug 16 07:31:50 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 10:31:50 +0300
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <1471288981.1177.7.camel@paulk.fr>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
 <1471285424.1130.8.camel@replicant.us> <57B20DD1.2030109@ceata.org>
 <1471288981.1177.7.camel@paulk.fr>
Message-ID: <57B2C166.90004@ceata.org>

On 15.08.2016 22:23, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> Le lundi 15 ao?t 2016 ? 21:45 +0300, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic a ?crit :
>> On 15.08.2016 21:23, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Le lundi 15 ao?t 2016 ? 21:04 +0300, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic a ?crit :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 15.08.2016 20:09, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Thus, it would be more accurate to say that the device is free-software-
>>>>> friendly, which is vague enough to not be contradictory with the facts.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not really a big fan of the "free-software-friendly" term, exactly
>>>> because it's vague (laking a definition/criteria) and it doesn't really
>>>> tell users much regarding how respecting of software freedom that piece
>>>> of hardware is. That's why a wide range of hardware projects feel at
>>>> liberty to promote themselves as "free-software-friendly".
>>>
>>> Indeed, it's not very precise, but I don't think that's the goal here. I
>>> think
>>> vague statements are fine as long as they are clearly recognized as such.
>>
>> It depends on the targeted audience. If that is the general public, I'm
>> sure that the average user doesn't clearly recognize this term as vague.
>>
>> I believe the targeted audience of the Parabola blog is not only
>> educated users/free software activists/developers, but the general
>> public/average computer user.
> 
> I mean that the precise wording "free-software-friendly" is intrinsically vague,
> so I doubt that anyone will understand it as an equivalent of "fully free
> software" or "freedom-respecting".

However, both average users and high-profile organizations in the free
software world are using "free software friendly" to also mean "fully
free software" or "freedom-respecting".

Few examples:

User #1:

Free software friendly GPS? [...] that even RMS would approve of?
https://trisquel.info/en/forum/free-software-friendly-gps

User #2:

Free software friendly (Wireless) Gamepads [...] should work on a Linux
kernel without blobs (eg: Linux-libre, Debian GNU/Linux kernel, etc
https://trisquel.info/en/forum/free-software-friendly-wireless-gamepads

User #3:

Is Arduino Free software friendly? Re: The Arduino software is free software
https://trisquel.info/en/forum/arduino-free-software-friendly

Company #1:

Freedom Included - free software friendly hardware [...] Lemote Yeeloong
[...] the only laptop in the world that completely respects free
software - for example, it has modifiable copyleft boot firmware (bios),
and wifi that does not require binary blobs to work. It is the laptop
used by the founder of the GNU project and Free Software.
http://www.freedomincluded.com/

Company #2:

ThinkPenguin, Inc. is currently the only company with a significant
catalog selling free software friendly hardware. From wifi adapters and
printers to desktops and laptops. For more information on free software
friendly hardware check out the Free Software Foundation's Respect Your
Freedom web site at: fsf.org/ryf.
https://www.thinkpenguin.com/gnu-linux/short-interview-christopher-waid-about-thinkpenguin-linux-action-show

Note: most if not all of their wifi adapters are freedom-respecting
(with or without RYF certification) but their laptops and desktops are
certainly not freedom-respecting since those use proprietary BIOS. To
them, all are "free software friendly" and, free software friendly =
FSF's RYF...

Company #3:

Talos is the world's first ATX-compatible, workstation-class mainboard
for the new, free-software friendly IBM POWER8 processor and architecture.
https://www.raptorengineering.com/TALOS/prerelease.php

Note: however, if the board is produced and sold, is guaranteed to
receive the FSF's RYF certification. Rean on.

Nonprofit #1:

Interested in a powerful, free software friendly workstation? -  Let
Raptor Engineering know that you would be interested in purchasing a
Talos Secure Workstation mainboard that runs only 100% free firmware and
software. [...] Raptor Engineering, is gauging public interest in a new
high-end workstation designed to run only free software.
https://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/interested-in-a-powerful-free-software-friendly-workstation

Nonprofit #2:

Linux: Free Software Friendly Graphics Card [...] completely open video
card [...] graphics card specifically for open source systems [...] so
that no one has to deal with anything closed source (BIOS included). The
goal here is to produce a graphics card which is a Free Software geek's
dream in terms of openness.
https://www.linux.com/news/linux-free-software-friendly-graphics-card

Nonprofit #3:

FSF certifies ThinkPenguin USB Wifi adapter with Atheros chip to be free
software friendly [...] The Free Software Foundation (FSF) today awarded
Respects Your Freedom (RYF) certification to the TPE-N150USB Wireless N
USB Adapter, sold by ThinkPenguin.
http://www.fsdaily.com/Community/FSF_certifies_ThinkPenguin_USB_Wifi_adapter_with_Atheros_chip_to_be_free_software_friendly

> So the question is whether it's good to use vague wording. I think that e.g. for
> the news title, it would be fine. Of course, a link to RYF and the single-board-
> computers page could shed some more lights for anyone interested.

Given the examples above where "free software friendly" is used by a
wide range of users, companies and nonprofits for both hardware fully
compatible with free software and hardware not fully compatible with
free software, I hope we can reach the same conclusion that we have to
avoid this ambiguous term which spreads confusion among what is and what
is not software freedom respecting, thus working against our efforts to
educate users as part of the free software movement.

To draw a parallel between "free software friendly" and "eco-friendly",
yes, I believe Purism has pioneered the practice of "software freedom
washing", similar to greenwashing :-)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenwashing

Thanks,
Tiberiu

--
https://ceata.org
https://tehnoetic.com


From contact at paulk.fr  Tue Aug 16 08:43:40 2016
From: contact at paulk.fr (Paul Kocialkowski)
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 10:43:40 +0200
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <57B2C166.90004@ceata.org>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
 <1471285424.1130.8.camel@replicant.us> <57B20DD1.2030109@ceata.org>
 <1471288981.1177.7.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2C166.90004@ceata.org>
Message-ID: <1471337020.1216.8.camel@paulk.fr>

Le mardi 16 ao?t 2016 ? 10:31 +0300, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic a ?crit?:
> On 15.08.2016 22:23, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> > 
> > Le lundi 15 ao?t 2016 ? 21:45 +0300, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic a ?crit :
> > > 
> > > On 15.08.2016 21:23, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Le lundi 15 ao?t 2016 ? 21:04 +0300, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic a ?crit :
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > On 15.08.2016 20:09, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Thus, it would be more accurate to say that the device is free-
> > > > > > software-
> > > > > > friendly, which is vague enough to not be contradictory with the
> > > > > > facts.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I'm not really a big fan of the "free-software-friendly" term, exactly
> > > > > because it's vague (laking a definition/criteria) and it doesn't
> > > > > really
> > > > > tell users much regarding how respecting of software freedom that
> > > > > piece
> > > > > of hardware is. That's why a wide range of hardware projects feel at
> > > > > liberty to promote themselves as "free-software-friendly".
> > > > 
> > > > Indeed, it's not very precise, but I don't think that's the goal here. I
> > > > think
> > > > vague statements are fine as long as they are clearly recognized as
> > > > such.
> > > 
> > > It depends on the targeted audience. If that is the general public, I'm
> > > sure that the average user doesn't clearly recognize this term as vague.
> > > 
> > > I believe the targeted audience of the Parabola blog is not only
> > > educated users/free software activists/developers, but the general
> > > public/average computer user.
> > 
> > I mean that the precise wording "free-software-friendly" is intrinsically
> > vague,
> > so I doubt that anyone will understand it as an equivalent of "fully free
> > software" or "freedom-respecting".
> 
> However, both average users and high-profile organizations in the free
> software world are using "free software friendly" to also mean "fully
> free software" or "freedom-respecting".

I don't see the problem or contradiction here. It is vague so it can rightfully
cover both terms. The point is that it is not intrinsically equivalent to one of
those.

> > So the question is whether it's good to use vague wording. I think that e.g.
> > for
> > the news title, it would be fine. Of course, a link to RYF and the single-
> > board-
> > computers page could shed some more lights for anyone interested.
> 
> Given the examples above where "free software friendly" is used by a
> wide range of users, companies and nonprofits for both hardware fully
> compatible with free software and hardware not fully compatible with
> free software, I hope we can reach the same conclusion that we have to
> avoid this ambiguous term which spreads confusion among what is and what
> is not software freedom respecting, thus working against our efforts to
> educate users as part of the free software movement.

I disagree with that conclusion. Using a vague word implies that it doesn't
refer to something more precise -- but it can cover such terms. I don't think
that using a vague/broad expression, that lacks details, is confusing and
misleading. It's just imprecise, which is different.

People who'll understand free software-friendly as fully free are jumping to
conclusion without any basis. The words don't hold that meaning, they are adding
more sense to it than what the words hold.

> To draw a parallel between "free software friendly" and "eco-friendly",
> yes, I believe Purism has pioneered the practice of "software freedom
> washing", similar to greenwashing :-)
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenwashing

I agree with this but again, don't see a problem. If Purism had said "free
software friendly" all along, it would have been fine IMO. Sadly, they did much,
much than claiming that.

-- 
Paul Kocialkowski, developer of low-level free software for embedded devices

Website: https://www.paulk.fr/
Coding blog: https://code.paulk.fr/
Git repositories: https://git.paulk.fr/ https://git.code.paulk.fr/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

From tct at ceata.org  Tue Aug 16 14:01:16 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 17:01:16 +0300
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <1471337020.1216.8.camel@paulk.fr>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
 <1471285424.1130.8.camel@replicant.us> <57B20DD1.2030109@ceata.org>
 <1471288981.1177.7.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2C166.90004@ceata.org>
 <1471337020.1216.8.camel@paulk.fr>
Message-ID: <57B31CAC.1030602@ceata.org>

On 16.08.2016 11:43, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> Le mardi 16 ao?t 2016 ? 10:31 +0300, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic a ?crit :
>> On 15.08.2016 22:23, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
>>>
>>> Le lundi 15 ao?t 2016 ? 21:45 +0300, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic a ?crit :
>>>>
>>>> On 15.08.2016 21:23, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Le lundi 15 ao?t 2016 ? 21:04 +0300, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic a ?crit :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 15.08.2016 20:09, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thus, it would be more accurate to say that the device is free-
>>>>>>> software-
>>>>>>> friendly, which is vague enough to not be contradictory with the
>>>>>>> facts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not really a big fan of the "free-software-friendly" term, exactly
>>>>>> because it's vague (laking a definition/criteria) and it doesn't
>>>>>> really
>>>>>> tell users much regarding how respecting of software freedom that
>>>>>> piece
>>>>>> of hardware is. That's why a wide range of hardware projects feel at
>>>>>> liberty to promote themselves as "free-software-friendly".
>>>>>
>>>>> Indeed, it's not very precise, but I don't think that's the goal here. I
>>>>> think
>>>>> vague statements are fine as long as they are clearly recognized as
>>>>> such.
>>>>
>>>> It depends on the targeted audience. If that is the general public, I'm
>>>> sure that the average user doesn't clearly recognize this term as vague.
>>>>
>>>> I believe the targeted audience of the Parabola blog is not only
>>>> educated users/free software activists/developers, but the general
>>>> public/average computer user.
>>>
>>> I mean that the precise wording "free-software-friendly" is intrinsically
>>> vague,
>>> so I doubt that anyone will understand it as an equivalent of "fully free
>>> software" or "freedom-respecting".
>>
>> However, both average users and high-profile organizations in the free
>> software world are using "free software friendly" to also mean "fully
>> free software" or "freedom-respecting".
> 
> I don't see the problem or contradiction here. It is vague so it can rightfully
> cover both terms. The point is that it is not intrinsically equivalent to one of
> those.
> 
>>> So the question is whether it's good to use vague wording. I think that e.g.
>>> for
>>> the news title, it would be fine. Of course, a link to RYF and the single-
>>> board-
>>> computers page could shed some more lights for anyone interested.
>>
>> Given the examples above where "free software friendly" is used by a
>> wide range of users, companies and nonprofits for both hardware fully
>> compatible with free software and hardware not fully compatible with
>> free software, I hope we can reach the same conclusion that we have to
>> avoid this ambiguous term which spreads confusion among what is and what
>> is not software freedom respecting, thus working against our efforts to
>> educate users as part of the free software movement.
> 
> I disagree with that conclusion. Using a vague word implies that it doesn't
> refer to something more precise -- but it can cover such terms. I don't think
> that using a vague/broad expression, that lacks details, is confusing and
> misleading. It's just imprecise, which is different.
> 
> People who'll understand free software-friendly as fully free are jumping to
> conclusion without any basis. The words don't hold that meaning, they are adding
> more sense to it than what the words hold.

Well, based on my experience, the masses do understand free software
friendly as fully compatible with free software. Especially since a
company with FSF-endorsed hardware states:

"For more information on free software friendly hardware check out the
Free Software Foundation's Respect Your Freedom web site at: fsf.org/ryf."
https://www.thinkpenguin.com/gnu-linux/short-interview-christopher-waid-about-thinkpenguin-linux-action-show

Which IMO sends the message "free software friendly" is equivalent to
"respects your freedom".

So this user understandably recommends other users:

"ThinkPenguin.com has some great free software-friendly computers (FSF
endorses ThinkPenguin, anyway) and can come installed with Trisquel, so
next time you get a PC, make it a penguin and escape proprietary software."
https://trisquel.info/en/forum/what-trisquel-without-libreboot#comment-56529

For him, "free software friendly" means "no proprietary software" =
"fully free software compatible". And he teaches other users that.

Another example:

"My freedom is ready" -
https://trisquel.info/en/forum/new-thinkpenguin-laptop

What do other people on this list think? Should we avoid using the term
"free software friendly" or there is no reason not to use it?

Thanks,
Tiberiu

--
https://ceata.org
https://tehnoetic.com


From fauno at endefensadelsl.org  Tue Aug 16 14:06:11 2016
From: fauno at endefensadelsl.org (fauno)
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 11:06:11 -0300
Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-18] change mailman admins
In-Reply-To: <1471152643.1222.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info>
References: <87r3a4psob.fsf@endefensadelsl.org>
 <1471152643.1222.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info>
Message-ID: <87d1l86c6k.fsf@endefensadelsl.org>

Isaac David  writes:
>
> what does it take to moderate a mailing list? I'm not familiar with
> mailman. Also, what is considered an acceptable response time to
> approve/reject mails?

the usual is:

* you receive one or several email notifications about bounces or email
  not matching a rule (non-subscribed, too big, etc.)

* you go to the https://lists.parabola.nu mailman admin panel and take
  action

it's not that difficult and some of the recurring issues can be solved
by configuring the list correctly, but i really don't have the time to
do it myself :(

so far we have three volunteers:

* joshua
* mariqueerta
* isaac

if no one's against, today or the next few days i'll make them admins on
mailman.

you'd have to figure how you want to organize the tasks (alternate days,
etc.)

>  >this last month i've been trying out rspamd+rmilter and it works 
> really
>  >well.  i uploaded them to abslibre/pcr but i don't have a working 
> chroot
>  >to package them.
>
> I dared to package them, look them up ;)

great, thanks!

-- 
http://utopia.partidopirata.com.ar/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 584 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

From lovell.joshyyy at gmail.com  Tue Aug 16 14:57:39 2016
From: lovell.joshyyy at gmail.com (Josh Branning)
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 15:57:39 +0100
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <57B31CAC.1030602@ceata.org>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
 <1471285424.1130.8.camel@replicant.us> <57B20DD1.2030109@ceata.org>
 <1471288981.1177.7.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2C166.90004@ceata.org>
 <1471337020.1216.8.camel@paulk.fr> <57B31CAC.1030602@ceata.org>
Message-ID: <57B329E3.703@gmail.com>

> What do other people on this list think? Should we avoid using the term
> "free software friendly" or there is no reason not to use it?

I think the article is misleading as it's written at the moment, (by 
stating it's "libre hardware" rather than "with an open specification").

In regards to free software friendly, it isn't 100%; totally, as there 
is no way to run the GPU using free software. And the same problem 
exists if one were to claim it 100% "respects your freedom", so I can't 
see how saying something is "free software friendly" is much better, as 
the same problem(s) exist(s) in both wordings.

Perhaps focusing on the positive features, like stating that it can boot 
up using only free software, is pre-installed with parabola, etc. whilst 
perhaps also admitting it's apparent flaws (like the lack of libre GPU 
drivers), would be the most accurate, honest, and least deceptive way to 
describe EOMA68 when writing an article on the subject. That and the 
"libre hardware" --> "open specification" correction.


Josh


From tct at ceata.org  Tue Aug 16 15:22:21 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 18:22:21 +0300
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <57B329E3.703@gmail.com>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
 <1471285424.1130.8.camel@replicant.us> <57B20DD1.2030109@ceata.org>
 <1471288981.1177.7.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2C166.90004@ceata.org>
 <1471337020.1216.8.camel@paulk.fr> <57B31CAC.1030602@ceata.org>
 <57B329E3.703@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57B32FAD.7000800@ceata.org>

On 16.08.2016 17:57, Josh Branning wrote:
>> What do other people on this list think? Should we avoid using the term
>> "free software friendly" or there is no reason not to use it?
> 
> I think the article is misleading as it's written at the moment, (by
> stating it's "libre hardware" rather than "with an open specification").

RMS recommends we avoid using "open" for anything related to computers,
in order to not seem we endorse the "open source" term and confuse users
regarding where we in the free software community stand in this
fundamental matter. This includes avoiding the term "open standards".
Instead, we should use "free standards" if the standard is published as
documentation under a free license.

Maybe a better wording than "with an open specification" would be "with
publicly available schematics" (or "specification").

Quoting the designer, "Full schematics [are] available."
https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68/micro-desktop

Please note that in the campaign's text he doesn't specify if the
schematics are available under a free license nor he links to the
schematics (but he specifies that for the "3D-printed casework design
files"; he says that those [are] available under GPLv3 license").
However, if this is the specification:

http://elinux.org/Embedded_Open_Modular_Architecture/EOMA-68

then I gather that it's under CC BY-SA 3.0. I couldn't find the
schematics PDF Luke was telling us about. Probably he will publish it
after his volunteers review it? I don't know.

> In regards to free software friendly, it isn't 100%; totally, as there
> is no way to run the GPU using free software. And the same problem
> exists if one were to claim it 100% "respects your freedom", so I can't
> see how saying something is "free software friendly" is much better, as
> the same problem(s) exist(s) in both wordings.

I see your point. But I was asking more, if it makes sense to add "free
software friendly" to the list of words to avoid:

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.en.html

> Perhaps focusing on the positive features, like stating that it can boot
> up using only free software, is pre-installed with parabola, etc.

I would also add here that the Embedded Controller is free software.

> whilst
> perhaps also admitting it's apparent flaws (like the lack of libre GPU
> drivers), would be the most accurate, honest, and least deceptive way to
> describe EOMA68 when writing an article on the subject. 

I agree.

My question still stands, do someone share my opinion that "free
software friendly" should be avoided and added to the list of infamous
words to avoid? https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.en.html

Thanks,
Tiberiu

--
https://ceata.org
https://tehnoetic.com


From lovell.joshyyy at gmail.com  Tue Aug 16 15:40:57 2016
From: lovell.joshyyy at gmail.com (Josh Branning)
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 16:40:57 +0100
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <57B32FAD.7000800@ceata.org>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
 <1471285424.1130.8.camel@replicant.us> <57B20DD1.2030109@ceata.org>
 <1471288981.1177.7.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2C166.90004@ceata.org>
 <1471337020.1216.8.camel@paulk.fr> <57B31CAC.1030602@ceata.org>
 <57B329E3.703@gmail.com> <57B32FAD.7000800@ceata.org>
Message-ID: <57B33409.2090206@gmail.com>

On 16/08/16 16:22, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
> On 16.08.2016 17:57, Josh Branning wrote:
>>> What do other people on this list think? Should we avoid using the term
>>> "free software friendly" or there is no reason not to use it?
>>
>> I think the article is misleading as it's written at the moment, (by
>> stating it's "libre hardware" rather than "with an open specification").
>
> RMS recommends we avoid using "open" for anything related to computers,
> in order to not seem we endorse the "open source" term and confuse users
> regarding where we in the free software community stand in this
> fundamental matter. This includes avoiding the term "open standards".
> Instead, we should use "free standards" if the standard is published as
> documentation under a free license.

Fair enough.

>
> Maybe a better wording than "with an open specification" would be "with
> publicly available schematics" (or "specification").

Or free schematics/specification.

>
> Quoting the designer, "Full schematics [are] available."
> https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68/micro-desktop
>
> Please note that in the campaign's text he doesn't specify if the
> schematics are available under a free license nor he links to the
> schematics (but he specifies that for the "3D-printed casework design
> files"; he says that those [are] available under GPLv3 license").
> However, if this is the specification:
>
> http://elinux.org/Embedded_Open_Modular_Architecture/EOMA-68
>
> then I gather that it's under CC BY-SA 3.0. I couldn't find the
> schematics PDF Luke was telling us about. Probably he will publish it
> after his volunteers review it? I don't know.

I couldn't find them either. If they're CC BY-SA then I guess they are 
free, and not just open or proprietary. But it's difficult to tell or 
make any valid assumption without seeing them.

>
>> In regards to free software friendly, it isn't 100%; totally, as there
>> is no way to run the GPU using free software. And the same problem
>> exists if one were to claim it 100% "respects your freedom", so I can't
>> see how saying something is "free software friendly" is much better, as
>> the same problem(s) exist(s) in both wordings.
>
> I see your point. But I was asking more, if it makes sense to add "free
> software friendly" to the list of words to avoid:
>
> https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.en.html
>

I think "free software friendly" is fairly synonymous with "respecting 
freedom". Of course, the FSF has made their certification program for 
specific devices for the latter.

In the event that someone were to create a 100% "free software friendly" 
device that for whatever reason didn't get through the FSF's 
certification process (they probably do exist), I would like to still be 
able to use the term "free software friendly" to describe the device.

>> Perhaps focusing on the positive features, like stating that it can boot
>> up using only free software, is pre-installed with parabola, etc.
>
> I would also add here that the Embedded Controller is free software.
>
>> whilst
>> perhaps also admitting it's apparent flaws (like the lack of libre GPU
>> drivers), would be the most accurate, honest, and least deceptive way to
>> describe EOMA68 when writing an article on the subject.
>
> I agree.
>
> My question still stands, do someone share my opinion that "free
> software friendly" should be avoided and added to the list of infamous
> words to avoid? https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.en.html

I don't necessarily share that opinion.

But I feel the article on parabola news should be updated if and when a 
consensus is reached.

>
> Thanks,
> Tiberiu
>
> --
> https://ceata.org
> https://tehnoetic.com
>



From contact at paulk.fr  Tue Aug 16 16:12:24 2016
From: contact at paulk.fr (Paul Kocialkowski)
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 18:12:24 +0200
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <57B31CAC.1030602@ceata.org>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
 <1471285424.1130.8.camel@replicant.us> <57B20DD1.2030109@ceata.org>
 <1471288981.1177.7.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2C166.90004@ceata.org>
 <1471337020.1216.8.camel@paulk.fr> <57B31CAC.1030602@ceata.org>
Message-ID: <1471363944.2003.12.camel@paulk.fr>

Le mardi 16 ao?t 2016 ? 17:01 +0300, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic a ?crit?:
> On 16.08.2016 11:43, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> > 
> > Le mardi 16 ao?t 2016 ? 10:31 +0300, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic a ?crit :
> > > 
> > > On 15.08.2016 22:23, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Le lundi 15 ao?t 2016 ? 21:45 +0300, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic a ?crit :
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > On 15.08.2016 21:23, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Le lundi 15 ao?t 2016 ? 21:04 +0300, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic a ?crit
> > > > > > :
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > On 15.08.2016 20:09, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Thus, it would be more accurate to say that the device is free-
> > > > > > > > software-
> > > > > > > > friendly, which is vague enough to not be contradictory with the
> > > > > > > > facts.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > I'm not really a big fan of the "free-software-friendly" term,
> > > > > > > exactly
> > > > > > > because it's vague (laking a definition/criteria) and it doesn't
> > > > > > > really
> > > > > > > tell users much regarding how respecting of software freedom that
> > > > > > > piece
> > > > > > > of hardware is. That's why a wide range of hardware projects feel
> > > > > > > at
> > > > > > > liberty to promote themselves as "free-software-friendly".
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Indeed, it's not very precise, but I don't think that's the goal
> > > > > > here. I
> > > > > > think
> > > > > > vague statements are fine as long as they are clearly recognized as
> > > > > > such.
> > > > > 
> > > > > It depends on the targeted audience. If that is the general public,
> > > > > I'm
> > > > > sure that the average user doesn't clearly recognize this term as
> > > > > vague.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I believe the targeted audience of the Parabola blog is not only
> > > > > educated users/free software activists/developers, but the general
> > > > > public/average computer user.
> > > > 
> > > > I mean that the precise wording "free-software-friendly" is
> > > > intrinsically
> > > > vague,
> > > > so I doubt that anyone will understand it as an equivalent of "fully
> > > > free
> > > > software" or "freedom-respecting".
> > > 
> > > However, both average users and high-profile organizations in the free
> > > software world are using "free software friendly" to also mean "fully
> > > free software" or "freedom-respecting".
> > 
> > I don't see the problem or contradiction here. It is vague so it can
> > rightfully
> > cover both terms. The point is that it is not intrinsically equivalent to
> > one of
> > those.
> > 
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > So the question is whether it's good to use vague wording. I think that
> > > > e.g.
> > > > for
> > > > the news title, it would be fine. Of course, a link to RYF and the
> > > > single-
> > > > board-
> > > > computers page could shed some more lights for anyone interested.
> > > 
> > > Given the examples above where "free software friendly" is used by a
> > > wide range of users, companies and nonprofits for both hardware fully
> > > compatible with free software and hardware not fully compatible with
> > > free software, I hope we can reach the same conclusion that we have to
> > > avoid this ambiguous term which spreads confusion among what is and what
> > > is not software freedom respecting, thus working against our efforts to
> > > educate users as part of the free software movement.
> > 
> > I disagree with that conclusion. Using a vague word implies that it doesn't
> > refer to something more precise -- but it can cover such terms. I don't
> > think
> > that using a vague/broad expression, that lacks details, is confusing and
> > misleading. It's just imprecise, which is different.
> > 
> > People who'll understand free software-friendly as fully free are jumping to
> > conclusion without any basis. The words don't hold that meaning, they are
> > adding
> > more sense to it than what the words hold.
> 
> Well, based on my experience, the masses do understand free software
> friendly as fully compatible with free software. Especially since a
> company with FSF-endorsed hardware states:

But this is not what "friendly" means! "friendly" is inherently vague. It's not
reasonable to act on what some people might add to that meaning: it becomes
impossible to draw a line then.

> "For more information on free software friendly hardware check out the
> Free Software Foundation's Respect Your Freedom web site at: fsf.org/ryf."
> https://www.thinkpenguin.com/gnu-linux/short-interview-christopher-waid-about-
> thinkpenguin-linux-action-show
> 
> Which IMO sends the message "free software friendly" is equivalent to
> "respects your freedom".

This is an interpretation, too. It is true that "free software friendly" covers
RYF. Also, RYF is not equivalent to "respects freedom".

Either way, I don't see the point of showing examples of people using "free
software friendly" in different ways. The words have a precise meaning, that's
all. How it's generally used and the context association feels irrelevant to me.

-- 
Paul Kocialkowski, developer of low-level free software for embedded devices

Website: https://www.paulk.fr/
Coding blog: https://code.paulk.fr/
Git repositories: https://git.paulk.fr/ https://git.code.paulk.fr/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

From contact at paulk.fr  Tue Aug 16 16:22:41 2016
From: contact at paulk.fr (Paul Kocialkowski)
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 18:22:41 +0200
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <57B33409.2090206@gmail.com>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
 <1471285424.1130.8.camel@replicant.us> <57B20DD1.2030109@ceata.org>
 <1471288981.1177.7.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2C166.90004@ceata.org>
 <1471337020.1216.8.camel@paulk.fr> <57B31CAC.1030602@ceata.org>
 <57B329E3.703@gmail.com> <57B32FAD.7000800@ceata.org>
 <57B33409.2090206@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1471364561.2003.19.camel@paulk.fr>

Le mardi 16 ao?t 2016 ? 16:40 +0100, Josh Branning a ?crit?:
> On 16/08/16 16:22, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
> > On 16.08.2016 17:57, Josh Branning wrote:
> > Quoting the designer, "Full schematics [are] available."
> > https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68/micro-desktop
> > 
> > Please note that in the campaign's text he doesn't specify if the
> > schematics are available under a free license nor he links to the
> > schematics (but he specifies that for the "3D-printed casework design
> > files"; he says that those [are] available under GPLv3 license").
> > However, if this is the specification:
> > 
> > http://elinux.org/Embedded_Open_Modular_Architecture/EOMA-68
> > 
> > then I gather that it's under CC BY-SA 3.0. I couldn't find the
> > schematics PDF Luke was telling us about. Probably he will publish it
> > after his volunteers review it? I don't know.
> 
> I couldn't find them either. If they're CC BY-SA then I guess they are?
> free, and not just open or proprietary. But it's difficult to tell or?
> make any valid assumption without seeing them.

I think it's safe to assume "proprietary unless proven otherwise", since this
is, after all, how copyright works.

> > > In regards to free software friendly, it isn't 100%; totally, as there
> > > is no way to run the GPU using free software. And the same problem
> > > exists if one were to claim it 100% "respects your freedom", so I can't
> > > see how saying something is "free software friendly" is much better, as
> > > the same problem(s) exist(s) in both wordings.
> > 
> > I see your point. But I was asking more, if it makes sense to add "free
> > software friendly" to the list of words to avoid:
> > 
> > https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.en.html
> 
> I think "free software friendly" is fairly synonymous with "respecting?
> freedom".

I really don't think this is a subjective matter: words have a given meaning,
which can be vague or precise, but is well defined. Acting on how people
perceive wording by adding a layer of personal understanding makes it impossible
to draw a line.

> In the event that someone were to create a 100% "free software friendly"?

I don't think "100% free software friendly" makes any sense, because "friendly"
doesn't carry a precise enough meaning here.?

It's like saying that something is "100% easy to achieve": "easy" isn't precise
enough. On the other hand, "100% achievable with a single screwdriver" is.

-- 
Paul Kocialkowski, developer of low-level free software for embedded devices

Website: https://www.paulk.fr/
Coding blog: https://code.paulk.fr/
Git repositories: https://git.paulk.fr/ https://git.code.paulk.fr/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

From tct at ceata.org  Tue Aug 16 16:40:30 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 19:40:30 +0300
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <1471364561.2003.19.camel@paulk.fr>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
 <1471285424.1130.8.camel@replicant.us> <57B20DD1.2030109@ceata.org>
 <1471288981.1177.7.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2C166.90004@ceata.org>
 <1471337020.1216.8.camel@paulk.fr> <57B31CAC.1030602@ceata.org>
 <57B329E3.703@gmail.com> <57B32FAD.7000800@ceata.org>
 <57B33409.2090206@gmail.com> <1471364561.2003.19.camel@paulk.fr>
Message-ID: <57B341FE.5040803@ceata.org>

On 16.08.2016 19:22, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> Le mardi 16 ao?t 2016 ? 16:40 +0100, Josh Branning a ?crit :
>> On 16/08/16 16:22, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
>>> On 16.08.2016 17:57, Josh Branning wrote:
>>> Quoting the designer, "Full schematics [are] available."
>>> https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68/micro-desktop
>>>
>>> Please note that in the campaign's text he doesn't specify if the
>>> schematics are available under a free license nor he links to the
>>> schematics (but he specifies that for the "3D-printed casework design
>>> files"; he says that those [are] available under GPLv3 license").
>>> However, if this is the specification:
>>>
>>> http://elinux.org/Embedded_Open_Modular_Architecture/EOMA-68
>>>
>>> then I gather that it's under CC BY-SA 3.0. I couldn't find the
>>> schematics PDF Luke was telling us about. Probably he will publish it
>>> after his volunteers review it? I don't know.
>>
>> I couldn't find them either. If they're CC BY-SA then I guess they are 
>> free, and not just open or proprietary. But it's difficult to tell or 
>> make any valid assumption without seeing them.
> 
> I think it's safe to assume "proprietary unless proven otherwise", since this
> is, after all, how copyright works.

So I guess both design source files and schematics are nonfree for the
time being.

>>>> In regards to free software friendly, it isn't 100%; totally, as there
>>>> is no way to run the GPU using free software. And the same problem
>>>> exists if one were to claim it 100% "respects your freedom", so I can't
>>>> see how saying something is "free software friendly" is much better, as
>>>> the same problem(s) exist(s) in both wordings.
>>>
>>> I see your point. But I was asking more, if it makes sense to add "free
>>> software friendly" to the list of words to avoid:
>>>
>>> https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.en.html
>>
>> I think "free software friendly" is fairly synonymous with "respecting 
>> freedom".
> 
> I really don't think this is a subjective matter: words have a given meaning,
> which can be vague or precise, but is well defined. Acting on how people
> perceive wording by adding a layer of personal understanding makes it impossible
> to draw a line.

"Friendly" might have a definition:
* (in compounds) Not damaging to, or compatible with (the compounded
noun) E.g. bike-friendly, soil-friendly, dolphin-friendly
- https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/friendly#English

IMO, this definition points to _compatibility_ for technology (bike is
technology, software is technology). So according to that definition, I
conclude that "free software friendly" would mean "compatible with free
software".

Now let's see where we draw the line. Is the RaspberryPi free software
friendly, in other words compatible with free software?

There is no definition for "free software friendly". And people
understandably (looking or not at the definition of "friendly") tend to
consider it synonymous to "software freedom-respecting", and JoshB
confirmed the rule.

What other people think?

Thanks,
Tiberiu

--
https://ceata.org
https://tehnoetic.com


From pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de  Tue Aug 16 18:34:07 2016
From: pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de (pelzflorian (Florian Pelz))
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 20:34:07 +0200
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <57B341FE.5040803@ceata.org>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
 <1471285424.1130.8.camel@replicant.us> <57B20DD1.2030109@ceata.org>
 <1471288981.1177.7.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2C166.90004@ceata.org>
 <1471337020.1216.8.camel@paulk.fr> <57B31CAC.1030602@ceata.org>
 <57B329E3.703@gmail.com> <57B32FAD.7000800@ceata.org>
 <57B33409.2090206@gmail.com> <1471364561.2003.19.camel@paulk.fr>
 <57B341FE.5040803@ceata.org>
Message-ID: <0e06fdb4-f3f3-84f9-508e-c128e320b3a0@pelzflorian.de>

On 08/16/2016 06:40 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
> "Friendly" might have a definition:
> * (in compounds) Not damaging to, or compatible with (the compounded
> noun) E.g. bike-friendly, soil-friendly, dolphin-friendly
> - https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/friendly#English
> 
> IMO, this definition points to _compatibility_ for technology (bike is
> technology, software is technology). So according to that definition, I
> conclude that "free software friendly" would mean "compatible with free
> software".
> 
> Now let's see where we draw the line. Is the RaspberryPi free software
> friendly, in other words compatible with free software?
> 
> There is no definition for "free software friendly". And people
> understandably (looking or not at the definition of "friendly") tend to
> consider it synonymous to "software freedom-respecting", and JoshB
> confirmed the rule.
> 
> What other people think?
> 

There are people (such as you) who consider it possible for ?free
software friendly? to be applied to the Raspberry Pi. The term is
imprecise. The ?line? between friendly and not friendly is fuzzy.
Readers do not know what the author means. Using the term does not go
against the free software principles IMHO like many of the ?words to
avoid? do. Clear wording just seems more appropriate. (?Respects your
freedom? would be equally fuzzy if it were not certified according to
clear criteria.)

On another note, if there is a promise to make the PCB free in the
future, maybe it is best to mention this once confirmed.


From tct at ceata.org  Tue Aug 16 19:06:40 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 22:06:40 +0300
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <0e06fdb4-f3f3-84f9-508e-c128e320b3a0@pelzflorian.de>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
 <1471285424.1130.8.camel@replicant.us> <57B20DD1.2030109@ceata.org>
 <1471288981.1177.7.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2C166.90004@ceata.org>
 <1471337020.1216.8.camel@paulk.fr> <57B31CAC.1030602@ceata.org>
 <57B329E3.703@gmail.com> <57B32FAD.7000800@ceata.org>
 <57B33409.2090206@gmail.com> <1471364561.2003.19.camel@paulk.fr>
 <57B341FE.5040803@ceata.org>
 <0e06fdb4-f3f3-84f9-508e-c128e320b3a0@pelzflorian.de>
Message-ID: <57B36440.5060707@ceata.org>

On 16.08.2016 21:34, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote:
> On 08/16/2016 06:40 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
>> "Friendly" might have a definition:
>> * (in compounds) Not damaging to, or compatible with (the compounded
>> noun) E.g. bike-friendly, soil-friendly, dolphin-friendly
>> - https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/friendly#English
>>
>> IMO, this definition points to _compatibility_ for technology (bike is
>> technology, software is technology). So according to that definition, I
>> conclude that "free software friendly" would mean "compatible with free
>> software".
>>
>> Now let's see where we draw the line. Is the RaspberryPi free software
>> friendly, in other words compatible with free software?
>>
>> There is no definition for "free software friendly". And people
>> understandably (looking or not at the definition of "friendly") tend to
>> consider it synonymous to "software freedom-respecting", and JoshB
>> confirmed the rule.
>>
>> What other people think?
>>
> 
> There are people (such as you) who consider it possible for ?free
> software friendly? to be applied to the Raspberry Pi. The term is
> imprecise. The ?line? between friendly and not friendly is fuzzy.
> Readers do not know what the author means.

I agree.

> Clear wording just seems more appropriate. (?Respects your
> freedom? would be equally fuzzy if it were not certified according to
> clear criteria.)

I agree.

> Using the term does not go
> against the free software principles IMHO like many of the ?words to
> avoid? do.

Thank you for your opinion. Still, don't you think that if people
consider to be OK the hardware labeled as "free software friendly", then
this undermines the importance of high priority projects such as
Libreboot (free BIOS) and Lima/Tamil (free GPU drivers)?

> On another note, if there is a promise to make the PCB free in the
> future, maybe it is best to mention this once confirmed.

I agree.

Thanks,
Tiberiu

PS As previously stated, I'm not a Parabola hacker and I only speak for
myself. My opinion shouldn't count for the consensus.

--
https://ceata.org
https://tehnoetic.com


From contact at paulk.fr  Tue Aug 16 19:14:24 2016
From: contact at paulk.fr (Paul Kocialkowski)
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 21:14:24 +0200
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <0e06fdb4-f3f3-84f9-508e-c128e320b3a0@pelzflorian.de>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
 <1471285424.1130.8.camel@replicant.us> <57B20DD1.2030109@ceata.org>
 <1471288981.1177.7.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2C166.90004@ceata.org>
 <1471337020.1216.8.camel@paulk.fr> <57B31CAC.1030602@ceata.org>
 <57B329E3.703@gmail.com> <57B32FAD.7000800@ceata.org>
 <57B33409.2090206@gmail.com> <1471364561.2003.19.camel@paulk.fr>
 <57B341FE.5040803@ceata.org>
 <0e06fdb4-f3f3-84f9-508e-c128e320b3a0@pelzflorian.de>
Message-ID: <1471374864.2003.22.camel@paulk.fr>

Le mardi 16 ao?t 2016 ? 20:34 +0200, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) a ?crit?:
> (?Respects your freedom? would be equally fuzzy if it were not certified
> according to clear criteria.)

On that, I disagree. Freedom in technology has a very precise definition, and
respecting that definition is very binary and straightforward. I don't see
what's fuzzy about it.

The FSF's RYF certification is instead adding layers of compromises (and also
mixing a bunch of other aspects in the bag). So I certainly wouldn't mix
"respects your freedom" and "the FSF's respect your freedom certification".

-- 
Paul Kocialkowski, developer of low-level free software for embedded devices

Website: https://www.paulk.fr/
Coding blog: https://code.paulk.fr/
Git repositories: https://git.paulk.fr/ https://git.code.paulk.fr/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

From lovell.joshyyy at gmail.com  Tue Aug 16 19:34:17 2016
From: lovell.joshyyy at gmail.com (Josh Branning)
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 20:34:17 +0100
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <1471374864.2003.22.camel@paulk.fr>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
 <1471285424.1130.8.camel@replicant.us> <57B20DD1.2030109@ceata.org>
 <1471288981.1177.7.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2C166.90004@ceata.org>
 <1471337020.1216.8.camel@paulk.fr> <57B31CAC.1030602@ceata.org>
 <57B329E3.703@gmail.com> <57B32FAD.7000800@ceata.org>
 <57B33409.2090206@gmail.com> <1471364561.2003.19.camel@paulk.fr>
 <57B341FE.5040803@ceata.org>
 <0e06fdb4-f3f3-84f9-508e-c128e320b3a0@pelzflorian.de>
 <1471374864.2003.22.camel@paulk.fr>
Message-ID: <57B36AB9.3090706@gmail.com>

On 16/08/16 20:14, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:

>I certainly wouldn't mix
> "respects your freedom" and "the FSF's respect your freedom certification".

So what would you say instead; that is, for a device that is completely 
free in software terms, but hasn't been through the FSF's certification 
process?

___________________________________________________________________

... Either way, I think the conversation is diverging a bit from your 
(IMO) completely valid and excellent point that the parabola news 
article is somewhat misleading, and should really be corrected 
(especially now that we've realised that we can't even find the pdf of 
schematics for the EOMA68 when "libre hardware" is mentioned).


From tct at ceata.org  Tue Aug 16 20:10:00 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 23:10:00 +0300
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <1471374864.2003.22.camel@paulk.fr>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
 <1471285424.1130.8.camel@replicant.us> <57B20DD1.2030109@ceata.org>
 <1471288981.1177.7.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2C166.90004@ceata.org>
 <1471337020.1216.8.camel@paulk.fr> <57B31CAC.1030602@ceata.org>
 <57B329E3.703@gmail.com> <57B32FAD.7000800@ceata.org>
 <57B33409.2090206@gmail.com> <1471364561.2003.19.camel@paulk.fr>
 <57B341FE.5040803@ceata.org>
 <0e06fdb4-f3f3-84f9-508e-c128e320b3a0@pelzflorian.de>
 <1471374864.2003.22.camel@paulk.fr>
Message-ID: <57B37318.8060900@ceata.org>

On 16.08.2016 22:14, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> Le mardi 16 ao?t 2016 ? 20:34 +0200, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) a ?crit :
>> (?Respects your freedom? would be equally fuzzy if it were not certified
>> according to clear criteria.)
> 
> On that, I disagree. Freedom in technology has a very precise definition, and
> respecting that definition is very binary and straightforward. I don't see
> what's fuzzy about it.

At least freedom in software has a very precise definition. I'm not
aware of a hardware freedom definition. But by extension, considering
that hardware is designed and manufactured using a hardware description
language, one can define freedom in hardware as freedom of the hardware
description software. I believe this is the point made in this
relatively recent essay of RMS:

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-hardware-designs.html

It seems freedomdefined.org which hosts the most known and accepted
definition for freedom in culture also hosts a definition for "open
source hardware":

http://freedomdefined.org/OSHW

It's also linked from Open Design Definition at OKFN:

http://design.okfn.org/designdefinition/

I couldn't find a definition for hardware freedom at Hardware Freedom
Day: http://www.hfday.org/

> The FSF's RYF certification is instead adding layers of compromises (and also
> mixing a bunch of other aspects in the bag). So I certainly wouldn't mix
> "respects your freedom" and "the FSF's respect your freedom certification".

Yes, you're right.

I have just received the answer from RMS regarding the use of "free
software friendly":

On 16.08.2016 22:52, Richard Stallman wrote:
>> IMO, we should teach users to avoid this ambiguous term. Instead of
>> "free software friendly", they should use the term "compatible with
>> fully free operating systems" if the hardware is compatible with free
>> distros endorsed by FSF.
>
> I agree.  The FSF could post something about this.  I will suggest it
> to the campaigns people.
>
> In the long term, I hope that our endorsement, RYF, will set a
> standard and that people will come to see other terms, without clear
> and strict definitions as inadequate.

Thanks,
Tiberiu

--
https://ceata.org
https://tehnoetic.com


From pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de  Tue Aug 16 21:37:50 2016
From: pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de (pelzflorian (Florian Pelz))
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 23:37:50 +0200
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <57B36440.5060707@ceata.org>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
 <1471285424.1130.8.camel@replicant.us> <57B20DD1.2030109@ceata.org>
 <1471288981.1177.7.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2C166.90004@ceata.org>
 <1471337020.1216.8.camel@paulk.fr> <57B31CAC.1030602@ceata.org>
 <57B329E3.703@gmail.com> <57B32FAD.7000800@ceata.org>
 <57B33409.2090206@gmail.com> <1471364561.2003.19.camel@paulk.fr>
 <57B341FE.5040803@ceata.org>
 <0e06fdb4-f3f3-84f9-508e-c128e320b3a0@pelzflorian.de>
 <57B36440.5060707@ceata.org>
Message-ID: <18624908-d5ea-7895-2217-074fa5fce9d0@pelzflorian.de>

On 08/16/2016 09:06 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
>> Using the term does not go
>> against the free software principles IMHO like many of the ?words to
>> avoid? do.
> 
> Thank you for your opinion. Still, don't you think that if people
> consider to be OK the hardware labeled as "free software friendly", then
> this undermines the importance of high priority projects such as
> Libreboot (free BIOS) and Lima/Tamil (free GPU drivers)?
> 

We could probably list better words for each use case of ?free software
friendly?: ?Hardware that is compatible with free software?, ?free
hardware?, etc. My concern however is that with this precedent, every
fuzzy word would need to be added to the list of ?words to avoid?.

> PS As previously stated, I'm not a Parabola hacker and I only speak for
> myself. My opinion shouldn't count for the consensus.
> 

Me neither.



From nobody at parabola.nu  Tue Aug 16 23:35:35 2016
From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification)
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 23:35:35 -0000
Subject: [Dev] Orphan Libre package [linux-libre] marked out-of-date
Message-ID: <20160816233535.1343.56106@parabola.nu>

jm.100best at hotmail.com wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date:


* linux-libre 4.7_gnu-1 [libre] (armv7h): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/armv7h/linux-libre/
* linux-libre 4.7_gnu-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre/
* linux-libre 4.7_gnu-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre/
* linux-libre-docs 4.7_gnu-1 [libre] (armv7h): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/armv7h/linux-libre-docs/
* linux-libre-docs 4.7_gnu-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre-docs/
* linux-libre-docs 4.7_gnu-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre-docs/
* linux-libre-headers 4.7_gnu-1 [libre] (armv7h): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/armv7h/linux-libre-headers/
* linux-libre-headers 4.7_gnu-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre-headers/
* linux-libre-headers 4.7_gnu-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre-headers/


The user provided the following additional text:

Latest stable is 4.7.1



From nobody at parabola.nu  Wed Aug 17 14:18:53 2016
From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification)
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:18:53 -0000
Subject: [Dev] Orphan Libre package [linux-libre-pck] marked out-of-date
Message-ID: <20160817141853.1344.75809@parabola.nu>

jackdon at ruggedinbox.com wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date:


* linux-libre-pck 4.6.5_gnu.pck1-1 [libre] (armv7h): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/armv7h/linux-libre-pck/
* linux-libre-pck 4.6.5_gnu.pck1-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre-pck/
* linux-libre-pck 4.6.5_gnu.pck1-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre-pck/
* linux-libre-pck-docs 4.6.5_gnu.pck1-1 [libre] (armv7h): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/armv7h/linux-libre-pck-docs/
* linux-libre-pck-docs 4.6.5_gnu.pck1-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre-pck-docs/
* linux-libre-pck-docs 4.6.5_gnu.pck1-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre-pck-docs/
* linux-libre-pck-headers 4.6.5_gnu.pck1-1 [libre] (armv7h): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/armv7h/linux-libre-pck-headers/
* linux-libre-pck-headers 4.6.5_gnu.pck1-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre-pck-headers/
* linux-libre-pck-headers 4.6.5_gnu.pck1-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre-pck-headers/


The user provided the following additional text:

Update to 4.7.x would be nice



From contact at paulk.fr  Wed Aug 17 18:25:43 2016
From: contact at paulk.fr (Paul Kocialkowski)
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 20:25:43 +0200
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <57B36AB9.3090706@gmail.com>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
 <1471285424.1130.8.camel@replicant.us> <57B20DD1.2030109@ceata.org>
 <1471288981.1177.7.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2C166.90004@ceata.org>
 <1471337020.1216.8.camel@paulk.fr> <57B31CAC.1030602@ceata.org>
 <57B329E3.703@gmail.com> <57B32FAD.7000800@ceata.org>
 <57B33409.2090206@gmail.com> <1471364561.2003.19.camel@paulk.fr>
 <57B341FE.5040803@ceata.org>
 <0e06fdb4-f3f3-84f9-508e-c128e320b3a0@pelzflorian.de>
 <1471374864.2003.22.camel@paulk.fr> <57B36AB9.3090706@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1471458343.1302.7.camel@paulk.fr>

Le mardi 16 ao?t 2016 ? 20:34 +0100, Josh Branning a ?crit?:
> On 16/08/16 20:14, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> 
> > 
> > I certainly wouldn't mix
> > "respects your freedom" and "the FSF's respect your freedom certification".
> 
> So what would you say instead; that is, for a device that is completely?
> free in software terms, but hasn't been through the FSF's certification?
> process?

"runs with fully free software" means something precise, I don't see any problem
with it. But of course, it doesn't apply here.

> ___________________________________________________________________
> 
> ... Either way, I think the conversation is diverging a bit from your?
> (IMO) completely valid and excellent point that the parabola news?
> article is somewhat misleading, and should really be corrected?
> (especially now that we've realised that we can't even find the pdf of?
> schematics for the EOMA68 when "libre hardware" is mentioned).

Okay so we should try to come up with suggestions for each sentence that I
quoted in the first email, that don't use "freedom-friendly" since the consensus
is to avoid that term.

Any propositions?

-- 
Paul Kocialkowski, developer of low-level free software for embedded devices

Website: https://www.paulk.fr/
Coding blog: https://code.paulk.fr/
Git repositories: https://git.paulk.fr/ https://git.code.paulk.fr/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

From isacdaavid at isacdaavid.info  Wed Aug 17 19:16:25 2016
From: isacdaavid at isacdaavid.info (Isaac David)
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:16:25 -0500
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <1471458343.1302.7.camel@paulk.fr>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr>
 <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org> <1471285424.1130.8.camel@replicant.us>
 <57B20DD1.2030109@ceata.org> <1471288981.1177.7.camel@paulk.fr>
 <57B2C166.90004@ceata.org> <1471337020.1216.8.camel@paulk.fr>
 <57B31CAC.1030602@ceata.org> <57B329E3.703@gmail.com>
 <57B32FAD.7000800@ceata.org> <57B33409.2090206@gmail.com>
 <1471364561.2003.19.camel@paulk.fr> <57B341FE.5040803@ceata.org>
 <0e06fdb4-f3f3-84f9-508e-c128e320b3a0@pelzflorian.de>
 <1471374864.2003.22.camel@paulk.fr> <57B36AB9.3090706@gmail.com>
 <1471458343.1302.7.camel@paulk.fr>
Message-ID: <1471461385.934.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info>


Le mer. 17 ao?t 2016 ? 13:25, Paul Kocialkowski  a 
?crit :
> Okay so we should try to come up with suggestions for each sentence 
> that I
> quoted in the first email, that don't use "freedom-friendly" since 
> the consensus
> is to avoid that term.
> 
> Any propositions?

I have copied the full Markdown text to a collaborative pad:

https://pad.partidopirata.com.ar/p/parabola-eoma

LibreJS users will notice some scripts are blocked, but it is OK to
accept them, they are free like the rest of Etherpad.

Everyone can join and help revise it there, or bring it to this thread
plus your changes and comments.

--
isacdaavid



From gnu_tesla at riseup.net  Wed Aug 17 23:13:41 2016
From: gnu_tesla at riseup.net (gnu_tesla)
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 20:13:41 -0300
Subject: [Dev] =?utf-8?q?Presentaci=C3=B3n?=
In-Reply-To: <561712FA.3070205@riseup.net>
References: <5616D0B6.6080104@riseup.net> <561712FA.3070205@riseup.net>
Message-ID: 

I apologize for leaving it so long since my last email, I had a few
problems but now I had solved. I have carefully read the documentation
suggested by Andr?. You still need man power to build armv7 packages? As
we continue? ;)

On 08/10/15 22:06, Andr? Silva wrote:
> On 10/08/2015 05:23 PM, gnu_tesla wrote:
>> Hello. The reason for this email is to offer my help to Parabola
>> project. I have programming skills to use as a hobby, I'm not a
>> programmer (I have a basic level of Python, PHP, SQL, HTML, and
>> intermediate in C and bash scripting), <
>> span id="result_box" class="" lang="en">I study courses of linux
>> operator, network, sysadmin, ethical hacking, LAMP, etc, for
>> curiosity. My current job is a teacher in physics and mathematics. My
>> idea is to help in the most need, I have no trouble learning to pack
>> or maintain the web, check licenses
>> , to translate things, etc .... Best Regards
> 
> Hi gnu_tesla, you're welcome!! Recently, we put a announcement that we
> are supporting ARMv7 for Parabola [0]. We need man power to
> maintain/build/port packages for it, do you like help us on it? if you
> haven't a ARMv7 machine, it isn't a problem since that you can build it
> from a x86 machine [1] :)
> 
> P.D. Now we put U-Boot support for SBCs boards and GRUB for EFI machine,
> but i would create uboot-grub package to give GRUB support for SBCs
> boards too, coadde wrote a email [2] to get help from grub devs. BTW we
> are creating qemu-linaro to emulate more arm boards as BeagleBone for do
> testing in virtual machines.
> 
> [0]:https://www.parabola.nu/news/parabola-supports-armv7/
> [1]:https://wiki.parabola.nu/Building_armv7h_packages_on_a_x86_system
> [2]:https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/help-grub/2015-10/msg00015.html
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> Dev at lists.parabola.nu
> https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev
> 


From lukeshu at sbcglobal.net  Thu Aug 18 01:02:16 2016
From: lukeshu at sbcglobal.net (Luke Shumaker)
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 21:02:16 -0400
Subject: [Dev] [FYI] new git repo management command: change-default-branch
Message-ID: <87mvkaubxj.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net>

git at git.parabola.nu has learned the command 'change-default-branch'.
As it will tell you when you run it, it may take some time to be
reflected in the web interface, because of caching.

Relatedly, git-meta now tracks which branche is the default for each
repo.

-- 
Happy hacking,
~ Luke Shumaker


From nobody at parabola.nu  Fri Aug 19 11:56:27 2016
From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification)
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 11:56:27 -0000
Subject: [Dev] Orphan Libre package [icecat] marked out-of-date
Message-ID: <20160819115627.1343.43989@parabola.nu>

jackdon at ruggedinbox.com wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date:


* icecat 38.8.0_gnu2-2 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/icecat/
* icecat 38.8.0_gnu2-2 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/icecat/
* icecat-debug 38.8.0_gnu2-2 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/icecat-debug/
* icecat-debug 38.8.0_gnu2-2 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/icecat-debug/


The user provided the following additional text:

Icecat update incoming (http://jenkins.trisquel.info/icecat/icecat-45.3.0-gnu1.tar.bz2)



From fauno at endefensadelsl.org  Fri Aug 19 12:49:47 2016
From: fauno at endefensadelsl.org (fauno)
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 09:49:47 -0300
Subject: [Dev] [consensus][due: 2016-08-18] change mailman admins
In-Reply-To: <87r3a4psob.fsf@endefensadelsl.org>
References: <87r3a4psob.fsf@endefensadelsl.org>
Message-ID: <87h9agapp0.fsf@endefensadelsl.org>

fauno  writes:

> [ Unknown signature status ]
>
> hey! i've been mailman admin for a long time and i receive blocked
> messages all the time, but i don't have the time myself to decide wether
> to approbe them or not, or make necessary changes.

i just gave mariqueerta, joshua and isaac admin privileges on the
following lists:

* dev
* mailman
* assist
* maintenance

-- 
.o?)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 584 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

From GNUtoo at no-log.org  Fri Aug 19 01:09:03 2016
From: GNUtoo at no-log.org (Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli)
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 03:09:03 +0200
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <57B2C166.90004@ceata.org>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
 <1471285424.1130.8.camel@replicant.us> <57B20DD1.2030109@ceata.org>
 <1471288981.1177.7.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2C166.90004@ceata.org>
Message-ID: <20160819030903.552d6124.GNUtoo@no-log.org>

On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 10:31:50 +0300
Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic  wrote:

> To draw a parallel between "free software friendly" and
> "eco-friendly", yes, I believe Purism has pioneered the practice of
> "software freedom washing", similar to greenwashing :-)
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenwashing
Indeed, "free software friendly" is way too vague.
It could be applied to almost any hardware (or software) that can run
some free software somehow.
Any hardware or software which permits or promotes the use of free
software on or with it could be called "free software friendly".

We could instead use some other terms such as:
1) Fully compatible with free software: It fits well RYF hardware.
2) Can run fully free software: It fits more the EOMA68.

However we should make it clear enough for people not to make confusion
between (1) and (2).

Denis.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: 

From GNUtoo at no-log.org  Fri Aug 19 13:55:48 2016
From: GNUtoo at no-log.org (Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli)
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 15:55:48 +0200
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: 
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
 
Message-ID: <20160819155548.3dd753b5.GNUtoo@no-log.org>

On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 20:15:00 +0100
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton  wrote:

> the PCB layout file - the complex part that, if somebody were to use
> it to **RIGHT NOW** place an order for 500 PCBs thus throwing this
> entire campaign into jeapoardy.... yes.
I never designed a PCB, so I've no idea if the "PCB layout file" is
enough to fab a board, or if you also need to adjust/tune the tools at
the factory somehow before making a big run.

However I don't see why some competitor would bother producing boards
right now.

See "Developing an Open Source Laptop" at 18 min 55s for a real world
example.

References:
-----------
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oVS8CCdSAs
    The video can be downloaded with youtube-dl.

Denis.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: 

From tct at ceata.org  Fri Aug 19 14:14:20 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 17:14:20 +0300
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <20160819030903.552d6124.GNUtoo@no-log.org>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org>
 <1471285424.1130.8.camel@replicant.us> <57B20DD1.2030109@ceata.org>
 <1471288981.1177.7.camel@paulk.fr> <57B2C166.90004@ceata.org>
 <20160819030903.552d6124.GNUtoo@no-log.org>
Message-ID: <57B7143C.2030107@ceata.org>

On 19.08.2016 04:09, Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli wrote:
> Indeed, "free software friendly" is way too vague.
> It could be applied to almost any hardware (or software) that can run
> some free software somehow.

Indeed.

> Any hardware or software which permits or promotes the use of free
> software on or with it could be called "free software friendly".

Yes, I'm afraid so. Essentially, according to the definition, "free
software friendly" means "free software compatible" but that's also too
vague (in what way compatible, how much compatible etc).

> We could instead use some other terms such as:
> 1) Fully compatible with free software: It fits well RYF hardware.

As Paul has pointed out, RYF-certified hardware is not necessarily fully
compatible with free software. But at least there is a list of criteria
to judge if a piece of hardware is RYF-certifiable and ultimately it's
FSF's decision if they offer the certification for that hardware, and
then you can call that hardware RYF-certified.

There are some compromises to software freedom in FSF's criteria.
Non-upgradeable/non-replaceable firmware being seen as hardware, for
instance. The reasoning is based on the practical consequences and not
the implementation (as hardware or as non-upgradeable/non-replaceable
firmware).

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-hardware-designs.html#boundary

For the EOMA68 there is probably going to be made the compromise it has
been announced, this time in a form of an exception to the FSF's RYF
certification criteria (so they won't modify the list of criteria).

I'm taking of course about the graphics. Is it "free software
compatible"? Not fully. For office work, the EOMA68 is probably free
software compatible, but it's definitely not for entertainment which
involves 3D acceleration.

> 2) Can run fully free software: It fits more the EOMA68.

I don't think this is a well-defined criteria to judge hardware. We
always have to think what hardware features will be missing when using
fully distros and especially when running fully free software.

Just because it boots and you can do some work with the computer (but
not 3D acceleration, or for other hardware, not be able to connect to
WiFi, or Bluetooth) it doesn't mean it can run fully free software.

IMO, EOMA68 should be presented as RYF-certifiable by FSF and then go
into details of what works with free software and the one thing that
doesn't.

Tiberiu

--
https://ceata.org
https://tehnoetic.com


From isacdaavid at isacdaavid.info  Sat Aug 20 01:20:44 2016
From: isacdaavid at isacdaavid.info (Isaac David)
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 20:20:44 -0500
Subject: [Dev] [PATCH abslibre] pacman: Get architecture from CARCH
 instead of auto
In-Reply-To: <20160815164618.9855-1-contact@paulk.fr>
References: <20160815164618.9855-1-contact@paulk.fr>
Message-ID: <1471656044.2734.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Hello Paul,

This was bug https://labs.parabola.nu/issues/1039, thanks
for reminding me of it.

Were you able to test this configuration? Behind the scenes
ALARM (should I say AGLARM?) is also doing some extra sed
magic to substitute @CARCH@ with a hard-coded value at build
time; so I can almost tell there's no way of using 'auto' or
anything equivalent under AGLARM. Pacman does use the value
of uname -m with 'auto' though, which raises the question:
how did AGLARM come about giving the architecture this name?

The hack makes sense for them, because they chose to use a
single pacman.conf template for all the architectures they
maintain; but we have multiple files, like Arch does, in
abslibre and therefore can afford just hard-coding "armv7h"
in there. That's exactly what I did.

All the best.

- --isacdaavid

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
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=jHkV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



From lukeshu at sbcglobal.net  Sat Aug 20 04:49:03 2016
From: lukeshu at sbcglobal.net (Luke Shumaker)
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 00:49:03 -0400
Subject: [Dev] [FYI] Wiki article with guidelines for icon directory
Message-ID: <87vaywdozk.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net>

I was packaging flpsed, and I didn't really know whether to put the
icons in /usr/share/pixmaps or /usr/share/icons.  So I did research.
And then wrote up a wiki article with guidlines for making the choice!

https://wiki.parabola.nu/Hacking:Pixmaps_vs_Icons

-- 
Happy hacking,
~ Luke Shumaker


From nobody at parabola.nu  Sat Aug 20 16:46:34 2016
From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification)
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 16:46:34 -0000
Subject: [Dev] Orphan Libre package [cups-filters] marked out-of-date
Message-ID: <20160820164634.1344.950@parabola.nu>

alessi at robertalessi.net wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date:


* cups-filters 1.10.0-2.parabola1 [libre] (armv7h): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/armv7h/cups-filters/
* cups-filters 1.10.0-2.parabola1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/cups-filters/
* cups-filters 1.10.0-2.parabola1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/cups-filters/


The user provided the following additional text:

Hi,

I think that cups-filter should be updated: this version uses poppler-0.46.0, but poppler-0.47.0 is out.

Many thanks to the maintainers,

Robert



From lukeshu at sbcglobal.net  Sat Aug 20 21:25:37 2016
From: lukeshu at sbcglobal.net (Luke Shumaker)
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 17:25:37 -0400
Subject: [Dev] Parabola Newsletter August 2016
Message-ID: <87twefdtf2.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net>

Parabola Newsletter for August 2016
===================================

Things that have happened since July's newsletter:

 - proton.parabola.nu performance issues resolved

   Proton is the server that most of the Parabola services are
   currently on (the notable exception being git, which is on
   Winston)... but had been suffering from severe performance issues
   for several months.

   The short version of the story is that it's Luke Shumaker's fault.
   We've known for a while that the performance issues were related to
   terrible disk I/O performance.  It turns out that the root cause of
   this was unionfs, which was set up by Luke.  What we don't know is
   why this only became an issue recently; unionfs had been in place
   on the server for more than a year before it ever became an issue.
   The resolution was detailed on the mailing list when it
   happened[0]; the short version is that we configured all of the
   software to bypass unionfs if possible without extensive patching.

   [0]: https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/2016-July/004242.html

 - Repomirror is prime-time

   Related to reducing the load on Proton, repo.parabola.nu now
   redirects to repomirror.parabola.nu unless it sees "noredirect" in
   the HTTP query string.

 - Experiments with Configuration Management Systems

   Last month we wrote that we'd been writing extensive documentation
   on how winston.parabola.nu was being configured.

   To be able to easily tranfer parts of this between the two servers,
   Luke Shumaker thought it would be neat to use a configuration
   management system to have each section of the documentation be a
   module that can be installed.

   We evaluated Holo[1], which creates configuration modules that are
   native system packages.  However, the syntax didn't seem offer much
   beyond what could easily be done in a PKGBUILD (though it would be
   valueable for dpkg or rpm based systems), so we opted to just write
   PKGBUILDs.

   We have a repository of configuration modules on Winston[2], and
   have deployed several of them on both Winston and Proton.

   Doing this, we have become aware of several shortcomings of the
   approach; namely being able to edit files owned by other packages,
   such as /etc/passwd.  Holo provides methods for this, which we may
   end up adopting; however, for now Holo's mechanisms seem to
   "magical", while still not providing a mechanism to say, chown a
   directory to a different user.

   The PKGBUILDs are written in a litterate style; the body of them is
   copied directly from the documentation they are based on.  We would
   like to be able to process them back into wiki articles, and have
   the whole thing be automated; having only a single source of truth.

   [1]: http://holocm.org/
   [2]: https://winston.parabola.nu/config/

 - FISL17 conference

   As mentioned in July's newsletter, Parabola participated as planned
   in the FISL conference on July 13-16.

   Andr? Silva ("Emulatorman") and M?rcio Silva ("coadde") presented
   on July 13, at 16:00 (UTC-3).

   Video/slides should be online (on the wiki) soon-ish.

 - Software e Cultura no Brasil seminary

   Parabola participated in Software e Cultura no Brasil, the Free
   Software seminary organized by the Federal University of ABC in S?o
   Bernardo do Campo, Brazil on August 15-16 2016.

   Andr? Silva ("Emulatorman") presented on August 16, at 10:00
   (UTC-3).

   Video/slides should be online (on the wiki) soon-ish.

   (If Luke Shumaker had his shit together and published the
   newsletter on a reasonable date, we would be announcing that we
   would be participating, not that we had already participated.)

 - notsystemd

   As part of the "nonsystemd" initiative to make Parabola work well
   with init systems other than systemd, Luke Shumaker has been
   working on a fork of systemd called "notsystemd"[3], in the spirit
   of Gentoo's eudev[4] or GuixSD's elogind[5], but larger in scope.
   The goal of notsystemd is to take each of the many components of
   systemd, and decouple them, making them each usable on its own,
   without the rest of systemd.  To paraphrase the elogind
   documentation, we think than many of these components are
   excellent, and that everyone deserves to run them if they like,
   regardless of their choice of PID1.

   More concrete motivation for this is that the Parabla developer
   tools "libretools" are build on systemd-nspawn, and we would like
   to be able to use the tools on OpenRC systems.

   This has been going on for a while now, but hadn't been written
   about.  It is not ready yet, and we don't have a timeline in place.

   [3]: https://git.parabola.nu/~lukeshu/systemd.git/tree/?h=notsystemd/master
   [4]: https://github.com/gentoo/eudev / https://www.parabola.nu/packages/pcr/x86_64/eudev/
   [5]: https://github.com/wingo/elogind / https://www.parabola.nu/packages/pcr/x86_64/elogind/

Things that we hoped to do since the last newsletter that we didn't
do:

 - autobuilder

   Just didn't get around to it.

Things that we hope to accomplish in the next month:

 - autobuilder (for real)

   (to copy/paste from July's newsletter)

   Hopefully we'll get autobuilder running on winston soon, to relieve
   pressure on Parabola developers with simple packages like
   parabola-keyring, your-freedom, et c.

   As of right now, there are no concrete plans to turn autobuilder
   into a more complete build server, but that is something we are
   interested in doing in the future.

   https://git.parabola.nu/server/autobuilder.git/

 - Migrate more things from Proton to Winston.

   Winston's just generally a beefier server (more RAM, more cores).
   Moving things to it would be nice.

-- 
the Parabola development team


From lukeshu at sbcglobal.net  Sat Aug 20 21:31:04 2016
From: lukeshu at sbcglobal.net (Luke Shumaker)
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 17:31:04 -0400
Subject: [Dev] Parabola Newsletter August 2016
In-Reply-To: <87twefdtf2.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net>
References: <87twefdtf2.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net>
Message-ID: <87shtzdt5z.wl-lukeshu@sbcglobal.net>

On Sat, 20 Aug 2016 17:25:37 -0400,
Luke Shumaker wrote:
> Things that we hope to accomplish in the next month:

Oh, how could we forget to mention:

 - Separate newsletter mailing list

   Several people have requested a separate mailing list for the
   newsletter, as they are interested in it, but don't want to
   subscribe to dev at .  Hopefully we'll do this soon.

--
the Parabola development team


From emulatorman at riseup.net  Sun Aug 21 00:54:51 2016
From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Andr=c3=a9_Silva?=)
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 21:54:51 -0300
Subject: [Dev] [News][Software e Cultura no Brasil] Seminary and
 presentation videos are available!
Message-ID: <7f06d2cd-adc0-d612-e7e1-da285a542575@riseup.net>

We're very happy to announce that we have some recorded moments of our
participation available in Parabola.

Further details:

 * Seminary (in Portuguese language) [0]
 * Parabola presentation [1]

[0]:https://wiki.parabola.nu/images/4/49/Parabola_seminary_2016.webm
[1]:https://wiki.parabola.nu/images/c/c4/Parabola_presentation_2016.webm

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: 

From nobody at parabola.nu  Sun Aug 21 06:30:51 2016
From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification)
Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 06:30:51 -0000
Subject: [Dev] Orphan Libre package [linux-libre-lts] marked out-of-date
Message-ID: <20160821063051.1344.27771@parabola.nu>

sa1904sa at gmail.com wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date:


* linux-libre-lts 4.4.16_gnu-1 [libre] (armv7h): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/armv7h/linux-libre-lts/
* linux-libre-lts 4.4.16_gnu-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre-lts/
* linux-libre-lts 4.4.16_gnu-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre-lts/
* linux-libre-lts-docs 4.4.16_gnu-1 [libre] (armv7h): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/armv7h/linux-libre-lts-docs/
* linux-libre-lts-docs 4.4.16_gnu-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre-lts-docs/
* linux-libre-lts-docs 4.4.16_gnu-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre-lts-docs/
* linux-libre-lts-headers 4.4.16_gnu-1 [libre] (armv7h): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/armv7h/linux-libre-lts-headers/
* linux-libre-lts-headers 4.4.16_gnu-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre-lts-headers/
* linux-libre-lts-headers 4.4.16_gnu-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre-lts-headers/


The user provided the following additional text:

Release 4.4.18 which is LTS too



From nobody at parabola.nu  Sun Aug 21 08:27:02 2016
From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification)
Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 08:27:02 -0000
Subject: [Dev] Orphan Pcr package [guix] marked out-of-date
Message-ID: <20160821082702.1343.62366@parabola.nu>

emas at openmailbox.org wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date:


* guix 0.10.0-1 [pcr] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/pcr/i686/guix/
* guix 0.10.0-1 [pcr] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/pcr/x86_64/guix/


The user provided the following additional text:

there is a new version of guix



From quiliro at riseup.net  Sun Aug 21 14:07:49 2016
From: quiliro at riseup.net (Quiliro Ordonez)
Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 09:07:49 -0500
Subject: [Dev] [News][Software e Cultura no Brasil] Seminary and
 presentation videos are available!
In-Reply-To: 
References: 
Message-ID: <7621993f34456c79866b94691f03e85e@riseup.net>

Beautiful presentation Emulatorman and Coade. Congratulations. It is 
very professional!


From emulatorman at riseup.net  Sun Aug 21 14:22:22 2016
From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Andr=c3=a9_Silva?=)
Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 11:22:22 -0300
Subject: [Dev] [News][Software e Cultura no Brasil] Seminary and
 presentation videos are available!
In-Reply-To: <7621993f34456c79866b94691f03e85e@riseup.net>
References: 
 <7621993f34456c79866b94691f03e85e@riseup.net>
Message-ID: 

On 08/21/2016 11:07 AM, Quiliro Ordonez wrote:
> Beautiful presentation Emulatorman and Coade. Congratulations. It is
> very professional!

You're welcome Quiliro, the cool part of that seminary was to see the
public in the university excited and shocked after seeing our video
presentation. :)


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: 

From ebrasca.ebrasca at gmail.com  Sun Aug 21 18:05:22 2016
From: ebrasca.ebrasca at gmail.com (Bruno Cichon)
Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 20:05:22 +0200
Subject: [Dev] =?utf-8?q?Servidor_para_copilar_de_forma_autom=C3=A1tica_de?=
 =?utf-8?q?_paquetes=2E?=
Message-ID: <31dd80e3-d4b1-25d1-ff8b-f36572816dba@gmail.com>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Opino que a Parabola le vendr?a bien un servidor para copilar los
paquetes de forma autom?tica.

Tal servidor ayudar?a a Parabola debido a que se podr?a dedicar mas
esfuerzo a partes mas importantes.

Planeo mantener el servidor en mi casa.

?Cuanta conexi?n a Internet aria falta para su debido funcionamiento?

?Tienen idea de como se realiza la instalaci?n de la bios libre?


Pienso que esta placa es la adecuada debido a la compatibilidad con
libreboot.

ASUS KGPE-D16 : https://libreboot.org/docs/hcl/kgpe-d16.html

Soporta 32 cores y 256 gb ram
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
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=KDEb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


From nobody at parabola.nu  Mon Aug 22 02:40:07 2016
From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification)
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 02:40:07 -0000
Subject: [Dev] Orphan Libre package [iceweasel] marked out-of-date
Message-ID: <20160822024007.1344.42610@parabola.nu>

eliotime3000 at openmailbox.org wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date:


* iceweasel 1:48.0.deb1-3 [libre] (armv7h): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/armv7h/iceweasel/
* iceweasel 1:48.0.deb1-2 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/iceweasel/
* iceweasel 1:48.0.deb1-2 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/iceweasel/
* iceweasel-debug 1:48.0.deb1-3 [libre] (armv7h): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/armv7h/iceweasel-debug/
* iceweasel-debug 1:48.0.deb1-2 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/iceweasel-debug/
* iceweasel-debug 1:48.0.deb1-2 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/iceweasel-debug/


The user provided the following additional text:

Firefox has released a update patch. Please. update them to 48.0.1 of the Iceweasel release branch >> https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/notes/



From nobody at parabola.nu  Mon Aug 22 02:40:35 2016
From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification)
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 02:40:35 -0000
Subject: [Dev] Orphan Libre package [iceweasel-l10n-es-ar] marked out-of-date
Message-ID: <20160822024035.1343.29630@parabola.nu>

eliotime3000 at openmailbox.org wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date:


* iceweasel-l10n-ach 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-ach/
* iceweasel-l10n-af 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-af/
* iceweasel-l10n-an 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-an/
* iceweasel-l10n-ar 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-ar/
* iceweasel-l10n-as 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-as/
* iceweasel-l10n-ast 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-ast/
* iceweasel-l10n-az 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-az/
* iceweasel-l10n-be 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-be/
* iceweasel-l10n-bg 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-bg/
* iceweasel-l10n-bn-bd 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-bn-bd/
* iceweasel-l10n-bn-in 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-bn-in/
* iceweasel-l10n-br 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-br/
* iceweasel-l10n-bs 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-bs/
* iceweasel-l10n-ca 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-ca/
* iceweasel-l10n-cs 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-cs/
* iceweasel-l10n-cy 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-cy/
* iceweasel-l10n-da 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-da/
* iceweasel-l10n-de 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-de/
* iceweasel-l10n-dsb 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-dsb/
* iceweasel-l10n-el 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-el/
* iceweasel-l10n-en-gb 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-en-gb/
* iceweasel-l10n-en-za 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-en-za/
* iceweasel-l10n-eo 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-eo/
* iceweasel-l10n-es-ar 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-es-ar/
* iceweasel-l10n-es-cl 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-es-cl/
* iceweasel-l10n-es-es 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-es-es/
* iceweasel-l10n-es-mx 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-es-mx/
* iceweasel-l10n-et 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-et/
* iceweasel-l10n-eu 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-eu/
* iceweasel-l10n-fa 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-fa/
* iceweasel-l10n-ff 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-ff/
* iceweasel-l10n-fi 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-fi/
* iceweasel-l10n-fr 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-fr/
* iceweasel-l10n-fy-nl 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-fy-nl/
* iceweasel-l10n-ga-ie 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-ga-ie/
* iceweasel-l10n-gd 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-gd/
* iceweasel-l10n-gl 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-gl/
* iceweasel-l10n-gn 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-gn/
* iceweasel-l10n-gu-in 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-gu-in/
* iceweasel-l10n-he 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-he/
* iceweasel-l10n-hi-in 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-hi-in/
* iceweasel-l10n-hr 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-hr/
* iceweasel-l10n-hsb 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-hsb/
* iceweasel-l10n-hu 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-hu/
* iceweasel-l10n-hy-am 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-hy-am/
* iceweasel-l10n-id 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-id/
* iceweasel-l10n-is 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-is/
* iceweasel-l10n-it 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-it/
* iceweasel-l10n-ja 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-ja/
* iceweasel-l10n-kk 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-kk/
* iceweasel-l10n-km 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-km/
* iceweasel-l10n-kn 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-kn/
* iceweasel-l10n-ko 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-ko/
* iceweasel-l10n-lij 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-lij/
* iceweasel-l10n-lt 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-lt/
* iceweasel-l10n-lv 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-lv/
* iceweasel-l10n-mai 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-mai/
* iceweasel-l10n-mk 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-mk/
* iceweasel-l10n-ml 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-ml/
* iceweasel-l10n-mr 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-mr/
* iceweasel-l10n-ms 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-ms/
* iceweasel-l10n-nb-no 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-nb-no/
* iceweasel-l10n-nl 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-nl/
* iceweasel-l10n-nn-no 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-nn-no/
* iceweasel-l10n-or 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-or/
* iceweasel-l10n-pa-in 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-pa-in/
* iceweasel-l10n-pl 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-pl/
* iceweasel-l10n-pt-br 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-pt-br/
* iceweasel-l10n-pt-pt 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-pt-pt/
* iceweasel-l10n-rm 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-rm/
* iceweasel-l10n-ro 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-ro/
* iceweasel-l10n-ru 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-ru/
* iceweasel-l10n-si 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-si/
* iceweasel-l10n-sk 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-sk/
* iceweasel-l10n-sl 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-sl/
* iceweasel-l10n-son 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-son/
* iceweasel-l10n-sq 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-sq/
* iceweasel-l10n-sr 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-sr/
* iceweasel-l10n-sv-se 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-sv-se/
* iceweasel-l10n-ta 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-ta/
* iceweasel-l10n-te 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-te/
* iceweasel-l10n-th 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-th/
* iceweasel-l10n-tr 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-tr/
* iceweasel-l10n-uk 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-uk/
* iceweasel-l10n-uz 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-uz/
* iceweasel-l10n-vi 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-vi/
* iceweasel-l10n-xh 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-xh/
* iceweasel-l10n-zh-cn 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-zh-cn/
* iceweasel-l10n-zh-tw 1:48.0.deb1-1 [libre] (any): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/any/iceweasel-l10n-zh-tw/


The user provided the following additional text:

Firefox has released a update patch. Please. update them to 48.0.1 of the Iceweasel release branch >> https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/notes/



From nobody at parabola.nu  Mon Aug 22 03:31:04 2016
From: nobody at parabola.nu (Parabola Website Notification)
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 03:31:04 -0000
Subject: [Dev] Orphan Libre package [linux-libre-grsec] marked out-of-date
Message-ID: <20160822033104.1344.73105@parabola.nu>

jc_gargma at iserlohn-fortress.net wants to notify you that the following packages may be out-of-date:


* linux-libre-grsec 4.7.1_gnu.201608161813-1 [libre] (armv7h): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/armv7h/linux-libre-grsec/
* linux-libre-grsec 4.7.1_gnu.201608161813-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre-grsec/
* linux-libre-grsec 4.7.1_gnu.201608161813-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre-grsec/
* linux-libre-grsec-docs 4.7.1_gnu.201608161813-1 [libre] (armv7h): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/armv7h/linux-libre-grsec-docs/
* linux-libre-grsec-docs 4.7.1_gnu.201608161813-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre-grsec-docs/
* linux-libre-grsec-docs 4.7.1_gnu.201608161813-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre-grsec-docs/
* linux-libre-grsec-headers 4.7.1_gnu.201608161813-1 [libre] (armv7h): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/armv7h/linux-libre-grsec-headers/
* linux-libre-grsec-headers 4.7.1_gnu.201608161813-1 [libre] (i686): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/i686/linux-libre-grsec-headers/
* linux-libre-grsec-headers 4.7.1_gnu.201608161813-1 [libre] (x86_64): https://parabolagnulinux.org/packages/libre/x86_64/linux-libre-grsec-headers/


The user provided the following additional text:

Grsecurity has released a patch for 4.7.2



From gnu_tesla at riseup.net  Mon Aug 22 13:38:48 2016
From: gnu_tesla at riseup.net (gnu_tesla)
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 10:38:48 -0300
Subject: [Dev] Wiki - spanish translations
Message-ID: <58522ae7-c41c-fa22-3179-f0c2f5fec9e4@riseup.net>

Hi everyone. I was editing the wiki in Spanish and translating some
articles (e.g.Adhocracy) and upgrading others (e.g. Mainpage, Parabola
Social Contract). If anyone has any suggestions about some priority
item, let me know. Otherwise, I will continue translating according to
my own judgment.

Happy hacking

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: 

From fauno at endefensadelsl.org  Mon Aug 22 14:32:47 2016
From: fauno at endefensadelsl.org (fauno)
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 11:32:47 -0300
Subject: [Dev] Wiki - spanish translations
In-Reply-To: <58522ae7-c41c-fa22-3179-f0c2f5fec9e4@riseup.net>
References: <58522ae7-c41c-fa22-3179-f0c2f5fec9e4@riseup.net>
Message-ID: <87mvk47u28.fsf@endefensadelsl.org>

gnu_tesla  writes:

> [ Unknown signature status ]
> Hi everyone. I was editing the wiki in Spanish and translating some
> articles (e.g.Adhocracy) and upgrading others (e.g. Mainpage, Parabola
> Social Contract). If anyone has any suggestions about some priority
> item, let me know. Otherwise, I will continue translating according to
> my own judgment.

my only suggestion would be to use the Translate plugin, since it's able
to tell you when the translation is behind the main article.  but i
guess this would entail migrating the already translated articles to the
new suffix (from " (Espa?ol)" to "/es")

-- 
:{
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 584 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

From franco.masotti at student.unife.it  Mon Aug 22 16:58:37 2016
From: franco.masotti at student.unife.it (Franco Masotti)
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 18:58:37 +0200
Subject: [Dev] cpan and pip doubt
Message-ID: <20160822165837.GA2018@ppc>

Hello parabola hackers,

I wanted to test a theory:
given [1],  tried to install, as an example, "Algorithm::Annotate" which is 
the first perl* package in [1] to be marked as "nonfree".
Installation with your-freedom installed was successful, so I guess the 
blacklist only works for "perl modules as (pacman) packages" not "perl modules 
to be compiled from CPAN".

Do you confirm this behaviour for all the non free packages (I guess the same 
might happen with pip)?

If so, is it possible to develop a fix, in order to avoid installing those 
non-free modules, maybe by integrating your-freedom?

F.

[1]:
-- 
Franco Masotti
Tox ID (voip): 9D855839E4BB0ADBF4F49063BF2ABC1479A7728011F20B563EA104B2EE10FF19DC8C255D8F3D
My public key fingerprint: F13C 27D7 EDF0 4F7C 0A9F  1244 9A11 29F0 4019 6B95
Get my public key like this: $ gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 40196B95
Use Parabola GNU/Linux-libre: 
Use Replicant ROM: 
Use GNUpot: 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 455 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

From lovell.joshyyy at gmail.com  Mon Aug 22 17:35:16 2016
From: lovell.joshyyy at gmail.com (Josh Branning)
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 18:35:16 +0100
Subject: [Dev] cpan and pip doubt
In-Reply-To: <20160822165837.GA2018@ppc>
References: <20160822165837.GA2018@ppc>
Message-ID: <57BB37D4.6060404@gmail.com>

On 22/08/16 17:58, Franco Masotti wrote:
> Hello parabola hackers,
>
> I wanted to test a theory:
> given [1],  tried to install, as an example, "Algorithm::Annotate" which is
> the first perl* package in [1] to be marked as "nonfree".
> Installation with your-freedom installed was successful, so I guess the
> blacklist only works for "perl modules as (pacman) packages" not "perl modules
> to be compiled from CPAN".
>
> Do you confirm this behaviour for all the non free packages (I guess the same
> might happen with pip)?
>
> If so, is it possible to develop a fix, in order to avoid installing those
> non-free modules, maybe by integrating your-freedom?
>
> F.
>
> [1]:
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> Dev at lists.parabola.nu
> https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev
>

There is a freedom issue filed here 2 months ago:

https://labs.parabola.nu/issues/1035

Josh


From franco.masotti at student.unife.it  Mon Aug 22 17:48:28 2016
From: franco.masotti at student.unife.it (Franco Masotti)
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 19:48:28 +0200
Subject: [Dev] cpan and pip doubt
In-Reply-To: <57BB37D4.6060404@gmail.com>
References: <20160822165837.GA2018@ppc>
 <57BB37D4.6060404@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20160822174828.GA2659@ppc>

I was quite sure I was missing something.

Hope for a fix soon :)

Meanwhile, I'll just look at the licenses directly from 
the respective websites.

Thank you.

On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 06:35:16PM +0100, Josh Branning wrote:
> On 22/08/16 17:58, Franco Masotti wrote:
> > Hello parabola hackers,
> > 
> > I wanted to test a theory:
> > given [1],  tried to install, as an example, "Algorithm::Annotate" which is
> > the first perl* package in [1] to be marked as "nonfree".
> > Installation with your-freedom installed was successful, so I guess the
> > blacklist only works for "perl modules as (pacman) packages" not "perl modules
> > to be compiled from CPAN".
> > 
> > Do you confirm this behaviour for all the non free packages (I guess the same
> > might happen with pip)?
> > 
> > If so, is it possible to develop a fix, in order to avoid installing those
> > non-free modules, maybe by integrating your-freedom?
> > 
> > F.
> > 
> > [1]:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Dev mailing list
> > Dev at lists.parabola.nu
> > https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev
> > 
> 
> There is a freedom issue filed here 2 months ago:
> 
> https://labs.parabola.nu/issues/1035
> 
> Josh
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> Dev at lists.parabola.nu
> https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev

-- 
Franco Masotti
Tox ID (voip): 9D855839E4BB0ADBF4F49063BF2ABC1479A7728011F20B563EA104B2EE10FF19DC8C255D8F3D
My public key fingerprint: F13C 27D7 EDF0 4F7C 0A9F  1244 9A11 29F0 4019 6B95
Get my public key like this: $ gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 40196B95
Use Parabola GNU/Linux-libre: 
Use Replicant ROM: 
Use GNUpot: 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 455 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

From isacdaavid at isacdaavid.info  Tue Aug 23 04:18:28 2016
From: isacdaavid at isacdaavid.info (Isaac David)
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 23:18:28 -0500
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <1471461385.934.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info>
References: <1471280979.9327.12.camel@paulk.fr>
 <57B2041A.1060606@ceata.org> <1471285424.1130.8.camel@replicant.us>
 <57B20DD1.2030109@ceata.org> <1471288981.1177.7.camel@paulk.fr>
 <57B2C166.90004@ceata.org> <1471337020.1216.8.camel@paulk.fr>
 <57B31CAC.1030602@ceata.org> <57B329E3.703@gmail.com>
 <57B32FAD.7000800@ceata.org> <57B33409.2090206@gmail.com>
 <1471364561.2003.19.camel@paulk.fr> <57B341FE.5040803@ceata.org>
 <0e06fdb4-f3f3-84f9-508e-c128e320b3a0@pelzflorian.de>
 <1471374864.2003.22.camel@paulk.fr> <57B36AB9.3090706@gmail.com>
 <1471458343.1302.7.camel@paulk.fr>
 <1471461385.934.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info>
Message-ID: <1471925908.4823.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info>


Le mer. 17 ao?t 2016 ? 14:16, Isaac David 
 a ?crit :
> I have copied the full Markdown text to a collaborative pad:
> 
> https://pad.partidopirata.com.ar/p/parabola-eoma
> 
> Everyone can join and help revise it there, or bring it to this thread
> plus your changes and comments.

either not too many people showed up or it didn't take too
many changes to get the wording right.

the campaign is almost over but i think this is still worth
tightening up, even if just for posterity.

if nobody objects to, over the next couple days i'm going to
add what is currently on the pad. i'm cc'ing koz, emulatorman
and adfeno because they were involved in the drafting of the
original news item, if memory serves me right.

--
isacdaavid



From contact at paulk.fr  Tue Aug 23 09:48:07 2016
From: contact at paulk.fr (Paul Kocialkowski)
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 11:48:07 +0200
Subject: [Dev] [PATCH abslibre] pacman: Get architecture from CARCH
 instead of auto
In-Reply-To: <1471656044.2734.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info>
References: <20160815164618.9855-1-contact@paulk.fr>
 <1471656044.2734.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info>
Message-ID: <1471945687.885.3.camel@paulk.fr>

Hi,

Le vendredi 19 ao?t 2016 ? 20:20 -0500, Isaac David a ?crit?:
> This was bug https://labs.parabola.nu/issues/1039, thanks
> for reminding me of it.

Thanks for pushing a fix in the meantime.

> Were you able to test this configuration? Behind the scenes
> ALARM (should I say AGLARM?) is also doing some extra sed
> magic to substitute @CARCH@ with a hard-coded value at build
> time; so I can almost tell there's no way of using 'auto' or
> anything equivalent under AGLARM. Pacman does use the value
> of uname -m with 'auto' though,

Right, I hadn't dug enough to figure this out.

>  which raises the question:
> how did AGLARM come about giving the architecture this name?

The kernel uses the final letter "l" to indicate endianness. ALARM on the other
hand uses "h" to indicate hard floating point.

> The hack makes sense for them, because they chose to use a
> single pacman.conf template for all the architectures they
> maintain; but we have multiple files, like Arch does, in
> abslibre and therefore can afford just hard-coding "armv7h"
> in there. That's exactly what I did.

I think that's the right thing to do here.

Cheers,

-- 
Paul Kocialkowski, developer of low-level free software for embedded devices

Website: https://www.paulk.fr/
Coding blog: https://code.paulk.fr/
Git repositories: https://git.paulk.fr/ https://git.code.paulk.fr/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

From contact at paulk.fr  Tue Aug 23 09:51:13 2016
From: contact at paulk.fr (Paul Kocialkowski)
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 11:51:13 +0200
Subject: [Dev] [PATCH abslibre] pacman: Get architecture from CARCH
 instead of auto
In-Reply-To: <1471656044.2734.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info>
References: <20160815164618.9855-1-contact@paulk.fr>
 <1471656044.2734.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info>
Message-ID: <1471945873.885.6.camel@paulk.fr>

Le vendredi 19 ao?t 2016 ? 20:20 -0500, Isaac David a ?crit?:
> The hack makes sense for them, because they chose to use a
> single pacman.conf template for all the architectures they
> maintain; but we have multiple files, like Arch does, in
> abslibre and therefore can afford just hard-coding "armv7h"
> in there. That's exactly what I did.

Also, I don't see what problem can arise from this, as it was suggested at:
https://labs.parabola.nu/issues/1039

ALARM also hardcodes "armv7h" in the distributed pacman.conf, so there's no
specific reason it would cause a problem when migrating. (Or am I perhaps
missing something here ?)

Cheers,

-- 
Paul Kocialkowski, developer of low-level free software for embedded devices

Website: https://www.paulk.fr/
Coding blog: https://code.paulk.fr/
Git repositories: https://git.paulk.fr/ https://git.code.paulk.fr/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

From adfeno at openmailbox.org  Tue Aug 23 14:24:07 2016
From: adfeno at openmailbox.org (Adonay Felipe Nogueira)
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 11:24:07 -0300
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
Message-ID: 

Just now, I **have** subscribed to Parabola's dev mailing list. So I'll
try to catch-up with this topic. :)

I'm inserting libreplanet-discuss and trisquel-users mailing lists as
recipients of this email because of my opinion on Tiberiu-Cezar
Tehnoetic's message
().

I'm also inserting a member of ThinkPenguin as recipient so as to let
him know the issue found by Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic, which is discussed
furthermore in this email.

I agree with Paul Kocialkowski's original message
().
Furthermore, my **last** edit in the original pad
() is perhaps
the most correct one (if the timeslider references don't change over
time, it should be
, 
saved July 24th, 2016. After this version, the misleading text gets 
added).

About Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic's message
():
Indeed, the use of "free software friendly" to also mean "fully free
software" or "freedom-respecting" is a communication noise (article on
Wikipedia: ).
Basically, in context of marketing (not sales), a communication noise
happens when **either** the senders or receivers of a message
distort-or-misunderstand the message.

Besides, I'm inserting a member of ThinkPenguin as recipient of this
email so as to let him know the issue that Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic found
in ThinkPenguin's website content. This was done so as to make it easier
for ThinkPenguin to see the issue. This **is not** meant to be taken
offensively.

Regarding the difference between FSF's RYF-certification and "true"
"respects your freedom" (as pointed out by Paul Kocialkowski on
): I
don't work for the FSF, and I don't speak for them, but I've been
studying the purpose of RYF for some time, and so far I noticed that RYF
certification is meant to say the following message to society: this
products are certified because, by default, they come with **maximum**
free/libre software that our movement recognizes as free/libre, **up to
where free/libre software is known to exist for**, or up to where
there's no technological limitations as to how to interact with such
software (this **differs** from "digital handcuffs).

Rephrasing the previous paragraph: According to what I have researched
so far, the idea of RYF certification **is-not** to say that these
products are "freedom respecting" in a binary (0 or 1; true or false)
scale, but in a gradual scale (which assumes that, once a new free/libre
software is known to work inside secondary embedded processors (e.g.:
some storage devices, some keyboards, some mouses), then the
already-certified products will be given a time limit to provide an
improved version that uses/provides the newly found free/libre
software).

On the ambiguity of "free software
friendly" 
(): I 
agree that "compatible with fully free operating systems" should be used 
instead. Personally, I have caught **myself** using "free software 
friendly" sometimes, although I use the other one in most cases. 
Besides, using the same reference: I think that the text on GNU.org 
about free/libre hardware designs serves as definitive definition to the 
hardware scenario. However, as noted on the articles there, it's not 
something easy to deny usage of hardware with non-free designs since 
there's no know hardware with free/libre design for use that enables 
society to do their computing in freedom.

And "RYF certified" can be included inside "free software friendly"
although care must be taken so as not to make the public think that they
are the same, just as it happens in the case of "open source software"
vs. "free/libre software".


From isacdaavid at isacdaavid.info  Tue Aug 23 17:55:32 2016
From: isacdaavid at isacdaavid.info (Isaac David)
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 12:55:32 -0500
Subject: [Dev] [PATCH abslibre] pacman: Get architecture from CARCH
 instead of auto
In-Reply-To: <1471945873.885.6.camel@paulk.fr>
References: <20160815164618.9855-1-contact@paulk.fr>
 <1471656044.2734.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info>
 <1471945873.885.6.camel@paulk.fr>
Message-ID: <1471974932.4468.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info>

Le mar. 23 ao?t 2016 ? 4:51, Paul Kocialkowski  a 
?crit :
> 
> Also, I don't see what problem can arise from this, as it was 
> suggested at:
> https://labs.parabola.nu/issues/1039
> 
> ALARM also hardcodes "armv7h" in the distributed pacman.conf, so 
> there's no
> specific reason it would cause a problem when migrating. (Or am I 
> perhaps
> missing something here ?)

You should read it as:

"Using armv7l as the architecture name in pacman is the KISS solution,
 but it would cause problems with migrating, etc."

instead of

"Hardcoding armv7h would cause problems with migrating, etc."



From gnu_tesla at riseup.net  Tue Aug 23 22:28:27 2016
From: gnu_tesla at riseup.net (gnu_tesla)
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 19:28:27 -0300
Subject: [Dev] Wiki - spanish translations
In-Reply-To: <87mvk47u28.fsf@endefensadelsl.org>
References: <58522ae7-c41c-fa22-3179-f0c2f5fec9e4@riseup.net>
 <87mvk47u28.fsf@endefensadelsl.org>
Message-ID: 

Thanks.I'll keep that in mind.

> my only suggestion would be to use the Translate plugin, since it's able
> to tell you when the translation is behind the main article.  but i
> guess this would entail migrating the already translated articles to the
> new suffix (from " (Espa?ol)" to "/es")
> 
___________________________
> Dev mailing list
> Dev at lists.parabola.nu
> https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev
> 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: 

From contact at paulk.fr  Wed Aug 24 09:32:17 2016
From: contact at paulk.fr (Paul Kocialkowski)
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 11:32:17 +0200
Subject: [Dev] [PATCH abslibre] pacman: Get architecture from CARCH
 instead of auto
In-Reply-To: <1471974932.4468.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info>
References: <20160815164618.9855-1-contact@paulk.fr>
 <1471656044.2734.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info>
 <1471945873.885.6.camel@paulk.fr>
 <1471974932.4468.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info>
Message-ID: <1472031137.1112.3.camel@paulk.fr>

Le mardi 23 ao?t 2016 ? 12:55 -0500, Isaac David a ?crit?:
> Le mar. 23 ao?t 2016 ? 4:51, Paul Kocialkowski  a?
> ?crit :
> > Also, I don't see what problem can arise from this, as it was?
> > suggested at:
> > https://labs.parabola.nu/issues/1039
> > 
> > ALARM also hardcodes "armv7h" in the distributed pacman.conf, so?
> > there's no
> > specific reason it would cause a problem when migrating. (Or am I?
> > perhaps
> > missing something here ?)
> 
> You should read it as:
> 
> "Using armv7l as the architecture name in pacman is the KISS solution,
> ?but it would cause problems with migrating, etc."
> 
> instead of
> 
> "Hardcoding armv7h would cause problems with migrating, etc."

Ah right, makes more sense. Well, I don't think that using something different
from what uname -m returns as arch name is a problem. I think the hard-floating
point distinction is more relevant than endianness, because it restricts the
scope of possibly supported devices.

If anything, I think pacman's autodetection should be fixed to ?return armv7h
when uname -m returns armv7l.

I could bring-in that change if you think it's relevant. Maybe upstream would be
interested too.

-- 
Paul Kocialkowski, developer of low-level free software for embedded devices

Website: https://www.paulk.fr/
Coding blog: https://code.paulk.fr/
Git repositories: https://git.paulk.fr/ https://git.code.paulk.fr/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

From contact at paulk.fr  Wed Aug 24 10:25:04 2016
From: contact at paulk.fr (Paul Kocialkowski)
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 12:25:04 +0200
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: 
References: 
Message-ID: <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>

Le mardi 23 ao?t 2016 ? 11:24 -0300, Adonay Felipe Nogueira a ?crit?:
> Just now, I **have** subscribed to Parabola's dev mailing list. So I'll
> try to catch-up with this topic. :)
> 
> I'm inserting libreplanet-discuss and trisquel-users mailing lists as
> recipients of this email because of my opinion on Tiberiu-Cezar
> Tehnoetic's message
> ().
> 
> I'm also inserting a member of ThinkPenguin as recipient so as to let
> him know the issue found by Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic, which is discussed
> furthermore in this email.
> 
> I agree with Paul Kocialkowski's original message
> ().
> Furthermore, my **last** edit in the original pad
> () is perhaps
> the most correct one (if the timeslider references don't change over
> time, it should be
> ,?
> saved July 24th, 2016. After this version, the misleading text gets?
> added).

Feel free to contribute to the revision pad:
https://pad.partidopirata.com.ar/p/parabola-eoma

Others: what do you think of this version? Please acknowledge when you think
it's ready. At this point, revision 310 suits me fine:
https://pad.partidopirata.com.ar/p/parabola-eoma/timeslider#310

However, I would gladly skip the part following "However, it's important to note
that:". Providing details there seems like a very slippery slope and I'd rather
link to relevant posts or information from the campaign page. Better yet,
quoting parts from there would be even more appropriate.

For instance, "2D and video acceleration work well with free software", while
being true, is not precise enough to be a really useful information. Also, the
part about the circuit board is too vague, since only the EOMA68 card (and not
the landing board or laptop board) were said to be withheld.

> About Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic's message
> ():
> Indeed, the use of "free software friendly" to also mean "fully free
> software" or "freedom-respecting" is a communication noise (article on
> Wikipedia: ).
> Basically, in context of marketing (not sales), a communication noise
> happens when **either** the senders or receivers of a message
> distort-or-misunderstand the message.
> 
> Besides, I'm inserting a member of ThinkPenguin as recipient of this
> email so as to let him know the issue that Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic found
> in ThinkPenguin's website content. This was done so as to make it easier
> for ThinkPenguin to see the issue. This **is not** meant to be taken
> offensively.

They may agree that it's an issue or not. I don't think it is one.
For the record, you're probably referring to "Company #2" from:
https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/2016-August/004353.html

-- 
Paul Kocialkowski, developer of low-level free software for embedded devices

Website: https://www.paulk.fr/
Coding blog: https://code.paulk.fr/
Git repositories: https://git.paulk.fr/ https://git.code.paulk.fr/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

From adfeno at openmailbox.org  Wed Aug 24 11:56:34 2016
From: adfeno at openmailbox.org (Adonay Felipe Nogueira)
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 08:56:34 -0300
Subject: [Dev] [Trisquel-users]  Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: 
References: 
 
Message-ID: <1472039794.7415.8.camel@adfeno-VPCEG17FB>

I might be wrong in the case of hardware designs, but as far as I know,
a copyright proprietor/owner/holder or a redistributor can choose not to
publish the hardware design on the Internet and still be considered
free/libre as long as he does one of the following:

* Provide a written offer together with the physical hardware that gives
anyone the right to request the complete corresponding sources/designs
at least for a period of 3 years after the product's date of
publication. This assumes that the hardware design is under the GPL 3
"or later" license.

* Provide the hardware design together with the physical hardware.

There **might** have other details that I overlooked or forgot to study
or mention, so please read the GPL 3 license for more information.



From chris at thinkpenguin.com  Wed Aug 24 17:18:54 2016
From: chris at thinkpenguin.com (Christopher Waid)
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 13:18:54 -0400
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
Message-ID: <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>

On 2016-08-24 06:25 AM, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> Le mardi 23 ao?t 2016 ? 11:24 -0300, Adonay Felipe Nogueira a ?crit?:
>> Just now, I **have** subscribed to Parabola's dev mailing list. So 
>> I'll
>> try to catch-up with this topic. :)
>> 
>> I'm inserting libreplanet-discuss and trisquel-users mailing lists as
>> recipients of this email because of my opinion on Tiberiu-Cezar
>> Tehnoetic's message
>> ().
>> 
>> I'm also inserting a member of ThinkPenguin as recipient so as to let
>> him know the issue found by Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic, which is 
>> discussed
>> furthermore in this email.
>> 
>> I agree with Paul Kocialkowski's original message
>> ().
>> Furthermore, my **last** edit in the original pad
>> () is 
>> perhaps
>> the most correct one (if the timeslider references don't change over
>> time, it should be
>> ,?
>> saved July 24th, 2016. After this version, the misleading text gets?
>> added).
> 
> Feel free to contribute to the revision pad:
> https://pad.partidopirata.com.ar/p/parabola-eoma
> 
> Others: what do you think of this version? Please acknowledge when you 
> think
> it's ready. At this point, revision 310 suits me fine:
> https://pad.partidopirata.com.ar/p/parabola-eoma/timeslider#310
> 
> However, I would gladly skip the part following "However, it's 
> important to note
> that:". Providing details there seems like a very slippery slope and 
> I'd rather
> link to relevant posts or information from the campaign page. Better 
> yet,
> quoting parts from there would be even more appropriate.
> 
> For instance, "2D and video acceleration work well with free software", 
> while
> being true, is not precise enough to be a really useful information. 
> Also, the
> part about the circuit board is too vague, since only the EOMA68 card 
> (and not
> the landing board or laptop board) were said to be withheld.
> 
>> About Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic's message
>> ():
>> Indeed, the use of "free software friendly" to also mean "fully free
>> software" or "freedom-respecting" is a communication noise (article on
>> Wikipedia: ).
>> Basically, in context of marketing (not sales), a communication noise
>> happens when **either** the senders or receivers of a message
>> distort-or-misunderstand the message.
>> 
>> Besides, I'm inserting a member of ThinkPenguin as recipient of this
>> email so as to let him know the issue that Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic 
>> found
>> in ThinkPenguin's website content. This was done so as to make it 
>> easier
>> for ThinkPenguin to see the issue. This **is not** meant to be taken
>> offensively.
> 
> They may agree that it's an issue or not. I don't think it is one.
> For the record, you're probably referring to "Company #2" from:
> https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/2016-August/004353.html

If the world were perfect I might fix this imperfection immediately. 
Every small fix takes time though and time is not something we have. We 
can't afford to waste it on minor issues. We have many many small issues 
yet to deal with after eight years and many many much bigger issues. If 
it took a fine tooth comb to find an issue it's probably not worth 
dealing with [immediately].

When this text was written LibreBoot didn't exist and I was probably the 
only person who had even looked into the possibility of porting CoreBoot 
to newer systems or free'ing it [this was around 2009]. It also was the 
case that all the core components [chipsets, like wifi, graphics, etc] 
were free so within the context of the day it was adequately describing 
I think, even if not a perfect choice of words to the extant that 
anybody else would have understood them.

When I say big issues I'm talking about things like getting sources 
released for newer CPUs/SOCs, reverse engineering components, targeting 
the FCC so we can overcome restrictions on the release of and ability to 
get code [in practice], designing new hardware, etc.

If you understand and think about the underlying issues and start nit 
picking you'd quickly realize not only are we imperfect, but so is the 
wording on every other site. We still don't have any free laptops. 
Utilizing the word free to describe almost any laptop would be 
technically wrong [including systems with LibreBoot]. I can think of one 
exception and that is the Ben NanoNote [if this even counts as a laptop, 
I wouldn't call it that]. The next best thing is going to be the Libre 
Tea Computer Card when combined with the related laptop housing 
components [also free] and that's only happening because we've been 
sponsoring its development and working with Luke on it for years. Why 
this is better is because we have the complete set of code for numerous 
components including microcode, keyboard/LCD controller firmware, 
bootloader, and more... so yes.. we could go back and fix these ancient 
issues nobody has even noticed until now or we could just work on 
solving the problems so we can replace these not-quite-perfect systems 
with ones that are [which if I understand the issue should also solve 
said problems].




From tct at ceata.org  Wed Aug 24 19:31:38 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 22:31:38 +0300
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
Message-ID: <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>

On 24.08.2016 20:18, Christopher Waid wrote:
> When this text was written LibreBoot didn't exist

I beg to differ. The text we refer to is from summer 2014 after
SouthEast GNU/Linux Fest 2014 took place on June 20-22, 2014.

https://www.thinkpenguin.com/gnu-linux/short-interview-christopher-waid-about-thinkpenguin-linux-action-show

While FSF awarded the RYF certification to Gluglug for the X60 laptop
preinstalled with deblobbed Coreboot in December 2013.

http://www.fsf.org/news/gluglug-x60-laptop-now-certified-to-respect-your-freedom

And the deblobbed Coreboot has been named Libreboot "during early 2014".
That is, before the summer conference and show edition.

https://libreboot.org/docs/index.html#why

Knowing that, in the beginning of the GNU/Linux Action Show interview
you still falsely stated that ThinkPenguin "makes sure that all the
hardware in your catalog is 100% free software friendly" (57:20). That
includes desktops and laptops.

You went on and said that "every bit of firmware on your laptops is free
software, except for the BIOS which is... outside". (57:26)

Fast forwarding to November 2015 when FSF announces the discounted
ThinkPenguin products for their associate members.

https://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/fsf-members-now-get-5-off-thinkpenguin-free-software-friendly-devices

Quoting:

"ThinkPenguin sells free software-friendly hardware, including laptops,
desktops, WiFi adapters (useful if your laptop's WiFi can't work with a
free driver), printers and more."

I guess it's convenient to have FSF recommend their associate members
your laptops and desktops with proprietary BIOS 1 month after their 30th
anniversary in October.

Right after in October you were sending off Libreboot founder and lead
developer to go work on free software for GPS devices, because in your
opinion she "would have done better" . You went on and said the effort
to have free BIOS for older laptops "would have been better spent
elsewhere", because getting software freedom-respecting laptops "is a
harder problem to solve and it is going to require massive amounts of
money".

https://trisquel.info/en/forum/asus-chromebook-c201-now-supported-libreboot-arm-cpu?page=1#comment-80943

It's also convenient to let know all FSF associate members that your
devices are OK in respect to freedom:

"5% off free software-friendly devices from ThinkPenguin" --
https://my.fsf.org/

But for you it must be as you say, just a "minor issue" you "can't
afford waste time" on it. For the rest of us, including founder of the
free software movement and the GNU project, it's not:

On 16.08.2016 22:52, Richard Stallman wrote:
> On 16.08.2016 17:14, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
>> IMO, we should teach users to avoid this ambiguous term. Instead of
>> "free software friendly", they should use the term "compatible with
>> fully free operating systems" if the hardware is compatible with free
>> distros endorsed by FSF.
>
> I agree.  The FSF could post something about this.  I will suggest it
> to the campaigns people.
>
> In the long term, I hope that our endorsement, RYF, will set a
> standard and that people will come to see other terms, without clear
> and strict definitions as inadequate.


From lovell.joshyyy at gmail.com  Wed Aug 24 20:19:01 2016
From: lovell.joshyyy at gmail.com (Josh Branning)
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 21:19:01 +0100
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
Message-ID: <57BE0135.8050608@gmail.com>

> Others: what do you think of this version? Please acknowledge when you think
> it's ready. At this point, revision 310 suits me fine:
> https://pad.partidopirata.com.ar/p/parabola-eoma/timeslider#310

I think this revision fits the bill and is ready.

Josh



From isacdaavid at isacdaavid.info  Thu Aug 25 05:05:14 2016
From: isacdaavid at isacdaavid.info (Isaac David)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 00:05:14 -0500
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <57BE0135.8050608@gmail.com>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr> <57BE0135.8050608@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1472101514.2591.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

OK, this sounds like consensus. We have made enough of a
fuss over this little thing,
https://pad.partidopirata.com.ar/p/parabola-eoma/timeslider#429
is now live.

Adonay took care of the last concerns raised by Paul after
revision 310. I decided not to touch on the licensing of
hardware design files at all, so as to not speculate either
way. I would love to see those released in the future, but
future-proofing the reliability of this information is more
important. The link will still contain the phrase "libre
hardware"; I would not like to break it.

Thanks all.

- --
isacdaavid

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJXvnxCAAoJEDNGbhLse6lDf7UQAN6ba9ilW2506CmeLq2L+hzB
xKHMRUZKqLF6oLBtHLWpHBtxPBx/Ut106txGaBaco4BE3ITprokeY6d7AXSulpae
BvhPW3f9JUHiT6pXsC/HouasbFmk55lEDBYTk1q0VLgdHBkkP9zM9c0qBWGJiFvR
orfeg4ITsvbdzLRa9HvMBlf1PtXXL8P7WeJbn0sfMoL7ReqDwzGAj5QHBgMgJ0qw
cm2oYqaBmQK7rTueZ6wN/BmP+M4ujU92J8U5QhV1aXzvHKJLmfl8cz0kXzY9Hkrl
DYxhKsK7nuFLVb50x/ZL03rkA24riigj4scUmKLf7bKPhcqi/rDirCfIwglGOaGf
LJlKsSilbMue+IK3xkUB/ZyFRFXhdRNJWd3PS9EPg1si5KcFLfd3O13hKoxOaHeB
vqxbajUNWwgw/NC8+NEVSMR1+TTLUqxSBrMfHuDcRiuESCEoZHnHfmQ5LdHWpM0u
1kgCin6HN85bKpB9x5GJLnb4adpT0qWmPbdlmiBoPWIge3jS7m0jahpo8mEr/h2E
+9QZkeVvXY+sNcOEid1zx2qSM5CsSOuQgXN9aac8InyEMbenN+eaF36sNU8WWbZ9
gciBatngyJgRcebqxZMZQDklUV2RA1ITCcMf6OcQi9CMjPFiqalpcjGxvqLpbz5n
hGNWpkn4zgGTjPoqC9Qg
=q2gb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



From contact at paulk.fr  Thu Aug 25 08:07:31 2016
From: contact at paulk.fr (Paul Kocialkowski)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 10:07:31 +0200
Subject: [Dev] [Trisquel-users]  Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <1472039794.7415.8.camel@adfeno-VPCEG17FB>
References: 
 
 <1472039794.7415.8.camel@adfeno-VPCEG17FB>
Message-ID: <1472112451.1110.3.camel@paulk.fr>

Le mercredi 24 ao?t 2016 ? 08:56 -0300, Adonay Felipe Nogueira a ?crit?:
> I might be wrong in the case of hardware designs, but as far as I know,
> a copyright proprietor/owner/holder or a redistributor can choose not to
> publish the hardware design on the Internet and still be considered
> free/libre as long as he does one of the following:
> 
> * Provide a written offer together with the physical hardware that gives
> anyone the right to request the complete corresponding sources/designs
> at least for a period of 3 years after the product's date of
> publication. This assumes that the hardware design is under the GPL 3
> "or later" license.
> 
> * Provide the hardware design together with the physical hardware.

You're right, there is no obligation to make it public, especially before the
product is released. Good that we dropped the part about libre hardware then.

-- 
Paul Kocialkowski, developer of low-level free software for embedded devices

Website: https://www.paulk.fr/
Coding blog: https://code.paulk.fr/
Git repositories: https://git.paulk.fr/ https://git.code.paulk.fr/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

From contact at paulk.fr  Thu Aug 25 08:09:19 2016
From: contact at paulk.fr (Paul Kocialkowski)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 10:09:19 +0200
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <1472101514.2591.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr> <57BE0135.8050608@gmail.com>
 <1472101514.2591.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info>
Message-ID: <1472112559.1110.5.camel@paulk.fr>

Le jeudi 25 ao?t 2016 ? 00:05 -0500, Isaac David a ?crit?:
> OK, this sounds like consensus. We have made enough of a
> fuss over this little thing,
> https://pad.partidopirata.com.ar/p/parabola-eoma/timeslider#429
> is now live.

Looks good to me.

> Adonay took care of the last concerns raised by Paul after
> revision 310. I decided not to touch on the licensing of
> hardware design files at all, so as to not speculate either
> way. I would love to see those released in the future, but
> future-proofing the reliability of this information is more
> important. The link will still contain the phrase "libre
> hardware"; I would not like to break it.

I agree, thanks!

-- 
Paul Kocialkowski, developer of low-level free software for embedded devices

Website: https://www.paulk.fr/
Coding blog: https://code.paulk.fr/
Git repositories: https://git.paulk.fr/ https://git.code.paulk.fr/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

From contact at paulk.fr  Thu Aug 25 09:01:30 2016
From: contact at paulk.fr (Paul Kocialkowski)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 11:01:30 +0200
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: 
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
Message-ID: <1472115690.1110.46.camel@paulk.fr>

Hi,

Le jeudi 25 ao?t 2016 ? 04:42 -0400, Christopher Waid a ?crit?:
> The laptops we sell currently @ ThinkPenguin are not RYF'd and shouldn't?
> be RYF'd, but we are working on something better than LibreBoot in that?
> it solves the free software problems in a more permanent long term way:?
> EOMA68. X86 is dead and we do not need LibreBoot for non-X86 systems.?

I'm very surprised to read this. How do we not need Libreboot in general?

Having a fully free bootup software distribution is IMO crucial to pave the road
for free software support. Note that U-Boot includes proprietary software and
should not be included as-is in or recommended by any FSDG-compliant dsitros.

Also, Libreboot is currently based on Coreboot (which, by the way, supports an
increasing number of ARM devices, with Chromebooks) but there's not reason it
can't handle U-Boot in the future too, or whatever other free bootup software.

So with upcoming ARM Chromebooks, the very large number of ARM devices that can
boot up with free software and other interesting platforms such as POWER8 and
POWER9, Libreboot still has a bright future ahead.

> The reason this issue hasn't been solved by us is because it's simply?
> not possible given Intel's hostility and refusal to cooperate. Reverse?
> engineering is a non-trivial task and the resulting code would not run?
> on modern Intel systems due to digital signatures.

Of course, we all agree that x86 is a dead-end, at least in the long run. There
are still possibilities with somewhat old Intel and AMD hardware, but these will
be outdated eventually. Also, note that most of these old x86 platforms are
much, much faster than the A20.

> We can do a lot more ?than what is feasible with LibreBoot, but it has taken
> years. Now that EOMA68 crowd funding campaign has succeeded though or is about
> to succeed we can do a 100% free software system

Note that the level of free software support brought by the EOMA68 is not really
something new. There have been dozens of computers, some of which come with a
free board design, using platforms that are as good for freedom, especially with
Allwinner (but there are lots of others). The linux-sunxi community has been
working hard on those for years and years, so this is nothing new or specific to
the EOMA68.

Many ARM Chromebooks even go a step further, with a free software embedded
controller firmware.

> (that is LibreBoot doesn't magically make a computer 100% free, there are
> other problematic components).

Of course, but nobody claimed that it does. It is only a very significant piece
in the software freedom puzzle.

> We've got the source code for LCD/Keyboard controller firmware,

Regarding LCD: are you talking about a MIPI interface done in software with a
MCU? Please feel free to share details about this LCD controller firmware, I'd
be very interested to learn more about it, it sounds unusual!

> bootloaders, CPU micro code

Huh? Again, please share details about the CPU microcodes. I am not aware of any
ARMv7 implementation using a microcode at all, nor of any that was liberated.

> and similar for the EOMA68 laptop housing and Libre Tea Computer Card. That's
> huge. And there are more significant developments coming including the release
> of schematics and higher end CPUs.

I fully agree that this is great and I support your project. However, keep in
mind that this is nothing new or groundbreaking (not to undermine the project
and the efforts associated with it).

-- 
Paul Kocialkowski, developer of low-level free software for embedded devices

Website: https://www.paulk.fr/
Coding blog: https://code.paulk.fr/
Git repositories: https://git.paulk.fr/ https://git.code.paulk.fr/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

From tct at ceata.org  Thu Aug 25 09:59:40 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 12:59:40 +0300
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: 
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
Message-ID: <57BEC18C.3070209@ceata.org>

On 25.08.2016 11:42, Christopher Waid wrote:
> I'm having a hard time taking you seriously. Wake me when you've
> actually contributed something of significance and aren't just trying to
> undermine those working on solving these problems. For some of us it
> isn't about financial gain. We actually want to see 100% free hardware.

I don't need you to take me seriously. I'm merely stating the facts and
drawing logical conclusions. I could be just a new free software user
with no contribution what so ever.

If you believe that what I'm doing is undermining your projects, then
you might be do something wrong in your projects. Like claiming your
proprietary BIOS laptops and desktops are OK in regard to software
freedom as your WiFi adapters. Like claiming EOMA68 board is libre
hardware although no one has access to the PCB CAD files under a
free/libre license. Like not guaranteeing EOMA68 campaign backers that
they will receive the PCB CAD files under a free license along with the
EOMA68 product when shipped. Like claiming EOMA68 board is a
breakthrough in the line of software freedom. Like undermining Libreboot
project and spreading FUD about it (that Libreboot is only for old
x86-based laptops). Like not providing config file to build LibreCMC.
Like LibreCMC not building at all lately. Like corrupting FSF to
recommend your proprietary BIOS laptops and desktops.


From lovell.joshyyy at gmail.com  Thu Aug 25 11:42:30 2016
From: lovell.joshyyy at gmail.com (Josh Branning)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 12:42:30 +0100
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <1472101514.2591.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr> <57BE0135.8050608@gmail.com>
 <1472101514.2591.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info>
Message-ID: <57BED9A6.7030809@gmail.com>

On 25/08/16 06:05, Isaac David wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
>
> OK, this sounds like consensus. We have made enough of a
> fuss over this little thing,
> https://pad.partidopirata.com.ar/p/parabola-eoma/timeslider#429
> is now live.
>
> Adonay took care of the last concerns raised by Paul after
> revision 310. I decided not to touch on the licensing of
> hardware design files at all, so as to not speculate either
> way. I would love to see those released in the future, but
> future-proofing the reliability of this information is more
> important. The link will still contain the phrase "libre
> hardware"; I would not like to break it.
>
> Thanks all.
>
> - --
> isacdaavid

Thanks for this. I think you've made the right decision. I didn't 
realise that the A20 has a Mali400 GPU, so the bit about there not being 
a free 3D graphics driver /may/ have been a mistake on my part.



From tct at ceata.org  Thu Aug 25 11:56:32 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 14:56:32 +0300
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <57BED9A6.7030809@gmail.com>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr> <57BE0135.8050608@gmail.com>
 <1472101514.2591.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info> <57BED9A6.7030809@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57BEDCF0.10306@ceata.org>

On 25.08.2016 14:42, Josh Branning wrote:
> On 25/08/16 06:05, Isaac David wrote:
>> The link will still contain the phrase "libre
>> hardware"; I would not like to break it.

> Thanks for this. I think you've made the right decision.

IMO, this is not okay. Changing the link and then having the old one
redirect to this new one is the right thing to do.


From adfeno at openmailbox.org  Thu Aug 25 12:25:34 2016
From: adfeno at openmailbox.org (Adonay Felipe Nogueira)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 09:25:34 -0300
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
Message-ID: <1472127934.3259.10.camel@adfeno-VPCEG17FB>

This issue of "you said it is 'libre' but I prove it's not", and even
the issue regarding the older publication on ThinkPenguin's site, can be
easily solved by changing terms/words accordingly there. There's no need
to make everyone mad at each other.

For example, we can publish updates on these publications, that have the
purpose of replacing confusing terms like "free software friendly" with
"compatible with free/libre system distributions" (or the similar term
that RMS suggested).

Remember, the issue about usage of confusing words have two ways to be
dealt with:

* We can discuss and try to convince each other on why our position is
the right one (whichever side it is).

* Or we can simply fix the text for now.

* Or we can do both described above.



From tct at ceata.org  Thu Aug 25 12:47:00 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 15:47:00 +0300
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <1472127934.3259.10.camel@adfeno-VPCEG17FB>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <1472127934.3259.10.camel@adfeno-VPCEG17FB>
Message-ID: <57BEE8C4.4000006@ceata.org>

On 25.08.2016 15:25, Adonay Felipe Nogueira wrote:
> This issue of "you said it is 'libre' but I prove it's not", and even
> the issue regarding the older publication on ThinkPenguin's site, can be
> easily solved by changing terms/words accordingly there. There's no need
> to make everyone mad at each other.

It's not just about terminology. It's about deliberately misinforming
the people to back your project because it's been libre hardware and
libre software "right from the beginning". And also misinforming people
to think it's OK for their freedom to buy laptops with proprietary BIOS
rather than with Libreboot.


From chris at thinkpenguin.com  Thu Aug 25 08:42:42 2016
From: chris at thinkpenguin.com (Christopher Waid)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 04:42:42 -0400
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
Message-ID: 

I'm going to reiterate that it is not my position that the wording 'free 
software friendly' is perfect. Changing this to compatible with free 
software operating systems may work. It may not. It may depend on the 
context. It may be challenging to integrate.

The laptops we sell currently @ ThinkPenguin are not RYF'd and shouldn't 
be RYF'd, but we are working on something better than LibreBoot in that 
it solves the free software problems in a more permanent long term way: 
EOMA68. X86 is dead and we do not need LibreBoot for non-X86 systems. 
The reason this issue hasn't been solved by us is because it's simply 
not possible given Intel's hostility and refusal to cooperate. Reverse 
engineering is a non-trivial task and the resulting code would not run 
on modern Intel systems due to digital signatures. We can do a lot more 
than what is feasible with LibreBoot, but it has taken years. Now that 
EOMA68 crowd funding campaign has succeeded though or is about to 
succeed we can do a 100% free software system (that is LibreBoot doesn't 
magically make a computer 100% free, there are other problematic 
components). We've got the source code for LCD/Keyboard controller 
firmware, bootloaders, CPU micro code, and similar for the EOMA68 laptop 
housing and Libre Tea Computer Card. That's huge. And there are more 
significant developments coming including the release of schematics and 
higher end CPUs.

I'm not sure if it is clear so I'm going to state for the record that 
I'm the CEO of ThinkPenguin and ThinkPenguin sponsored Luke's work on 
EOMA68. I'm a good person to respond to the criticisms about pretty much 
anything related to TP, EOMA68, and the comments below. We've pulled off 
getting code for chips in the past and have a solid track record 
including release of other RYF'd products. More than anyone else 
actually. We were in competition for being the first company to release 
an RYF product and our efforts to free hardware pre-date the RYF 
program.

On 2016-08-24 03:31 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
> On 24.08.2016 20:18, Christopher Waid wrote:
>> When this text was written LibreBoot didn't exist
> 
> I beg to differ.

The quote was 2008/2009. If there was something else referenced I didn't 
see it.

> The text we refer to is from summer 2014 after
> SouthEast GNU/Linux Fest 2014 took place on June 20-22, 2014.
> 
> https://www.thinkpenguin.com/gnu-linux/short-interview-christopher-waid-about-thinkpenguin-linux-action-show

The systems are compatible with Trisquel and Parabola GNU/Linux-libre 
and not dependent on any OS-loaded proprietary bits. This is not to say 
they are completely free of proprietary bits. That's what we've been 
working toward, but it's a much bigger goal to hit than just freeing the 
BIOS.

> While FSF awarded the RYF certification to Gluglug for the X60 laptop
> preinstalled with deblobbed Coreboot in December 2013.

The RYF Lenovo laptops with LibreBoot from Mini Free are not entirely 
free even though they have RYF status from the FSF. It doesn't appear at 
a quick glance that it is being advertised as entirely free either.

> http://www.fsf.org/news/gluglug-x60-laptop-now-certified-to-respect-your-freedom
> 
> And the deblobbed Coreboot has been named Libreboot "during early 
> 2014".
> That is, before the summer conference and show edition.
> 
> 
> https://libreboot.org/docs/index.html#why
> 
> Knowing that, in the beginning of the GNU/Linux Action Show interview
> you still falsely stated that ThinkPenguin "makes sure that all the
> hardware in your catalog is 100% free software friendly" (57:20). That
> includes desktops and laptops.
> 
> You went on and said that "every bit of firmware on your laptops is 
> free
> software, except for the BIOS which is... outside". (57:26)

You have to watch the entire segment and keep it in context to 
understand what was being said. It was not that there weren't any 
non-free bits. It was that there weren't any OS-loaded non-free 
firmwares or drivers that would interfere with compatibility and 
support. Notice the word 'outside' in the quotes. That part might not 
have been very clear, but by BIOS I was really referring to anything not 
loaded by the OS, and it was clearer if you quoted the later bit:

"basically anything that is loaded by the operating system is free"

Which obviously excludes the BIOS, hard disk firmware, keyboard/LCD 
controller firmware, CPU micro code, etc. These bits are all stored on 
flash and not loaded by the OS (or need not be loaded by the OS as a 
result).

Humorously it also becomes more apparent when you take into account that 
I had mentioned Linux Mint alongside Trisquel. This was essentially a 
sales pitch to users of non-free distributions (ie most Linux Action 
Show viewers) to care about and understand some of the damage done by 
proprietary drivers/firmware.

> Fast forwarding to November 2015 when FSF announces the discounted
> ThinkPenguin products for their associate members.
> 
> https://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/fsf-members-now-get-5-off-thinkpenguin-free-software-friendly-devices
> 
> Quoting:
> 
> "ThinkPenguin sells free software-friendly hardware, including laptops,
> desktops, WiFi adapters (useful if your laptop's WiFi can't work with a
> free driver), printers and more."
> 
> I guess it's convenient to have FSF recommend their associate members
> your laptops and desktops with proprietary BIOS 1 month after their 
> 30th
> anniversary in October.

These were not my words and I'm not sure this is really incorrect. The 
laptops and desktops do support 100% free distributions like Trisquel 
and Parabola GNU/Linux-libre.

> Right after in October you were sending off Libreboot founder and lead
> developer to go work on free software for GPS devices, because in your
> opinion she "would have done better" . You went on and said the effort
> to have free BIOS for older laptops "would have been better spent
> elsewhere", because getting software freedom-respecting laptops "is a
> harder problem to solve and it is going to require massive amounts of
> money".

Yes- I did say something along those lines. It's taken out of context 
though. I didn't feel that LibreBoot was the best approach and suggested 
working on a different hardware effort. I still would like someone to 
produce a free software GPS navigation device.

To back up on why this was the wrong approach you have to look back to 
2009 when I began looking into CoreBoot and talking with CoreBoot 
developers about porting of CoreBoot to modern systems. This was mainly 
at LinuxCon 2009. The problem as it was explained to me is it's 
difficult enough to port CoreBoot from one system to another let alone 
to newer generation hardware. At the time things were going from being 
difficult to impossible because Intel was adding signature checking. 
Ultimately it wasn't going to work out long term so we didn't move on 
it, and it hasn't. There were other important projects we worked on 
instead including getting sources for modern USB N wifi chipsets and 
resurrecting LibreWRT.

If you look at what we've done since then it becomes obvious why that 
was the wrong approach too. Luke was working on a modular computing 
standard (EOMA68) and we teamed up with him to work on this. He was the 
only person working on anything that seemed remotely plausible for a 
solution to the problem. The reason we went this way was because it 
would reduce the cost long term of designing and manufacturing systems 
that we would be able to make utilizing only 100% free software. It also 
gives us an additional angle. Because we can easily switch CPU/SOCs  we 
can play prisoners dilemma with the companies designing the CPUs/SOCs. 
If one or a handful don't cooperate with us we can easily switch to a 
competing CPU. It's much less likely to fail because of financial issues 
(insurmountable costs to design a new model or inability to get 
cases/parts, etc), will scale, and won't hit a brick wall like how 
LibreBoot has.

> 
> https://trisquel.info/en/forum/asus-chromebook-c201-now-supported-libreboot-arm-cpu?page=1#comment-80943
> 
> It's also convenient to let know all FSF associate members that your
> devices are OK in respect to freedom:
> 
> "5% off free software-friendly devices from ThinkPenguin" --
> https://my.fsf.org/
> 
> But for you it must be as you say, just a "minor issue" you "can't
> afford waste time" on it. For the rest of us, including founder of the
> free software movement and the GNU project, it's not:

I'm having a hard time taking you seriously. Wake me when you've 
actually contributed something of significance and aren't just trying to 
undermine those working on solving these problems. For some of us it 
isn't about financial gain. We actually want to see 100% free hardware.


> 
> On 16.08.2016 22:52, Richard Stallman wrote:
>> On 16.08.2016 17:14, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
>>> IMO, we should teach users to avoid this ambiguous term. Instead of
>>> "free software friendly", they should use the term "compatible with
>>> fully free operating systems" if the hardware is compatible with free
>>> distros endorsed by FSF.
>> 
>> I agree.  The FSF could post something about this.  I will suggest it
>> to the campaigns people.
>> 
>> In the long term, I hope that our endorsement, RYF, will set a
>> standard and that people will come to see other terms, without clear
>> and strict definitions as inadequate.


From chris at thinkpenguin.com  Thu Aug 25 18:24:27 2016
From: chris at thinkpenguin.com (Christopher Waid)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 14:24:27 -0400
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <1472115690.1110.46.camel@paulk.fr>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
 <1472115690.1110.46.camel@paulk.fr>
Message-ID: <40b8ad42c08d47c86d2f972fbde6daa9@thinkpenguin.com>

On 2016-08-25 05:01 AM, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Le jeudi 25 ao?t 2016 ? 04:42 -0400, Christopher Waid a ?crit :
>> The laptops we sell currently @ ThinkPenguin are not RYF'd and 
>> shouldn't
>> be RYF'd, but we are working on something better than LibreBoot in 
>> that
>> it solves the free software problems in a more permanent long term 
>> way:
>> EOMA68. X86 is dead and we do not need LibreBoot for non-X86 systems.
> 
> I'm very surprised to read this. How do we not need Libreboot in 
> general?
> 
> Having a fully free bootup software distribution is IMO crucial to pave 
> the road
> for free software support. Note that U-Boot includes proprietary 
> software and
> should not be included as-is in or recommended by any FSDG-compliant 
> dsitros.
> 
> Also, Libreboot is currently based on Coreboot (which, by the way, 
> supports an
> increasing number of ARM devices, with Chromebooks) but there's not 
> reason it
> can't handle U-Boot in the future too, or whatever other free bootup 
> software.
> 
> So with upcoming ARM Chromebooks, the very large number of ARM devices 
> that can
> boot up with free software and other interesting platforms such as 
> POWER8 and
> POWER9, Libreboot still has a bright future ahead.

We already have completely free versions of Uboot for various ARM and 
MIPS devices. All of our routers have shipped with the complete set of 
source code for the OS and bootloader. The devices are RYF certified and 
do not contain any proprietary bits in the version of Uboot run on our 
routers.

https://www.thinkpenguin.com/gnu-linux/free-software-wireless-n-mini-vpn-router-tpe-r1100

I want to make it clear that I don't dislike LibreBoot and I'm not 
saying it has no value. It's value right now to me is clear. It's 100% 
free software for what is otherwise proprietary. I value that. As we 
move away from X86 the value in it from a freedom-perspective will 
diminish as alternatives exist. In that position I would begin to think 
about alternative projects to work on if my primary focus was advancing 
software freedom.

What I believe will make it valuable to people down the line will be 
functionality (within the free software community and maybe even 
beyond). I don't know what this functionality is right now and I simply 
know that it's got value to some use case still. If I had to take an 
educated guess I'd probably say it has functionality which is useful to 
system administrators in server environments. From what I understand of 
CoreBoot from which LibreBoot is derived that functionality was what has 
in the past spurred CoreBoot's adoption by those outside the free 
software world.

If servers were a high priority for us (they aren't) I'd probably be 
pushing/sponsoring LibreBoot. I was the first person to suggest 
LibreBoot add a donation option. Right now our focus is on laptops, 
desktops, and typical end-user hardware. I want to see GNU/Linux and 
free software adopted by the masses. It's largely won in the server 
arena and there is a huge market opportunity here for free software 
servers to anyone who wished to pursue it.

> 
>> The reason this issue hasn't been solved by us is because it's simply
>> not possible given Intel's hostility and refusal to cooperate. Reverse
>> engineering is a non-trivial task and the resulting code would not run
>> on modern Intel systems due to digital signatures.
> 
> Of course, we all agree that x86 is a dead-end, at least in the long 
> run. There
> are still possibilities with somewhat old Intel and AMD hardware, but 
> these will
> be outdated eventually. Also, note that most of these old x86 platforms 
> are
> much, much faster than the A20.

Of course. The solution isn't intended to outperform. It's intended to 
solve a problem. That problem is X86 doesn't work for us and it's too 
costly to have to design and manufacture our own non-x86 hardware (which 
is critical given all newer non-X86 hardware is dependent on other 
proprietary components such as 802.11ac wifi chips). The solution to 
that is modularization. This has a side benefit of making it easy and 
cheap (relatively speaking, and therefore feasible) to manufacture new 
'models' in addition to giving us inroads to obtain source code for 
higher end CPUs [moving forward]. Even ones that aren't yet on the 
market! That's a huge change to the two steps forward one step back we 
were doing before. Right now we are several years behind because of our 
dependence on X86 and companies who won't cooperate. By moving away and 
modularizing we can let companies designing CPUs cater to our demands. 
This is what you get from competition.

> 
>> We can do a lot more  than what is feasible with LibreBoot, but it has 
>> taken
>> years. Now that EOMA68 crowd funding campaign has succeeded though or 
>> is about
>> to succeed we can do a 100% free software system
> 
> Note that the level of free software support brought by the EOMA68 is 
> not really
> something new.

This is incorrect or a misunderstanding of the value here. Its taken 
years and a lot of reverse engineering to get the Allwinner A20 
supported. While the first computer card is in part built off the work 
of others at a component level it's not the value for which I'm 
referring that EOMA68 adds in relation to free software. The value is in 
the modular standard and what it is enabling us to do in the free 
software world. To look at the CPU and components individually is to 
misunderstand the value in this project. It was not essential that we 
utilize the Allwinner A20. It just made a lot of sense given the work 
others have already done including the work of Luke (for which we 
sponsored). The value is we get to pick and choose each part that goes 
into a system and when one company upstream doesn't cooperate we can 
look elsewhere. We don't have to spend years reverse engineering parts 
thereof when we can work in collaboration with the companies upstream 
doing the design of these CPUs/SOCs. To achieve that we need control 
over the design and manufacturing process. This is not something we had 
before. This is not something most companies have. Most companies build 
off of reference designs and the product designs are little different 
than the reference designs in many if not most cases. A tweak or two at 
best.

> There have been dozens of computers, some of which come with a
> free board design, using platforms that are as good for freedom, 
> especially with
> Allwinner (but there are lots of others). The linux-sunxi community has 
> been
> working hard on those for years and years, so this is nothing new or 
> specific to
> the EOMA68.
> 
> Many ARM Chromebooks even go a step further, with a free software 
> embedded
> controller firmware.

I'm in many cases referring to laptop designs. This isn't totally 
correct though particularly as it relates to laptops. All of the ARM 
Chromebooks have fundamental problems in one way or the other. There are 
no free software friendly 802.11ac wifi chips and these wifi chips are 
integrated on every single modern Chromebook that is readily available 
[last I checked]. You can't easily replace these chips like you can with 
X86. To solve this problem and many others in the process is to gain 
control over the overall design and what you can utilize as your 
building blocks. With the laptop housing that is part of this crowd 
funding campaign you'll be able to get an Allwinner dual-core A20 on the 
Libre Tea Computer Card today and upgrade to a quad-core CPU tomorrow. 
It won't cost $500 either. It'll be under $100.

> 
>> (that is LibreBoot doesn't magically make a computer 100% free, there 
>> are
>> other problematic components).
> 
> Of course, but nobody claimed that it does. It is only a very 
> significant piece
> in the software freedom puzzle.

It's one of many pieces. It's not quite as significant as people think. 
If it were gone it wouldn't really make any difference.

There are many components for which we are dependent and there are no 
alternative options. Wifi firmwares are a great example. We have only 
one driver and chip for modern 802.11n that we can utilize (AR9271) and 
nothing for 802.11ac (in any format, PCIE/M.2/USB). It won't be the case 
that we can get AR9271 adapters manufactured forever and at some point 
it will become critical that we work on obtaining sources [another 
project we're working on].

Wifi cards are fundamental to modern computers. You can still get away 
without 3D acceleration, but good luck with a system that doesn't have 
internet connectivity.

There are zero good options for graphics right now too. Graphics are not 
quite critical because we can ship without it for the moment and the 
user experience is still "good enough", but it is certainly more 
important than LibreBoot.

LibreBoot is a duplication of effort as far as critical components are 
concerned and we should try to avoid duplication of efforts given the 
limited resources available.

> 
>> We've got the source code for LCD/Keyboard controller firmware,
> 
> Regarding LCD: are you talking about a MIPI interface done in software 
> with a
> MCU? Please feel free to share details about this LCD controller 
> firmware, I'd
> be very interested to learn more about it, it sounds unusual!

I know a little bit about it, but not enough to give you details. The 
details are readily available though.

Unlike many 'free' projects everything has been and is being documented. 
There is one piece that hasn't been published yet (schematics, but this 
isn't a libre issue, you can have a libre system and a non-libre design, 
however full schematics will be released shortly, there is almost no 
libre-designs that are actually libre because most are dependent on 
non-free components like wifi chips that depend on proprietary 
drivers/firmware), but its coming. Luke was a bit concerned of attacks 
on our efforts before the campaign was finished. With good reason. There 
was already one effort to undercut the project that failed. Someone Luke 
had talked to began a crowd funding campaign to raise funds for a 
modular computer. They did not care about freedom nor did they have an 
actual prototype. If it wasn't a fraud they would have had to have 
designed it after the fact. They created fake drawings/mock ups and 
similar. Unlike the many crowd funding efforts out there we actually 
have working prototypes because we funded his work.

This said contact lkcl at lkcl.net and he can get you hacking on it if 
you want to help out. This is a community endeavor and there are other 
people working on adding support for different language keyboards and 
similar (a French layout).

> 
>> bootloaders, CPU micro code
> 
> Huh? Again, please share details about the CPU microcodes. I am not 
> aware of any
> ARMv7 implementation using a microcode at all, nor of any that was 
> liberated.

Overgeneralized. As far as the A20 goes you are correct. I can confirm 
that there is no micro code in this particular CPU.

I'll throw out some other words that may make more sense here:

SPL uboot in mainline 2015-10- ddr3 timeings initialization and pll 
clocks.

>> and similar for the EOMA68 laptop housing and Libre Tea Computer Card. 
>> That's
>> huge. And there are more significant developments coming including the 
>> release
>> of schematics and higher end CPUs.
> 
> I fully agree that this is great and I support your project. However, 
> keep in
> mind that this is nothing new or groundbreaking (not to undermine the 
> project
> and the efforts associated with it).

I disagree. There is simply nothing you can compare this project to. We 
are achieving results that can't be demonstrated via any other means. If 
we could get here some other way at a lower cost with the same long term 
impact I would have gone that route.

The issue is your looking at one thing. A few specs. It's not the specs 
that matter. It's the standard, it's the modularization, it's the 
response and cooperation we are getting already as a result of our 
actions here, etc. Intel and AMD are not going to cooperate and building 
off of other companies products (higher up the chain) is not a reliable 
long term solution.




From tct at ceata.org  Thu Aug 25 22:26:12 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 01:26:12 +0300
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <57BEE8C4.4000006@ceata.org>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <1472127934.3259.10.camel@adfeno-VPCEG17FB> <57BEE8C4.4000006@ceata.org>
Message-ID: <57BF7084.9080908@ceata.org>

On 25.08.2016 15:47, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
> On 25.08.2016 15:25, Adonay Felipe Nogueira wrote:
>> This issue of "you said it is 'libre' but I prove it's not", and even
>> the issue regarding the older publication on ThinkPenguin's site, can be
>> easily solved by changing terms/words accordingly there. There's no need
>> to make everyone mad at each other.
> 
> It's not just about terminology. It's about deliberately misinforming
> the people to back your project because it's been libre hardware and
> libre software "right from the beginning". And also misinforming people
> to think it's OK for their freedom to buy laptops with proprietary BIOS
> rather than with Libreboot.

Richard Stallman has just confirmed me that FSF has not received the PCB
design sources along with the Libre Tea Computer Card.

I hope that now everyone understands that this EOMA68 board is *not*
libre hardware as claimed.

Tiberiu


From contact at paulk.fr  Thu Aug 25 22:33:59 2016
From: contact at paulk.fr (Paul Kocialkowski)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 00:33:59 +0200
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <57BF7084.9080908@ceata.org>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <1472127934.3259.10.camel@adfeno-VPCEG17FB> <57BEE8C4.4000006@ceata.org>
 <57BF7084.9080908@ceata.org>
Message-ID: <1472164439.1216.2.camel@paulk.fr>

Le vendredi 26 ao?t 2016 ? 01:26 +0300, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic a ?crit?:
> On 25.08.2016 15:47, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
> > 
> > On 25.08.2016 15:25, Adonay Felipe Nogueira wrote:
> > > 
> > > This issue of "you said it is 'libre' but I prove it's not", and even
> > > the issue regarding the older publication on ThinkPenguin's site, can be
> > > easily solved by changing terms/words accordingly there. There's no need
> > > to make everyone mad at each other.
> > 
> > It's not just about terminology. It's about deliberately misinforming
> > the people to back your project because it's been libre hardware and
> > libre software "right from the beginning". And also misinforming people
> > to think it's OK for their freedom to buy laptops with proprietary BIOS
> > rather than with Libreboot.
> 
> Richard Stallman has just confirmed me that FSF has not received the PCB
> design sources along with the Libre Tea Computer Card.
> 
> I hope that now everyone understands that this EOMA68 board is *not*
> libre hardware as claimed.

LKCL made it clear already: the EOMA68 circuit board design is not libre
hardware for now, but may be liberated in the future.

Where (except for the Parabola news we just fixed) did you see anyone claim that
it's libre hardware?

-- 
Paul Kocialkowski, developer of low-level free software for embedded devices

Website: https://www.paulk.fr/
Coding blog: https://code.paulk.fr/
Git repositories: https://git.paulk.fr/ https://git.code.paulk.fr/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

From tct at ceata.org  Thu Aug 25 23:11:46 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 02:11:46 +0300
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <1472164439.1216.2.camel@paulk.fr>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <1472127934.3259.10.camel@adfeno-VPCEG17FB> <57BEE8C4.4000006@ceata.org>
 <57BF7084.9080908@ceata.org> <1472164439.1216.2.camel@paulk.fr>
Message-ID: <57BF7B32.5070604@ceata.org>

On 26.08.2016 01:33, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> Le vendredi 26 ao?t 2016 ? 01:26 +0300, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic a ?crit :
>> On 25.08.2016 15:47, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
>>>
>>> On 25.08.2016 15:25, Adonay Felipe Nogueira wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This issue of "you said it is 'libre' but I prove it's not", and even
>>>> the issue regarding the older publication on ThinkPenguin's site, can be
>>>> easily solved by changing terms/words accordingly there. There's no need
>>>> to make everyone mad at each other.
>>>
>>> It's not just about terminology. It's about deliberately misinforming
>>> the people to back your project because it's been libre hardware and
>>> libre software "right from the beginning". And also misinforming people
>>> to think it's OK for their freedom to buy laptops with proprietary BIOS
>>> rather than with Libreboot.
>>
>> Richard Stallman has just confirmed me that FSF has not received the PCB
>> design sources along with the Libre Tea Computer Card.
>>
>> I hope that now everyone understands that this EOMA68 board is *not*
>> libre hardware as claimed.
> 
> LKCL made it clear already: the EOMA68 circuit board design is not libre
> hardware for now, but may be liberated in the future.
> 
> Where (except for the Parabola news we just fixed) did you see anyone claim that
> it's libre hardware?

Yes, I've been explaining this separately in the Trisquel-users forum:

https://trisquel.info/en/forum/re-dev-misleading-information-eoma68-news

Sadly, I couldn't Cc the other lists while posting directly in the forum
and I have posted directly in the forum because it takes some time for a
mail in the Trisquel-users mailing list to be posted automatically in
the forum as well.

The claim that it's "libre hardware" originates, of course, in their
crowdfunding campaign, where they state that "This project has been
extremely unusual in that it has been a Libre Hardware and Software
project right from the beginning. [...] A commitment to being fully
Libre is a critical strategic part of this project."

https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68/micro-desktop

Hackerboards article, quoted in the campaign's page:

"The EOMA68-A20 COM and systems are claimed to be scrupulously ?libre?
in both hardware and software"
http://hackerboards.com/open-source-com-and-carriers-become-3d-printable-computers/

Liliputing article, quoted in the campaign's page:

"Part of what makes the EOMA68 unusual is that all of the software,
hardware schematics, and even CAD files for the case design are all
available for free."
http://liliputing.com/2016/06/crowdfunding-begins-modular-eoma68-pc-system-laptop-desktop-upgradeable-pc-card.html

Retro-Freedom article, quoted in the campaign's page:

"we need computers that [...] Are based on libre hardware designs. [...]
Why the EOMA68 solves our problems"
http://retro-freedom.nz/blog/2016/06/30/eoma68-my-dream-machine/

Xataka article, quoted in the campaign's page:

"Parte de la gracia que tiene el sistema est? en la en que todo lo que
lo rodea es libre y gratuito. Me explico, tanto el software, como los
esquemas de hardware, adem?s de los ficheros CAD, son de libre acceso"
http://www.xataka.com/makers/el-cerebro-de-todos-tus-gadgets-puede-caber-en-una-cartera-eoma68

And other articles quoted in the campaign's page reiterate the same claim.

Additionally, the discussions have been reiterating the same claim:

"Open Source" Hardware Association's mailing list:

http://lists.oshwa.org/pipermail/discuss/2016-August/001865.html

"Open" Manufacturing Group's mailing list:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/openmanufacturing/5Wi1poeK4B4/02CC4uLMAAAJ
(https://groups.google.com/forum/#!aboutgroup/openmanufacturing)

Free Software Foundation community mailing list LibrePlanet-discuss:

Thread #1: EOMA68 - We have to get Free Hardware!

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreplanet-discuss/2016-07/msg00023.html

Thread #2:  EOMA68 - libre software, libre hardware, and eco-

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreplanet-discuss/2016-07/msg00002.html

And the list can go on.


From g4jc at openmailbox.org  Thu Aug 25 23:39:30 2016
From: g4jc at openmailbox.org (Luke)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 19:39:30 -0400
Subject: [Dev] parabola.goodgnus.com.ar mirror down
Message-ID: <8673fdd3-bff6-10ae-c674-c045b3352feb@openmailbox.org>

Hello,

Just so everyone knows in advanced, we have received a large spike in
users over the past few days. While this is great news for the overall
project, it is putting too much strain on the parabola.goodgnus.com.ar
mirror.

I received word today that the bandwidth usage has expired after
surpassing 1TB during this payment period.

Due to this, all users are advised to use server2.goodgnus.com.ar until
I can find a better host for the main mirror.

Thank you.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: 

From emulatorman at riseup.net  Fri Aug 26 01:03:39 2016
From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Andr=c3=a9_Silva?=)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 22:03:39 -0300
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
 <57BEC18C.3070209@ceata.org>
 <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
Message-ID: 

Hi guys, i let you know that our url about EOMA68 news has been changed
[0] to fix misleading information there too.

[0]:https://www.parabola.nu/news/new-ryf-seeking-hardware-crowdfunding-project-with-parabola-pre-installed/

On 08/25/2016 08:18 PM, Christopher Waid wrote:
> On 2016-08-25 05:59 AM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
>> On 25.08.2016 11:42, Christopher Waid wrote:
>>> I'm having a hard time taking you seriously. Wake me when you've
>>> actually contributed something of significance and aren't just trying to
>>> undermine those working on solving these problems. For some of us it
>>> isn't about financial gain. We actually want to see 100% free hardware.
>>
>> I don't need you to take me seriously. I'm merely stating the facts and
>> drawing logical conclusions. I could be just a new free software user
>> with no contribution what so ever.
> 
> No. Your selectively quoting with the clear intent to mislead. You are
> doing exactly what you propose we're doing. There is a difference
> between accidentally misstating something technical and selectively
> pulling quotes that make it sound as if I was misleading people.
> 
>>
>> If you believe that what I'm doing is undermining your projects, then
>> you might be do something wrong in your projects. Like claiming your
>> proprietary BIOS laptops and desktops are OK in regard to software
>> freedom as your WiFi adapters.
> 
> I never made that claim. You are twisting words around as if that is
> what I was saying. It was clear from the video and I'd encourage anybody
> who believes this to watch it.
> 
>> Like claiming EOMA68 board is libre
>> hardware although no one has access to the PCB CAD files under a
>> free/libre license.
> 
> Everything is already available with one exception that was clearly
> stated and the reason why. Luke was upfront about everything:
> 
> "The only exception to this rule to release everything in advance is the
> PCB CAD files for the Computer Card. We?re planning to release the PCB
> CAD files for the Computer card once sufficient units are hit that
> ensures any third party manufacturing runs will not undermine the
> project?s development or stability."
> 
> I also already explained that someone has already attempted to undermine
> the project. The decision to withhold this is temporary, and nobody said
> it was beholden on the success of the campaign even, and given that we
> have already released everything else our intent is clear.
> 
> It's also unusual to release this kind of thing if it is released at all
> prior to the shipping of the rewards. It's not even wrong to release
> nothing until after the crowd funding campaign is done or the rewards
> ship. The fact it is being done prior is in spirit with the philosophy
> and a mark of good will toward the community.
> 
>> Like not guaranteeing EOMA68 campaign backers that
>> they will receive the PCB CAD files under a free license along with the
>> EOMA68 product when shipped.
> 
> It's already abundantly clear that it's going to be released. We're at
> $145,300 of $150,000 as of this moment. That is 97% and there is still
> 25 hours to go. There is zero chance we won't hit that target and
> technically we already surpassed the number needed for us to proceed
> because the # we estimated could not be 100% determined until we knew
> the ratios of rewards. Given that I don't see any reason Luke won't post
> the files soon. If he doesn't though it still won't matter from an
> ethical stand point because they will be released well before anybody
> gets these devices and it will be within the statements/promises made.
> Nobody is breaking a promise here.
> 
>> Like claiming EOMA68 board is a
>> breakthrough in the line of software freedom. Like undermining Libreboot
>> project and spreading FUD about it (that Libreboot is only for old
>> x86-based laptops).
> 
> While it supports a newer ARM laptop or two it's not any better
> ethically speaking from a freedom stand point than using free versions
> of Uboot. These Chromebooks are actually hostile to users freedom and
> I'd highly discourage people from going this route. The older X86
> LibreBoot laptops don't depend on proprietary firmwares for the wifi
> chips. With the older X86 laptops you can replace the internal wifi
> cards with free ones. That's not possible on the newer Chromebooks. This
> is just one great example of why EOMA68 matters so much.
> 
> LibreBoot's value when you talk about freedom is on older X86 laptops.
> This is not FUD, just fact. There may be other features that are
> desirable and therefore support of EOMA68 devices makes sense. However
> it is not an ethics or freedom issue.
> 
>> Like not providing config file to build LibreCMC.
> 
> You are flat out lying. We ship it with every router on CD.
> 
>> Like LibreCMC not building at all lately.
> 
> This is nonsense. There are better directions for building LibreCMC than
> just about any other project and we are frequently complimented on how
> easy it is to get working. The Software Freedom Conservancy even used
> our routers as an example of how to do GPL compliance properly:
> https://copyleft.org/guide/comprehensive-gpl-guidech22.html. If there
> are issues building LibreCMC it's not something we did explicitly. It
> could be any number of problems.
> 
> This is telling:
> 
> "If an investigator of average skill in embedded firmware construction
> can surmise the proper procedures to build and install a replacement
> firmware, the instructions are likely sufficient to meet GPL?s
> requirements."
> 
> Given they were able to build an image independent of us and are not the
> only ones it's reasonable to state you are full of it. We even improved
> the directions to make them better in the one area that they indicated
> improvement could be made (it was still completely GPL compliant despite
> this).
> 
>> Like corrupting FSF to recommend your proprietary BIOS laptops and
>> desktops.
> 
> Is anybody here buying this? The FSF is a totally independent
> organization that we have zero effective influence over. There is
> insignificant amounts going to the FSF relative to the donations and
> monies coming from other sources. It might not have been a good idea for
> them to word this as they did. However I did not have any involvement in
> this wording and there is no money being exchanged here.
> 
> Here is the disclaimer: 10% of our regular eBay sales go to the FSF.
> This amount is donated via proxy and therefore I don't even think the
> FSF is aware that said donations are coming from us. I have an associate
> member subscription with the FSF. I have purchased a lot of t-shirts
> from the FSF over the years. We have sponsored Libre Planet for a number
> of years. I was once in a bidding war for a GNU stuffed animal and a GNU
> 30th cup at the GNU 30th b'day party that resulted in less than $600 USD
> going to the FSF. These were less than $50 and you could buy them before
> and after the auction. During the holiday one year we did contribute
> some amount from each sale to the FSF during the holiday promotion
> guide. So did others I believe.
> 
> Now we do contribute to the Trisquel project 25% of the profits from any
> user purchasing through http://libre.thinkpenguin.com. This is the link
> that the FSF uses, many freedom conscious bloggers, Trisquel/FSF
> members, and so on. We have also sponsored Ruben's (Trisquel founder)
> accommodations or travel in the past when has come to Libre Planet. This
> pre-dates Ruben's employment with the FSF.
> 
> I think that sums it up. Nothing of significance relative to the million
> dollars they have (https://www.fsf.org/about/financial).
> 
> 
> 
> 


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: 

From tct at ceata.org  Fri Aug 26 02:03:40 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 05:03:40 +0300
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
 <57BEC18C.3070209@ceata.org>
 <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
Message-ID: <57BFA37C.6080303@ceata.org>

On 26.08.2016 02:18, Christopher Waid wrote:
> On 2016-08-25 05:59 AM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
>> On 25.08.2016 11:42, Christopher Waid wrote:
>>> I'm having a hard time taking you seriously. Wake me when you've
>>> actually contributed something of significance and aren't just trying to
>>> undermine those working on solving these problems. For some of us it
>>> isn't about financial gain. We actually want to see 100% free hardware.
>>
>> I don't need you to take me seriously. I'm merely stating the facts and
>> drawing logical conclusions. I could be just a new free software user
>> with no contribution what so ever.
> 
> No. Your selectively quoting with the clear intent to mislead. You are
> doing exactly what you propose we're doing. There is a difference
> between accidentally misstating something technical and selectively
> pulling quotes that make it sound as if I was misleading people.

Freedom is not a technicality, but I've been told this before by people
who do librewashing. Of course you're misleading people. You've been
doing this for several years and you're getting better and better at it.

Also, I'd like to mention that English is not my mother tongue (that is
Romanian) and I don't have the language skills to express my ideas as
well as a native, nor I have or desire to have your manipulation skills
to do brainwashing with gigantic replies. Moreover, I'm not getting paid
for my activism work, so if I'm spending time raising awareness on
freedom issues, I do it sacrificing hours I should be spending to be
able to support myself and in the process serve people hardware
compatible with fully free operating systems.

>> If you believe that what I'm doing is undermining your projects, then
>> you might be do something wrong in your projects. Like claiming your
>> proprietary BIOS laptops and desktops are OK in regard to software
>> freedom as your WiFi adapters.
> 
> I never made that claim. You are twisting words around as if that is
> what I was saying. It was clear from the video and I'd encourage anybody
> who believes this to watch it.

I will repeat the arguments and the logic once more. I hate that you're
wasting my time by making me do this over and over again, while instead
you could read again my arguments and logic and see if they make sense.
Okay, here is another attempt to prove that I'm not falsely accusing
you. This time I will break it into small baby steps.

Quoting:

"ThinkPenguin, Inc. is currently the only company with a significant
catalog selling free software friendly hardware. From wifi adapters and
printers to desktops and laptops. For more information on free software
friendly hardware check out the Free Software Foundation's Respect Your
Freedom web site at: fsf.org/ryf."
https://www.thinkpenguin.com/gnu-linux/short-interview-christopher-waid-about-thinkpenguin-linux-action-show

I'm now breaking this paragraph into logical sentences:

S1: ThinkPenguin has a significant catalog of free software friendly
hardware.

S2: ThinkPenguin's catalog of free software friendly hardware is
significant because it ranges from wifi adapters and printers to
desktops and laptops.

S1 & S2 => S3

S3: The free software friendly hardware at ThinkPenguin ranges from wifi
adapters and printers to desktops and laptops.

S4: So far ThinkPenguin has provided you information on the free
software friendly hardware at ThinkPenguin.

S5: For more information on free software friendly hardware, check out
FSF's RYF web site.

S4 & S5 => S6

S6: ThinkPenguin's free software friendly hardware is the same as the
hardware FSF says it respects your freedom.

S3 & S6 => S7

S7: ThinkPenguin's hardware ranging from wifi adapters and printers to
desktops and laptops respect your freedom.

This is basic logic any visitor reading the paragraph would apply and
reach the same conclusion.

(S)he couldn't find ThinkPenguin's laptops listed as certified on the
FSF's RYF page, but couldn't find listed some of ThinkPenguin's wifi
adapters either. Or some other hardware at ThinkPenguin, like printers,
for instance.

(S)he could think that ThinkPenguin has decided not to submit the
laptops for FSF's RYF certification, the way some of the ThinkPenguin's
wifi adapters haven't been submitted for certification, although all
their wifi adapters are respecting user's freedom. Or (s)he could simply
think that ThinkPenguin's laptops are currently under evaluation at FSF.

In any case, (s)he looks for the laptops at ThinkPenguin and find the
two product pages:

https://www.thinkpenguin.com/gnu-linux/korora-penguin-gnu-linux-notebook
https://www.thinkpenguin.com/gnu-linux/penguin-adelie-gnu-linux-laptop

(S)he's now looking at the notes below the product pictures and finds
the list of supported operating systems. After reading a list of several
common distros which ship nonfree software (Linux Mint 18, Ubuntu 16.04,
Slackware 14.2, Fedora 24, openSUSE Tumbleweed, Debian Testing, Arch),
(s)he finds listed free distros like Parabola and Trisquel. (S)he's
happy (s)he can run a fully free operating system on ThinkPenguin's laptop.

(S)he scraps the product pages of the laptops, then takes a closer look
at the specifications, and finds *no* warning these laptops have *big*
freedom issues such as proprietary BIOS. Happily (s)he orders one and
tells everyone (s)he has a ThinkPenguin laptop which respects her/his
freedom. If (s)he's lucky, a free software activist will tell her different.

If someone thinks only that page at ThinkPenguin throws their wifi
adapters and laptops in the same freedom category without warning about
the proprietary BIOS, (s)he's wrong. Their About page does the same
thing. A lot of pages at FSF about ThinkPenguin do the the same thing,
including:

*
https://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/fsf-members-now-get-5-off-thinkpenguin-free-software-friendly-devices
* https://fsf.org/associate/benefits/
* https://my.fsf.org/

When FSF approached me for including the Tehnoetic S2 preinstalled with
Replicant in the 2015 Giving Guide, I agreed. When I read the text they
prepared which was entirely positive, I asked them to include the
warning that the modem runs a proprietary system. And the Tehnoetic
devices preinstalled with Replicant have product pages filled with
warnings about the freedom issues. I've also integrated in the text
suggestions from PaulK (Replicant developer) and Tehnoetic customers to
make the warnings more clear.

https://www.fsf.org/givingguide/v6/
https://tehnoetic.com/mobile-devices

Below are more attempts of ThinkPenguin to brainwash people.

Like stating that they don't need to provide the PCB design sources
before the campaign ends, even though all this time they have falsely
claimed and fooled a lot of people into backing the campaign on the
premise that their project is "libre hardware right from the beginning",
making a lot of people including the Parabola developers (the free
distro they preinstall on their computer) to fall in the trap and
propagate this big lie. Like saying everything about a computer is
"libre hardware", err... with one exception... the *computer* itself!
Err... "every bit of firmware on our laptops is free software, except
for the BIOS which is... outside". "Libre" computer err... except the
computer. Every bit of firmware is free software, err... except the most
important firmware, the BIOS! But that's... "outside".

And other things. Like claiming a publicly available *not* self-hosting
*free* operating system doesn't have to include the config file (the
allegedly modified u-boot *bootloader* wasn't/isn't included either!) in
the sources for users of that *free* operating system to actually be
able to run that free system on a supported router, not necessarily
bought from ThinkPenguin.

Back and forth from LibreCMC project to ThinkPenguin and Software
Freedom Conservancy, I've been asking for the LibreCMC config file for a
target and free u-boot sources, with no success. Only few ThinkPenguin
customers on Trisquel forum have provided that:

https://trisquel.info/en/forum/thinkpenguins-heavily-modified-version-u-boot

Does for instance Replicant, another *not* self-hosted *free* system not
provide config files for targets along with the source code? Or the
bootloader for any new target that can have a free bootloader? It does
provide, because Replicant is a *true* free system, following the FSDG:

https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html#complete-distros


And many, many other lies and manipulations. I've spent again too much
of my time to raise awareness on the freedom issues of ThinkPenguin, so
I'll stop now because it's almost morning and no one pays me for my
activism work except my business Tehnoetic.

>> Like claiming EOMA68 board is libre
>> hardware although no one has access to the PCB CAD files under a
>> free/libre license.
> 
> Everything is already available with one exception that was clearly
> stated and the reason why. Luke was upfront about everything:
> 
> "The only exception to this rule to release everything in advance is the
> PCB CAD files for the Computer Card. We?re planning to release the PCB
> CAD files for the Computer card once sufficient units are hit that
> ensures any third party manufacturing runs will not undermine the
> project?s development or stability."
> 
> I also already explained that someone has already attempted to undermine
> the project. The decision to withhold this is temporary, and nobody said
> it was beholden on the success of the campaign even, and given that we
> have already released everything else our intent is clear.
> 
> It's also unusual to release this kind of thing if it is released at all
> prior to the shipping of the rewards. It's not even wrong to release
> nothing until after the crowd funding campaign is done or the rewards
> ship. The fact it is being done prior is in spirit with the philosophy
> and a mark of good will toward the community.
> 
>> Like not guaranteeing EOMA68 campaign backers that
>> they will receive the PCB CAD files under a free license along with the
>> EOMA68 product when shipped.
> 
> It's already abundantly clear that it's going to be released. We're at
> $145,300 of $150,000 as of this moment. That is 97% and there is still
> 25 hours to go. There is zero chance we won't hit that target and
> technically we already surpassed the number needed for us to proceed
> because the # we estimated could not be 100% determined until we knew
> the ratios of rewards. Given that I don't see any reason Luke won't post
> the files soon. If he doesn't though it still won't matter from an
> ethical stand point because they will be released well before anybody
> gets these devices and it will be within the statements/promises made.
> Nobody is breaking a promise here.
> 
>> Like claiming EOMA68 board is a
>> breakthrough in the line of software freedom. Like undermining Libreboot
>> project and spreading FUD about it (that Libreboot is only for old
>> x86-based laptops).
> 
> While it supports a newer ARM laptop or two it's not any better
> ethically speaking from a freedom stand point than using free versions
> of Uboot. These Chromebooks are actually hostile to users freedom and
> I'd highly discourage people from going this route. The older X86
> LibreBoot laptops don't depend on proprietary firmwares for the wifi
> chips. With the older X86 laptops you can replace the internal wifi
> cards with free ones. That's not possible on the newer Chromebooks. This
> is just one great example of why EOMA68 matters so much.
> 
> LibreBoot's value when you talk about freedom is on older X86 laptops.
> This is not FUD, just fact. There may be other features that are
> desirable and therefore support of EOMA68 devices makes sense. However
> it is not an ethics or freedom issue.
> 
>> Like not providing config file to build LibreCMC.
> 
> You are flat out lying. We ship it with every router on CD.
> 
>> Like LibreCMC not building at all lately.
> 
> This is nonsense. There are better directions for building LibreCMC than
> just about any other project and we are frequently complimented on how
> easy it is to get working. The Software Freedom Conservancy even used
> our routers as an example of how to do GPL compliance properly:
> https://copyleft.org/guide/comprehensive-gpl-guidech22.html. If there
> are issues building LibreCMC it's not something we did explicitly. It
> could be any number of problems.
> 
> This is telling:
> 
> "If an investigator of average skill in embedded firmware construction
> can surmise the proper procedures to build and install a replacement
> firmware, the instructions are likely sufficient to meet GPL?s
> requirements."
> 
> Given they were able to build an image independent of us and are not the
> only ones it's reasonable to state you are full of it. We even improved
> the directions to make them better in the one area that they indicated
> improvement could be made (it was still completely GPL compliant despite
> this).
> 
>> Like corrupting FSF to recommend your proprietary BIOS laptops and
>> desktops.
> 
> Is anybody here buying this? The FSF is a totally independent
> organization that we have zero effective influence over. There is
> insignificant amounts going to the FSF relative to the donations and
> monies coming from other sources. It might not have been a good idea for
> them to word this as they did. However I did not have any involvement in
> this wording and there is no money being exchanged here.
> 
> Here is the disclaimer: 10% of our regular eBay sales go to the FSF.
> This amount is donated via proxy and therefore I don't even think the
> FSF is aware that said donations are coming from us. I have an associate
> member subscription with the FSF. I have purchased a lot of t-shirts
> from the FSF over the years. We have sponsored Libre Planet for a number
> of years. I was once in a bidding war for a GNU stuffed animal and a GNU
> 30th cup at the GNU 30th b'day party that resulted in less than $600 USD
> going to the FSF. These were less than $50 and you could buy them before
> and after the auction. During the holiday one year we did contribute
> some amount from each sale to the FSF during the holiday promotion
> guide. So did others I believe.
> 
> Now we do contribute to the Trisquel project 25% of the profits from any
> user purchasing through http://libre.thinkpenguin.com. This is the link
> that the FSF uses, many freedom conscious bloggers, Trisquel/FSF
> members, and so on. We have also sponsored Ruben's (Trisquel founder)
> accommodations or travel in the past when has come to Libre Planet. This
> pre-dates Ruben's employment with the FSF.
> 
> I think that sums it up. Nothing of significance relative to the million
> dollars they have (https://www.fsf.org/about/financial).
> 
> 


From tct at ceata.org  Fri Aug 26 02:19:46 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 05:19:46 +0300
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: 
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
 <57BEC18C.3070209@ceata.org>
 <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
 
Message-ID: <57BFA742.3050408@ceata.org>

On 26.08.2016 04:03, Andr? Silva wrote:
> Hi guys, i let you know that our url about EOMA68 news has been changed
> [0] to fix misleading information there too.
> 
> [0]:https://www.parabola.nu/news/new-ryf-seeking-hardware-crowdfunding-project-with-parabola-pre-installed/

That's a good thing. Oh, but you missed something. At the bottom of the
news I read:

"EOMA68 - libre software, libre hardware, and eco-friendly too!"
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreplanet-discuss/2016-06/msg00208.html

IMO, you shouldn't link to that discussion which right from the subject
starts with the "libre hardware" lie.


From tct at ceata.org  Fri Aug 26 02:22:39 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 05:22:39 +0300
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: 
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <1472127934.3259.10.camel@adfeno-VPCEG17FB> <57BEE8C4.4000006@ceata.org>
 <57BF7084.9080908@ceata.org>
 
Message-ID: <57BFA7EF.7070602@ceata.org>

On 26.08.2016 05:16, Christopher Waid wrote:
> On 2016-08-25 06:26 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
>> On 25.08.2016 15:47, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
>>> On 25.08.2016 15:25, Adonay Felipe Nogueira wrote:
>>>> This issue of "you said it is 'libre' but I prove it's not", and even
>>>> the issue regarding the older publication on ThinkPenguin's site,
>>>> can be
>>>> easily solved by changing terms/words accordingly there. There's no
>>>> need
>>>> to make everyone mad at each other.
>>>
>>> It's not just about terminology. It's about deliberately misinforming
>>> the people to back your project because it's been libre hardware and
>>> libre software "right from the beginning". And also misinforming people
>>> to think it's OK for their freedom to buy laptops with proprietary BIOS
>>> rather than with Libreboot.
>>
>> Richard Stallman has just confirmed me that FSF has not received the PCB
>> design sources along with the Libre Tea Computer Card.
>>
>> I hope that now everyone understands that this EOMA68 board is *not*
>> libre hardware as claimed.
> 
> That doesn't make it "*not* libre hardware" as far as the FSF is
> concerned. The FSF *DOES NOT* require the PCB designs for RYF. 

RYF doesn't certify free hardware design. But "libre hardware" means
free-design hardware and that is explained in this essay you should read
sometimes:

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-hardware-designs.html

Using the definition there, of course EOMA68 computer is *not* "libre
hardware".


From tct at ceata.org  Fri Aug 26 02:29:29 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 05:29:29 +0300
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <2f2deb30f2ba0be1b287e10b3db824ec@thinkpenguin.com>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <1472127934.3259.10.camel@adfeno-VPCEG17FB> <57BEE8C4.4000006@ceata.org>
 <57BF7084.9080908@ceata.org> <1472164439.1216.2.camel@paulk.fr>
 <57BF7B32.5070604@ceata.org>
 <2f2deb30f2ba0be1b287e10b3db824ec@thinkpenguin.com>
Message-ID: <57BFA989.6090908@ceata.org>

On 26.08.2016 05:22, Christopher Waid wrote:
> The project is claiming to be a libre hardware/software project, not
> that everything has been released yet.

Then it's not a libre hardware project yet!

And need I remind you that outside your organization there is an
organization/user of an EOMA68 computer which haven't received the
product as a libre hardware product, because free PCB files have not
been provided?

https://trisquel.info/en/forum/re-dev-misleading-information-eoma68-news#comment-101871


From lkcl at lkcl.net  Fri Aug 26 02:54:53 2016
From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 03:54:53 +0100
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <57BF7084.9080908@ceata.org>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <1472127934.3259.10.camel@adfeno-VPCEG17FB> <57BEE8C4.4000006@ceata.org>
 <57BF7084.9080908@ceata.org>
Message-ID: 

tiberiu: please cease and desist from emailing me.  you are not
authorised to use my email address.


From johns at fsf.org  Fri Aug 26 03:22:44 2016
From: johns at fsf.org (John Sullivan)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 23:22:44 -0400
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <57BFA37C.6080303@ceata.org> (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic's message
 of "Fri, 26 Aug 2016 05:03:40 +0300")
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
 <57BEC18C.3070209@ceata.org>
 <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BFA37C.6080303@ceata.org>
Message-ID: <87d1kw6wor.fsf@wjsullivan.net>

Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic  writes:

> Below are more attempts of ThinkPenguin to brainwash people.
>

This stops now on this list. ThinkPenguin is not deliberately attempting
to brainwash anyone, and we won't tolerate accusations of bad faith
here.

What this *should* be is a discussion among people on the same side to
refine text and messaging such that it is accurate, approachable, and
effective. Please make it that.

-john

-- 
John Sullivan | Executive Director, Free Software Foundation
GPG Key: A462 6CBA FF37 6039 D2D7 5544 97BA 9CE7 61A0 963B
http://status.fsf.org/johns | http://fsf.org/blogs/RSS

Do you use free software? Donate to join the FSF and support freedom at
.


From johns at fsf.org  Fri Aug 26 03:26:57 2016
From: johns at fsf.org (John Sullivan)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 23:26:57 -0400
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <87d1kw6wor.fsf@wjsullivan.net> (John Sullivan's message of "Thu, 
 25 Aug 2016 23:22:44 -0400")
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
 <57BEC18C.3070209@ceata.org>
 <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BFA37C.6080303@ceata.org> <87d1kw6wor.fsf@wjsullivan.net>
Message-ID: <871t1c6whq.fsf@wjsullivan.net>

John Sullivan  writes:

> Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic  writes:
>
>> Below are more attempts of ThinkPenguin to brainwash people.
>>
>
> This stops now on this list.

(By "this list", I mean libreplanet-discuss.)

-john

-- 
John Sullivan | Executive Director, Free Software Foundation
GPG Key: A462 6CBA FF37 6039 D2D7 5544 97BA 9CE7 61A0 963B
http://status.fsf.org/johns | http://fsf.org/blogs/RSS

Do you use free software? Donate to join the FSF and support freedom at
.


From tct at ceata.org  Fri Aug 26 03:42:47 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 06:42:47 +0300
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <87d1kw6wor.fsf@wjsullivan.net>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
 <57BEC18C.3070209@ceata.org>
 <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BFA37C.6080303@ceata.org> <87d1kw6wor.fsf@wjsullivan.net>
Message-ID: <57BFBAB7.6060107@ceata.org>

On 26.08.2016 06:22, John Sullivan wrote
> What this *should* be is a discussion among people on the same side to
> refine text and messaging such that it is accurate, approachable, and
> effective. Please make it that.

I believe your or other FSF staff member's comments on the points raised
here could help this discussion reach some conclusions.


From chris at thinkpenguin.com  Thu Aug 25 23:18:37 2016
From: chris at thinkpenguin.com (Christopher Waid)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 19:18:37 -0400
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <57BEC18C.3070209@ceata.org>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
 <57BEC18C.3070209@ceata.org>
Message-ID: <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>

On 2016-08-25 05:59 AM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
> On 25.08.2016 11:42, Christopher Waid wrote:
>> I'm having a hard time taking you seriously. Wake me when you've
>> actually contributed something of significance and aren't just trying 
>> to
>> undermine those working on solving these problems. For some of us it
>> isn't about financial gain. We actually want to see 100% free 
>> hardware.
> 
> I don't need you to take me seriously. I'm merely stating the facts and
> drawing logical conclusions. I could be just a new free software user
> with no contribution what so ever.

No. Your selectively quoting with the clear intent to mislead. You are 
doing exactly what you propose we're doing. There is a difference 
between accidentally misstating something technical and selectively 
pulling quotes that make it sound as if I was misleading people.

> 
> If you believe that what I'm doing is undermining your projects, then
> you might be do something wrong in your projects. Like claiming your
> proprietary BIOS laptops and desktops are OK in regard to software
> freedom as your WiFi adapters.

I never made that claim. You are twisting words around as if that is 
what I was saying. It was clear from the video and I'd encourage anybody 
who believes this to watch it.

> Like claiming EOMA68 board is libre
> hardware although no one has access to the PCB CAD files under a
> free/libre license.

Everything is already available with one exception that was clearly 
stated and the reason why. Luke was upfront about everything:

"The only exception to this rule to release everything in advance is the 
PCB CAD files for the Computer Card. We?re planning to release the PCB 
CAD files for the Computer card once sufficient units are hit that 
ensures any third party manufacturing runs will not undermine the 
project?s development or stability."

I also already explained that someone has already attempted to undermine 
the project. The decision to withhold this is temporary, and nobody said 
it was beholden on the success of the campaign even, and given that we 
have already released everything else our intent is clear.

It's also unusual to release this kind of thing if it is released at all 
prior to the shipping of the rewards. It's not even wrong to release 
nothing until after the crowd funding campaign is done or the rewards 
ship. The fact it is being done prior is in spirit with the philosophy 
and a mark of good will toward the community.

> Like not guaranteeing EOMA68 campaign backers that
> they will receive the PCB CAD files under a free license along with the
> EOMA68 product when shipped.

It's already abundantly clear that it's going to be released. We're at 
$145,300 of $150,000 as of this moment. That is 97% and there is still 
25 hours to go. There is zero chance we won't hit that target and 
technically we already surpassed the number needed for us to proceed 
because the # we estimated could not be 100% determined until we knew 
the ratios of rewards. Given that I don't see any reason Luke won't post 
the files soon. If he doesn't though it still won't matter from an 
ethical stand point because they will be released well before anybody 
gets these devices and it will be within the statements/promises made. 
Nobody is breaking a promise here.

> Like claiming EOMA68 board is a
> breakthrough in the line of software freedom. Like undermining 
> Libreboot
> project and spreading FUD about it (that Libreboot is only for old
> x86-based laptops).

While it supports a newer ARM laptop or two it's not any better 
ethically speaking from a freedom stand point than using free versions 
of Uboot. These Chromebooks are actually hostile to users freedom and 
I'd highly discourage people from going this route. The older X86 
LibreBoot laptops don't depend on proprietary firmwares for the wifi 
chips. With the older X86 laptops you can replace the internal wifi 
cards with free ones. That's not possible on the newer Chromebooks. This 
is just one great example of why EOMA68 matters so much.

LibreBoot's value when you talk about freedom is on older X86 laptops. 
This is not FUD, just fact. There may be other features that are 
desirable and therefore support of EOMA68 devices makes sense. However 
it is not an ethics or freedom issue.

> Like not providing config file to build LibreCMC.

You are flat out lying. We ship it with every router on CD.

> Like LibreCMC not building at all lately.

This is nonsense. There are better directions for building LibreCMC than 
just about any other project and we are frequently complimented on how 
easy it is to get working. The Software Freedom Conservancy even used 
our routers as an example of how to do GPL compliance properly: 
https://copyleft.org/guide/comprehensive-gpl-guidech22.html. If there 
are issues building LibreCMC it's not something we did explicitly. It 
could be any number of problems.

This is telling:

"If an investigator of average skill in embedded firmware construction 
can surmise the proper procedures to build and install a replacement 
firmware, the instructions are likely sufficient to meet GPL?s 
requirements."

Given they were able to build an image independent of us and are not the 
only ones it's reasonable to state you are full of it. We even improved 
the directions to make them better in the one area that they indicated 
improvement could be made (it was still completely GPL compliant despite 
this).

> Like corrupting FSF to recommend your proprietary BIOS laptops and 
> desktops.

Is anybody here buying this? The FSF is a totally independent 
organization that we have zero effective influence over. There is 
insignificant amounts going to the FSF relative to the donations and 
monies coming from other sources. It might not have been a good idea for 
them to word this as they did. However I did not have any involvement in 
this wording and there is no money being exchanged here.

Here is the disclaimer: 10% of our regular eBay sales go to the FSF. 
This amount is donated via proxy and therefore I don't even think the 
FSF is aware that said donations are coming from us. I have an associate 
member subscription with the FSF. I have purchased a lot of t-shirts 
from the FSF over the years. We have sponsored Libre Planet for a number 
of years. I was once in a bidding war for a GNU stuffed animal and a GNU 
30th cup at the GNU 30th b'day party that resulted in less than $600 USD 
going to the FSF. These were less than $50 and you could buy them before 
and after the auction. During the holiday one year we did contribute 
some amount from each sale to the FSF during the holiday promotion 
guide. So did others I believe.

Now we do contribute to the Trisquel project 25% of the profits from any 
user purchasing through http://libre.thinkpenguin.com. This is the link 
that the FSF uses, many freedom conscious bloggers, Trisquel/FSF 
members, and so on. We have also sponsored Ruben's (Trisquel founder) 
accommodations or travel in the past when has come to Libre Planet. This 
pre-dates Ruben's employment with the FSF.

I think that sums it up. Nothing of significance relative to the million 
dollars they have (https://www.fsf.org/about/financial).




From d4n1 at d4n1.org  Fri Aug 26 00:15:45 2016
From: d4n1 at d4n1.org (Daniel Pimentel)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 21:15:45 -0300
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
 <57BEC18C.3070209@ceata.org>
 <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
Message-ID: <21014f6edd868acb4e9e998807230634@d4n1.org>

I bought my Libre Tea.

I wait for Laptop House with 11' screen :)

Help guys this great project!

Thanks,

-- 
Daniel Pimentel (aka d4n1)


From chris at thinkpenguin.com  Fri Aug 26 02:16:27 2016
From: chris at thinkpenguin.com (Christopher Waid)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 22:16:27 -0400
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <57BF7084.9080908@ceata.org>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <1472127934.3259.10.camel@adfeno-VPCEG17FB> <57BEE8C4.4000006@ceata.org>
 <57BF7084.9080908@ceata.org>
Message-ID: 

On 2016-08-25 06:26 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
> On 25.08.2016 15:47, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
>> On 25.08.2016 15:25, Adonay Felipe Nogueira wrote:
>>> This issue of "you said it is 'libre' but I prove it's not", and even
>>> the issue regarding the older publication on ThinkPenguin's site, can 
>>> be
>>> easily solved by changing terms/words accordingly there. There's no 
>>> need
>>> to make everyone mad at each other.
>> 
>> It's not just about terminology. It's about deliberately misinforming
>> the people to back your project because it's been libre hardware and
>> libre software "right from the beginning". And also misinforming 
>> people
>> to think it's OK for their freedom to buy laptops with proprietary 
>> BIOS
>> rather than with Libreboot.
> 
> Richard Stallman has just confirmed me that FSF has not received the 
> PCB
> design sources along with the Libre Tea Computer Card.
> 
> I hope that now everyone understands that this EOMA68 board is *not*
> libre hardware as claimed.

That doesn't make it "*not* libre hardware" as far as the FSF is 
concerned. The FSF *DOES NOT* require the PCB designs for RYF. They are 
not involved in or concerned with the release of schematics. The end 
user can't do anything with schematics like they can with libre 
software. This source code is what the FSF is concerned with.

What has to be released is the complete set of corresponding source 
code. Everything else is extra and is being released out of our 
goodwill. No promises have not been kept as the crowd funding page 
clearly says the schematics will be released. As a gesture of goodwill 
everything else already has been.




From chris at thinkpenguin.com  Fri Aug 26 02:18:34 2016
From: chris at thinkpenguin.com (Christopher Waid)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 22:18:34 -0400
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <1472164439.1216.2.camel@paulk.fr>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <1472127934.3259.10.camel@adfeno-VPCEG17FB> <57BEE8C4.4000006@ceata.org>
 <57BF7084.9080908@ceata.org> <1472164439.1216.2.camel@paulk.fr>
Message-ID: <1af99d96d35d326aa0714b5e8e24b2d5@thinkpenguin.com>

On 2016-08-25 06:33 PM, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> Le vendredi 26 ao?t 2016 ? 01:26 +0300, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic a 
> ?crit?:
>> On 25.08.2016 15:47, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
>> >
>> > On 25.08.2016 15:25, Adonay Felipe Nogueira wrote:
>> > >
>> > > This issue of "you said it is 'libre' but I prove it's not", and even
>> > > the issue regarding the older publication on ThinkPenguin's site, can be
>> > > easily solved by changing terms/words accordingly there. There's no need
>> > > to make everyone mad at each other.
>> >
>> > It's not just about terminology. It's about deliberately misinforming
>> > the people to back your project because it's been libre hardware and
>> > libre software "right from the beginning". And also misinforming people
>> > to think it's OK for their freedom to buy laptops with proprietary BIOS
>> > rather than with Libreboot.
>> 
>> Richard Stallman has just confirmed me that FSF has not received the 
>> PCB
>> design sources along with the Libre Tea Computer Card.
>> 
>> I hope that now everyone understands that this EOMA68 board is *not*
>> libre hardware as claimed.
> 
> LKCL made it clear already: the EOMA68 circuit board design is not 
> libre
> hardware for now, but may be liberated in the future.
> 
> Where (except for the Parabola news we just fixed) did you see anyone 
> claim that
> it's libre hardware?

On the crowd funding page it does clearly say what has and has not been 
released *YET*, but will be:

We are working with the FSF to apply for RYF Certification of the Libre 
Tea Computer Card for example, but are also going way beyond that by 
providing full CAD files, schematics, and datasheets for all the parts 
(without NDAs) as well as having the 3D CAD files for the casework as a 
completely open GPLv3+ licensed project right from its inception. In 
addition, all firmware and kernel sources are GPL-licensed and will 
always remain so, and have been vetted in advance and do not contain any 
copyright violations or proprietary license-violating blobs (an 
extremely common practice nowadays).

The only exception to this rule to release everything in advance is the 
PCB CAD files for the Computer Card. We?re planning to release the PCB 
CAD files for the Computer card once sufficient units are hit that 
ensures any third party manufacturing runs will not undermine the 
project?s development or stability.




From chris at thinkpenguin.com  Fri Aug 26 02:22:52 2016
From: chris at thinkpenguin.com (Christopher Waid)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 22:22:52 -0400
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <57BF7B32.5070604@ceata.org>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <1472127934.3259.10.camel@adfeno-VPCEG17FB> <57BEE8C4.4000006@ceata.org>
 <57BF7084.9080908@ceata.org> <1472164439.1216.2.camel@paulk.fr>
 <57BF7B32.5070604@ceata.org>
Message-ID: <2f2deb30f2ba0be1b287e10b3db824ec@thinkpenguin.com>

On 2016-08-25 07:11 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
> On 26.08.2016 01:33, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
>> Le vendredi 26 ao?t 2016 ? 01:26 +0300, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic a 
>> ?crit :
>>> On 25.08.2016 15:47, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> On 25.08.2016 15:25, Adonay Felipe Nogueira wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> This issue of "you said it is 'libre' but I prove it's not", and 
>>>>> even
>>>>> the issue regarding the older publication on ThinkPenguin's site, 
>>>>> can be
>>>>> easily solved by changing terms/words accordingly there. There's no 
>>>>> need
>>>>> to make everyone mad at each other.
>>>> 
>>>> It's not just about terminology. It's about deliberately 
>>>> misinforming
>>>> the people to back your project because it's been libre hardware and
>>>> libre software "right from the beginning". And also misinforming 
>>>> people
>>>> to think it's OK for their freedom to buy laptops with proprietary 
>>>> BIOS
>>>> rather than with Libreboot.
>>> 
>>> Richard Stallman has just confirmed me that FSF has not received the 
>>> PCB
>>> design sources along with the Libre Tea Computer Card.
>>> 
>>> I hope that now everyone understands that this EOMA68 board is *not*
>>> libre hardware as claimed.
>> 
>> LKCL made it clear already: the EOMA68 circuit board design is not 
>> libre
>> hardware for now, but may be liberated in the future.
>> 
>> Where (except for the Parabola news we just fixed) did you see anyone 
>> claim that
>> it's libre hardware?
> 
> Yes, I've been explaining this separately in the Trisquel-users forum:
> 
> https://trisquel.info/en/forum/re-dev-misleading-information-eoma68-news
> 
> Sadly, I couldn't Cc the other lists while posting directly in the 
> forum
> and I have posted directly in the forum because it takes some time for 
> a
> mail in the Trisquel-users mailing list to be posted automatically in
> the forum as well.
> 
> The claim that it's "libre hardware" originates, of course, in their
> crowdfunding campaign, where they state that "This project has been
> extremely unusual in that it has been a Libre Hardware and Software
> project right from the beginning. [...] A commitment to being fully
> Libre is a critical strategic part of this project."

The project is claiming to be a libre hardware/software project, not 
that everything has been released yet. There is a huge difference. This 
is a crowd funding campaign and not a product for sale. Your making 
mountains out of molehills. More *stuff* has been released with this 
project already than any other I've ever seen. Most crowd funding 
campaigns don't release any of this and those that do don't do it until 
long after the rewards have shipped.

IT CLEARLY sates this all on the crowd funding site:

We are working with the FSF to apply for RYF Certification of the Libre 
Tea Computer Card for example, but are also going way beyond that by 
providing full CAD files, schematics, and datasheets for all the parts 
(without NDAs) as well as having the 3D CAD files for the casework as a 
completely open GPLv3+ licensed project right from its inception. In 
addition, all firmware and kernel sources are GPL-licensed and will 
always remain so, and have been vetted in advance and do not contain any 
copyright violations or proprietary license-violating blobs (an 
extremely common practice nowadays).

The only exception to this rule to release everything in advance is the 
PCB CAD files for the Computer Card. We?re planning to release the PCB 
CAD files for the Computer card once sufficient units are hit that 
ensures any third party manufacturing runs will not undermine the 
project?s development or stability.


> 
> https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68/micro-desktop
> 
> Hackerboards article, quoted in the campaign's page:
> 
> "The EOMA68-A20 COM and systems are claimed to be scrupulously ?libre?
> in both hardware and software"
> http://hackerboards.com/open-source-com-and-carriers-become-3d-printable-computers/
> 
> Liliputing article, quoted in the campaign's page:
> 
> "Part of what makes the EOMA68 unusual is that all of the software,
> hardware schematics, and even CAD files for the case design are all
> available for free."
> http://liliputing.com/2016/06/crowdfunding-begins-modular-eoma68-pc-system-laptop-desktop-upgradeable-pc-card.html
> 
> Retro-Freedom article, quoted in the campaign's page:
> 
> "we need computers that [...] Are based on libre hardware designs. 
> [...]
> Why the EOMA68 solves our problems"
> http://retro-freedom.nz/blog/2016/06/30/eoma68-my-dream-machine/
> 
> Xataka article, quoted in the campaign's page:
> 
> "Parte de la gracia que tiene el sistema est? en la en que todo lo que
> lo rodea es libre y gratuito. Me explico, tanto el software, como los
> esquemas de hardware, adem?s de los ficheros CAD, son de libre acceso"
> http://www.xataka.com/makers/el-cerebro-de-todos-tus-gadgets-puede-caber-en-una-cartera-eoma68
> 
> And other articles quoted in the campaign's page reiterate the same 
> claim.
> 
> Additionally, the discussions have been reiterating the same claim:
> 
> "Open Source" Hardware Association's mailing list:
> 
> http://lists.oshwa.org/pipermail/discuss/2016-August/001865.html
> 
> "Open" Manufacturing Group's mailing list:
> 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/openmanufacturing/5Wi1poeK4B4/02CC4uLMAAAJ
> (https://groups.google.com/forum/#!aboutgroup/openmanufacturing)
> 
> Free Software Foundation community mailing list LibrePlanet-discuss:
> 
> Thread #1: EOMA68 - We have to get Free Hardware!
> 
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreplanet-discuss/2016-07/msg00023.html
> 
> Thread #2:  EOMA68 - libre software, libre hardware, and eco-
> 
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreplanet-discuss/2016-07/msg00002.html
> 
> And the list can go on.


From adam.vany at gmail.com  Fri Aug 26 02:44:37 2016
From: adam.vany at gmail.com (Adam Van Ymeren)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 22:44:37 -0400
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <57BFA989.6090908@ceata.org>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <1472127934.3259.10.camel@adfeno-VPCEG17FB> <57BEE8C4.4000006@ceata.org>
 <57BF7084.9080908@ceata.org> <1472164439.1216.2.camel@paulk.fr>
 <57BF7B32.5070604@ceata.org>
 <2f2deb30f2ba0be1b287e10b3db824ec@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BFA989.6090908@ceata.org>
Message-ID: 

On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 10:29 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic 
wrote:

> On 26.08.2016 05:22, Christopher Waid wrote:
> > The project is claiming to be a libre hardware/software project, not
> > that everything has been released yet.
>
> Then it's not a libre hardware project yet!
>
> And need I remind you that outside your organization there is an
> organization/user of an EOMA68 computer which haven't received the
> product as a libre hardware product, because free PCB files have not
> been provided?
>

Did they ask for the PCB files?


>
> https://trisquel.info/en/forum/re-dev-misleading-information-eoma68-news#
> comment-101871
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

From chris at thinkpenguin.com  Fri Aug 26 03:13:06 2016
From: chris at thinkpenguin.com (Christopher Waid)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 23:13:06 -0400
Subject: [Dev] Misleading information in EOMA68 news
In-Reply-To: <57BFA37C.6080303@ceata.org>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
 <57BEC18C.3070209@ceata.org>
 <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BFA37C.6080303@ceata.org>
Message-ID: 

On 2016-08-25 10:03 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
> On 26.08.2016 02:18, Christopher Waid wrote:
>> On 2016-08-25 05:59 AM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
>>> On 25.08.2016 11:42, Christopher Waid wrote:
>>>> I'm having a hard time taking you seriously. Wake me when you've
>>>> actually contributed something of significance and aren't just 
>>>> trying to
>>>> undermine those working on solving these problems. For some of us it
>>>> isn't about financial gain. We actually want to see 100% free 
>>>> hardware.
>>> 
>>> I don't need you to take me seriously. I'm merely stating the facts 
>>> and
>>> drawing logical conclusions. I could be just a new free software user
>>> with no contribution what so ever.
>> 
>> No. Your selectively quoting with the clear intent to mislead. You are
>> doing exactly what you propose we're doing. There is a difference
>> between accidentally misstating something technical and selectively
>> pulling quotes that make it sound as if I was misleading people.
> 
> Freedom is not a technicality, but I've been told this before by people
> who do librewashing. Of course you're misleading people. You've been
> doing this for several years and you're getting better and better at 
> it.
> 
> Also, I'd like to mention that English is not my mother tongue (that is
> Romanian) and I don't have the language skills to express my ideas as
> well as a native, nor I have or desire to have your manipulation skills
> to do brainwashing with gigantic replies. Moreover, I'm not getting 
> paid
> for my activism work, so if I'm spending time raising awareness on
> freedom issues, I do it sacrificing hours I should be spending to be
> able to support myself and in the process serve people hardware
> compatible with fully free operating systems.


I never said freedom was a technicality. You're intentionally 
misunderstanding what I'm saying. Your understanding of English isn't 
that bad.

>>> If you believe that what I'm doing is undermining your projects, then
>>> you might be do something wrong in your projects. Like claiming your
>>> proprietary BIOS laptops and desktops are OK in regard to software
>>> freedom as your WiFi adapters.
>> 
>> I never made that claim. You are twisting words around as if that is
>> what I was saying. It was clear from the video and I'd encourage 
>> anybody
>> who believes this to watch it.
> 
> I will repeat the arguments and the logic once more. I hate that you're
> wasting my time by making me do this over and over again, while instead
> you could read again my arguments and logic and see if they make sense.
> Okay, here is another attempt to prove that I'm not falsely accusing
> you. This time I will break it into small baby steps.
> 

You are quoting ancient text that was pulled from our about page I think 
from a very very long time ago. The actual about page hasn't included 
this for years. Yes- it was imperfect and has LONG ago been 
fixed/improved upon.

Get lost.

> Quoting:
> 
> "ThinkPenguin, Inc. is currently the only company with a significant
> catalog selling free software friendly hardware. From wifi adapters and
> printers to desktops and laptops. For more information on free software
> friendly hardware check out the Free Software Foundation's Respect Your
> Freedom web site at: fsf.org/ryf."
> https://www.thinkpenguin.com/gnu-linux/short-interview-christopher-waid-about-thinkpenguin-linux-action-show
> 
> I'm now breaking this paragraph into logical sentences:
> 
> S1: ThinkPenguin has a significant catalog of free software friendly
> hardware.
> 
> S2: ThinkPenguin's catalog of free software friendly hardware is
> significant because it ranges from wifi adapters and printers to
> desktops and laptops.
> 
> S1 & S2 => S3
> 
> S3: The free software friendly hardware at ThinkPenguin ranges from 
> wifi
> adapters and printers to desktops and laptops.
> 
> S4: So far ThinkPenguin has provided you information on the free
> software friendly hardware at ThinkPenguin.
> 
> S5: For more information on free software friendly hardware, check out
> FSF's RYF web site.
> 
> S4 & S5 => S6
> 
> S6: ThinkPenguin's free software friendly hardware is the same as the
> hardware FSF says it respects your freedom.
> 
> S3 & S6 => S7
> 
> S7: ThinkPenguin's hardware ranging from wifi adapters and printers to
> desktops and laptops respect your freedom.
> 
> This is basic logic any visitor reading the paragraph would apply and
> reach the same conclusion.
> 
> (S)he couldn't find ThinkPenguin's laptops listed as certified on the
> FSF's RYF page, but couldn't find listed some of ThinkPenguin's wifi
> adapters either. Or some other hardware at ThinkPenguin, like printers,
> for instance.
> 
> (S)he could think that ThinkPenguin has decided not to submit the
> laptops for FSF's RYF certification, the way some of the ThinkPenguin's
> wifi adapters haven't been submitted for certification, although all
> their wifi adapters are respecting user's freedom. Or (s)he could 
> simply
> think that ThinkPenguin's laptops are currently under evaluation at 
> FSF.
> 
> In any case, (s)he looks for the laptops at ThinkPenguin and find the
> two product pages:
> 
> https://www.thinkpenguin.com/gnu-linux/korora-penguin-gnu-linux-notebook
> https://www.thinkpenguin.com/gnu-linux/penguin-adelie-gnu-linux-laptop
> 
> (S)he's now looking at the notes below the product pictures and finds
> the list of supported operating systems. After reading a list of 
> several
> common distros which ship nonfree software (Linux Mint 18, Ubuntu 
> 16.04,
> Slackware 14.2, Fedora 24, openSUSE Tumbleweed, Debian Testing, Arch),
> (s)he finds listed free distros like Parabola and Trisquel. (S)he's
> happy (s)he can run a fully free operating system on ThinkPenguin's 
> laptop.
> 
> (S)he scraps the product pages of the laptops, then takes a closer look
> at the specifications, and finds *no* warning these laptops have *big*
> freedom issues such as proprietary BIOS. Happily (s)he orders one and
> tells everyone (s)he has a ThinkPenguin laptop which respects her/his
> freedom. If (s)he's lucky, a free software activist will tell her 
> different.
> 
> If someone thinks only that page at ThinkPenguin throws their wifi
> adapters and laptops in the same freedom category without warning about
> the proprietary BIOS, (s)he's wrong. Their About page does the same
> thing. A lot of pages at FSF about ThinkPenguin do the the same thing,
> including:
> 
> *
> https://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/fsf-members-now-get-5-off-thinkpenguin-free-software-friendly-devices
> * https://fsf.org/associate/benefits/
> * https://my.fsf.org/
> 
> When FSF approached me for including the Tehnoetic S2 preinstalled with
> Replicant in the 2015 Giving Guide, I agreed. When I read the text they
> prepared which was entirely positive, I asked them to include the
> warning that the modem runs a proprietary system. And the Tehnoetic
> devices preinstalled with Replicant have product pages filled with
> warnings about the freedom issues. I've also integrated in the text
> suggestions from PaulK (Replicant developer) and Tehnoetic customers to
> make the warnings more clear.
> 
> https://www.fsf.org/givingguide/v6/
> https://tehnoetic.com/mobile-devices
> 
> Below are more attempts of ThinkPenguin to brainwash people.
> 
> Like stating that they don't need to provide the PCB design sources
> before the campaign ends, even though all this time they have falsely
> claimed and fooled a lot of people into backing the campaign on the
> premise that their project is "libre hardware right from the 
> beginning",
> making a lot of people including the Parabola developers (the free
> distro they preinstall on their computer) to fall in the trap and
> propagate this big lie. Like saying everything about a computer is
> "libre hardware", err... with one exception... the *computer* itself!
> Err... "every bit of firmware on our laptops is free software, except
> for the BIOS which is... outside". "Libre" computer err... except the
> computer. Every bit of firmware is free software, err... except the 
> most
> important firmware, the BIOS! But that's... "outside".
> 
> And other things. Like claiming a publicly available *not* self-hosting
> *free* operating system doesn't have to include the config file (the
> allegedly modified u-boot *bootloader* wasn't/isn't included either!) 
> in
> the sources for users of that *free* operating system to actually be
> able to run that free system on a supported router, not necessarily
> bought from ThinkPenguin.
> 
> Back and forth from LibreCMC project to ThinkPenguin and Software
> Freedom Conservancy, I've been asking for the LibreCMC config file for 
> a
> target and free u-boot sources, with no success. Only few ThinkPenguin
> customers on Trisquel forum have provided that:
> 
> https://trisquel.info/en/forum/thinkpenguins-heavily-modified-version-u-boot
> 
> Does for instance Replicant, another *not* self-hosted *free* system 
> not
> provide config files for targets along with the source code? Or the
> bootloader for any new target that can have a free bootloader? It does
> provide, because Replicant is a *true* free system, following the FSDG:
> 
> https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html#complete-distros
> 
> 
> And many, many other lies and manipulations. I've spent again too much
> of my time to raise awareness on the freedom issues of ThinkPenguin, so
> I'll stop now because it's almost morning and no one pays me for my
> activism work except my business Tehnoetic.
> 
>>> Like claiming EOMA68 board is libre
>>> hardware although no one has access to the PCB CAD files under a
>>> free/libre license.
>> 
>> Everything is already available with one exception that was clearly
>> stated and the reason why. Luke was upfront about everything:
>> 
>> "The only exception to this rule to release everything in advance is 
>> the
>> PCB CAD files for the Computer Card. We?re planning to release the PCB
>> CAD files for the Computer card once sufficient units are hit that
>> ensures any third party manufacturing runs will not undermine the
>> project?s development or stability."
>> 
>> I also already explained that someone has already attempted to 
>> undermine
>> the project. The decision to withhold this is temporary, and nobody 
>> said
>> it was beholden on the success of the campaign even, and given that we
>> have already released everything else our intent is clear.
>> 
>> It's also unusual to release this kind of thing if it is released at 
>> all
>> prior to the shipping of the rewards. It's not even wrong to release
>> nothing until after the crowd funding campaign is done or the rewards
>> ship. The fact it is being done prior is in spirit with the philosophy
>> and a mark of good will toward the community.
>> 
>>> Like not guaranteeing EOMA68 campaign backers that
>>> they will receive the PCB CAD files under a free license along with 
>>> the
>>> EOMA68 product when shipped.
>> 
>> It's already abundantly clear that it's going to be released. We're at
>> $145,300 of $150,000 as of this moment. That is 97% and there is still
>> 25 hours to go. There is zero chance we won't hit that target and
>> technically we already surpassed the number needed for us to proceed
>> because the # we estimated could not be 100% determined until we knew
>> the ratios of rewards. Given that I don't see any reason Luke won't 
>> post
>> the files soon. If he doesn't though it still won't matter from an
>> ethical stand point because they will be released well before anybody
>> gets these devices and it will be within the statements/promises made.
>> Nobody is breaking a promise here.
>> 
>>> Like claiming EOMA68 board is a
>>> breakthrough in the line of software freedom. Like undermining 
>>> Libreboot
>>> project and spreading FUD about it (that Libreboot is only for old
>>> x86-based laptops).
>> 
>> While it supports a newer ARM laptop or two it's not any better
>> ethically speaking from a freedom stand point than using free versions
>> of Uboot. These Chromebooks are actually hostile to users freedom and
>> I'd highly discourage people from going this route. The older X86
>> LibreBoot laptops don't depend on proprietary firmwares for the wifi
>> chips. With the older X86 laptops you can replace the internal wifi
>> cards with free ones. That's not possible on the newer Chromebooks. 
>> This
>> is just one great example of why EOMA68 matters so much.
>> 
>> LibreBoot's value when you talk about freedom is on older X86 laptops.
>> This is not FUD, just fact. There may be other features that are
>> desirable and therefore support of EOMA68 devices makes sense. However
>> it is not an ethics or freedom issue.
>> 
>>> Like not providing config file to build LibreCMC.
>> 
>> You are flat out lying. We ship it with every router on CD.
>> 
>>> Like LibreCMC not building at all lately.
>> 
>> This is nonsense. There are better directions for building LibreCMC 
>> than
>> just about any other project and we are frequently complimented on how
>> easy it is to get working. The Software Freedom Conservancy even used
>> our routers as an example of how to do GPL compliance properly:
>> https://copyleft.org/guide/comprehensive-gpl-guidech22.html. If there
>> are issues building LibreCMC it's not something we did explicitly. It
>> could be any number of problems.
>> 
>> This is telling:
>> 
>> "If an investigator of average skill in embedded firmware construction
>> can surmise the proper procedures to build and install a replacement
>> firmware, the instructions are likely sufficient to meet GPL?s
>> requirements."
>> 
>> Given they were able to build an image independent of us and are not 
>> the
>> only ones it's reasonable to state you are full of it. We even 
>> improved
>> the directions to make them better in the one area that they indicated
>> improvement could be made (it was still completely GPL compliant 
>> despite
>> this).
>> 
>>> Like corrupting FSF to recommend your proprietary BIOS laptops and
>>> desktops.
>> 
>> Is anybody here buying this? The FSF is a totally independent
>> organization that we have zero effective influence over. There is
>> insignificant amounts going to the FSF relative to the donations and
>> monies coming from other sources. It might not have been a good idea 
>> for
>> them to word this as they did. However I did not have any involvement 
>> in
>> this wording and there is no money being exchanged here.
>> 
>> Here is the disclaimer: 10% of our regular eBay sales go to the FSF.
>> This amount is donated via proxy and therefore I don't even think the
>> FSF is aware that said donations are coming from us. I have an 
>> associate
>> member subscription with the FSF. I have purchased a lot of t-shirts
>> from the FSF over the years. We have sponsored Libre Planet for a 
>> number
>> of years. I was once in a bidding war for a GNU stuffed animal and a 
>> GNU
>> 30th cup at the GNU 30th b'day party that resulted in less than $600 
>> USD
>> going to the FSF. These were less than $50 and you could buy them 
>> before
>> and after the auction. During the holiday one year we did contribute
>> some amount from each sale to the FSF during the holiday promotion
>> guide. So did others I believe.
>> 
>> Now we do contribute to the Trisquel project 25% of the profits from 
>> any
>> user purchasing through http://libre.thinkpenguin.com. This is the 
>> link
>> that the FSF uses, many freedom conscious bloggers, Trisquel/FSF
>> members, and so on. We have also sponsored Ruben's (Trisquel founder)
>> accommodations or travel in the past when has come to Libre Planet. 
>> This
>> pre-dates Ruben's employment with the FSF.
>> 
>> I think that sums it up. Nothing of significance relative to the 
>> million
>> dollars they have (https://www.fsf.org/about/financial).
>> 
>> 


From chris at thinkpenguin.com  Fri Aug 26 03:14:46 2016
From: chris at thinkpenguin.com (Christopher Waid)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 23:14:46 -0400
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <57BFA742.3050408@ceata.org>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
 <57BEC18C.3070209@ceata.org>
 <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
 
 <57BFA742.3050408@ceata.org>
Message-ID: <2b57b42cca4dd6253255214cba9eaf99@thinkpenguin.com>

On 2016-08-25 10:19 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
> On 26.08.2016 04:03, Andr? Silva wrote:
>> Hi guys, i let you know that our url about EOMA68 news has been 
>> changed
>> [0] to fix misleading information there too.
>> 
>> [0]:https://www.parabola.nu/news/new-ryf-seeking-hardware-crowdfunding-project-with-parabola-pre-installed/
> 
> That's a good thing. Oh, but you missed something. At the bottom of the
> news I read:
> 
> "EOMA68 - libre software, libre hardware, and eco-friendly too!"
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreplanet-discuss/2016-06/msg00208.html
> 
> IMO, you shouldn't link to that discussion which right from the subject
> starts with the "libre hardware" lie.

It's NOT a lie. It's a crowding funding campaign explaining what we are 
doing. It hasn't been released yet. It's not technically incorrect to 
call it libre just because it hasn't been released yet.




From chris at thinkpenguin.com  Fri Aug 26 03:22:57 2016
From: chris at thinkpenguin.com (Christopher Waid)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 23:22:57 -0400
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <57BFA7EF.7070602@ceata.org>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <1472127934.3259.10.camel@adfeno-VPCEG17FB> <57BEE8C4.4000006@ceata.org>
 <57BF7084.9080908@ceata.org>
 
 <57BFA7EF.7070602@ceata.org>
Message-ID: <7f08b74fe7a8004dc74a12a2fac3d627@thinkpenguin.com>

On 2016-08-25 10:22 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
> On 26.08.2016 05:16, Christopher Waid wrote:
>> On 2016-08-25 06:26 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
>>> On 25.08.2016 15:47, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
>>>> On 25.08.2016 15:25, Adonay Felipe Nogueira wrote:
>>>>> This issue of "you said it is 'libre' but I prove it's not", and 
>>>>> even
>>>>> the issue regarding the older publication on ThinkPenguin's site,
>>>>> can be
>>>>> easily solved by changing terms/words accordingly there. There's no
>>>>> need
>>>>> to make everyone mad at each other.
>>>> 
>>>> It's not just about terminology. It's about deliberately 
>>>> misinforming
>>>> the people to back your project because it's been libre hardware and
>>>> libre software "right from the beginning". And also misinforming 
>>>> people
>>>> to think it's OK for their freedom to buy laptops with proprietary 
>>>> BIOS
>>>> rather than with Libreboot.
>>> 
>>> Richard Stallman has just confirmed me that FSF has not received the 
>>> PCB
>>> design sources along with the Libre Tea Computer Card.
>>> 
>>> I hope that now everyone understands that this EOMA68 board is *not*
>>> libre hardware as claimed.
>> 
>> That doesn't make it "*not* libre hardware" as far as the FSF is
>> concerned. The FSF *DOES NOT* require the PCB designs for RYF.
> 
> RYF doesn't certify free hardware design. But "libre hardware" means
> free-design hardware and that is explained in this essay you should 
> read
> sometimes:
> 
> https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-hardware-designs.html
> 
> Using the definition there, of course EOMA68 computer is *not* "libre
> hardware".

Actually it is libre. The hardware has not been shipped.  Everybody who 
has the devices has the schematics and rights thereof. You don't have to 
give the source code to random people, just those you give the binary 
to. In similar terms there is no reason this should not be true of libre 
hardware.




From chris at thinkpenguin.com  Fri Aug 26 03:34:49 2016
From: chris at thinkpenguin.com (Christopher Waid)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 23:34:49 -0400
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <57BFA989.6090908@ceata.org>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <1472127934.3259.10.camel@adfeno-VPCEG17FB> <57BEE8C4.4000006@ceata.org>
 <57BF7084.9080908@ceata.org> <1472164439.1216.2.camel@paulk.fr>
 <57BF7B32.5070604@ceata.org>
 <2f2deb30f2ba0be1b287e10b3db824ec@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BFA989.6090908@ceata.org>
Message-ID: <5911b2ab6bf61f23d55cf26465f7179c@thinkpenguin.com>

On 2016-08-25 10:29 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
> On 26.08.2016 05:22, Christopher Waid wrote:
>> The project is claiming to be a libre hardware/software project, not
>> that everything has been released yet.
> 
> Then it's not a libre hardware project yet!

It is. All owners of this hardware have the schematics and the rights 
thereof to redistribute.

> And need I remind you that outside your organization there is an
> organization/user of an EOMA68 computer which haven't received the
> product as a libre hardware product, because free PCB files have not
> been provided?

This is not correct for multiple reasons. For one what the FSF reviewed 
was not the final hardware. The hardware they have reviewed was an early 
prototype that demonstrated we would be in compliance with RYF. The FSF 
does not have any units for RYF yet. Under RYF you would be correct. 
They would in that case get to keep the units/own them. The units they 
were given were on loan. We still owned them. A company can utilize free 
software and refuse to provide its employees with the source and still 
be in compliance.

> 
> https://trisquel.info/en/forum/re-dev-misleading-information-eoma68-news#comment-101871


From chris at thinkpenguin.com  Fri Aug 26 03:41:49 2016
From: chris at thinkpenguin.com (Christopher Waid)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 23:41:49 -0400
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: 
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <1472127934.3259.10.camel@adfeno-VPCEG17FB> <57BEE8C4.4000006@ceata.org>
 <57BF7084.9080908@ceata.org> <1472164439.1216.2.camel@paulk.fr>
 <57BF7B32.5070604@ceata.org>
 <2f2deb30f2ba0be1b287e10b3db824ec@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BFA989.6090908@ceata.org>
 
Message-ID: <9a3ca2e7049546c5b0d1baf6e6ea4518@thinkpenguin.com>

On 2016-08-25 10:44 PM, Adam Van Ymeren wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 10:29 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic
>  wrote:
> 
>> On 26.08.2016 05 [1]:22, Christopher Waid wrote:
>>> The project is claiming to be a libre hardware/software project,
>> not
>>> that everything has been released yet.
>> 
>> Then it's not a libre hardware project yet!
>> 
>> And need I remind you that outside your organization there is an
>> organization/user of an EOMA68 computer which haven't received the
>> product as a libre hardware product, because free PCB files have
>> not
>> been provided?
> 
> Did they ask for the PCB files?

No.

> 
>> 
> https://trisquel.info/en/forum/re-dev-misleading-information-eoma68-news#comment-101871
>> [2]
> 
> 
> 
> Links:
> ------
> [1] tel:26.08.2016%2005
> [2]
> https://trisquel.info/en/forum/re-dev-misleading-information-eoma68-news#comment-101871


From contact at paulk.fr  Fri Aug 26 09:46:07 2016
From: contact at paulk.fr (Paul Kocialkowski)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 11:46:07 +0200
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <87d1kw6wor.fsf@wjsullivan.net>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
 <57BEC18C.3070209@ceata.org>
 <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BFA37C.6080303@ceata.org> <87d1kw6wor.fsf@wjsullivan.net>
Message-ID: <1472204767.1291.3.camel@paulk.fr>

Le jeudi 25 ao?t 2016 ? 23:22 -0400, John Sullivan a ?crit?:
> Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic  writes:
> Below are more attempts of ThinkPenguin to brainwash people.
> 
> This stops now on this list. ThinkPenguin is not deliberately attempting
> to brainwash anyone, and we won't tolerate accusations of bad faith
> here.
> 
> What this *should* be is a discussion among people on the same side to
> refine text and messaging such that it is accurate, approachable, and
> effective. Please make it that.

Thank-you for?intervening here. This is what I meant this discussion to be in
the first place, not a targeted attack at Christopher, Luke, Thinkpenguin?or
Rhombus Tech. I'm really sad it has turned this way and condemn those
accusations as well.

-- 
Paul Kocialkowski, developer of low-level free software for embedded devices

Website: https://www.paulk.fr/
Coding blog: https://code.paulk.fr/
Git repositories: https://git.paulk.fr/ https://git.code.paulk.fr/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: 

From tct at ceata.org  Fri Aug 26 11:30:22 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 14:30:22 +0300
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <1472204767.1291.3.camel@paulk.fr>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
 <57BEC18C.3070209@ceata.org>
 <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BFA37C.6080303@ceata.org> <87d1kw6wor.fsf@wjsullivan.net>
 <1472204767.1291.3.camel@paulk.fr>
Message-ID: <57C0284E.8000108@ceata.org>

On 26.08.2016 12:46, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> Le jeudi 25 ao?t 2016 ? 23:22 -0400, John Sullivan a ?crit :
>> Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic  writes:
>> Below are more attempts of ThinkPenguin to brainwash people.
>>
>> This stops now on this list. ThinkPenguin is not deliberately attempting
>> to brainwash anyone, and we won't tolerate accusations of bad faith
>> here.

John, have you read in detail the discussion and followed the links?
Anyone is free to find counter-arguments to the arguments/proof I have
provided. And it's time someone else than Christopher Waid does that on
the libreplanet-discuss mailing list.

>> What this *should* be is a discussion among people on the same side to
>> refine text and messaging such that it is accurate, approachable, and
>> effective. Please make it that.
> 
> Thank-you for intervening here. This is what I meant this discussion to be in
> the first place, not a targeted attack at Christopher, Luke, Thinkpenguin or
> Rhombus Tech. I'm really sad it has turned this way and condemn those
> accusations as well.

These accusations are my conclusions based on my several-year experience
as business competitor of ThinkPenguin and believe me I learned the hard
way he's doing it deliberately, me more than anyone else (except maybe
Minifree).

Essentially, the "EOMA68 as libre hardware" debate comes down to these
three simple questions:

Question #1:

What does "right from the beginning" mean in this paragraph:

"This project has been extremely unusual in that it has been a Libre
Hardware and Software project right from the beginning. Many projects
claim a degree of ?open-ness?, using the word ?open? in order to attract
users and developers, but a simple in-depth investigation of such
projects quickly reveals the claim of ?open-ness? to be misleading or
outright false." -- https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68/micro-desktop

Shouldn't that be corrected if the PCB design sources are not free at
this moment? It takes only 1 minute to correct it (for instance, state
that the computer will probably become "libre hardware" at some point).

Question #2:

If claiming this EOMA68 computer is "libre hardware" in the Parabola
news has been consensually considered in the Parabola community as being
misleading, how come it's not misleading to have the same statement in
the campaign's text even reinforced with "right from the beginning" and
how come it's not deliberately misleading to have such a statement since
the EOMA68 project leaders have refused to admit it's misleading and to
correct it.

Question #3:

If the EOMA68 campaign's text haven't mislead people, how come so many
people have thought that the computer is "libre hardware" and promoted
it as such, similarly to Parabola project in their news?

I'm copying again the not-complete list of such news/articles
perpetuating the same "EOMA68 as libre hardware" claim Parabola project
admitted it was misleading:

Hackerboards article, quoted in the campaign's page:

"The EOMA68-A20 COM and systems are claimed to be scrupulously ?libre?
in both hardware and software"
http://hackerboards.com/open-source-com-and-carriers-become-3d-printable-computers/

Liliputing article, quoted in the campaign's page:

"Part of what makes the EOMA68 unusual is that all of the software,
hardware schematics, and even CAD files for the case design are all
available for free."
http://liliputing.com/2016/06/crowdfunding-begins-modular-eoma68-pc-system-laptop-desktop-upgradeable-pc-card.html

Retro-Freedom article, quoted in the campaign's page:

"we need computers that [...] Are based on libre hardware designs. [...]
Why the EOMA68 solves our problems"
http://retro-freedom.nz/blog/2016/06/30/eoma68-my-dream-machine/

Xataka article, quoted in the campaign's page:

"Parte de la gracia que tiene el sistema est? en la en que todo lo que
lo rodea es libre y gratuito. Me explico, tanto el software, como los
esquemas de hardware, adem?s de los ficheros CAD, son de libre acceso"
http://www.xataka.com/makers/el-cerebro-de-todos-tus-gadgets-puede-caber-en-una-cartera-eoma68

And other articles quoted in the campaign's page reiterate the same claim.

Additionally, the discussions have been reiterating the same claim:

"Open Source" Hardware Association's mailing list:

http://lists.oshwa.org/pipermail/discuss/2016-August/001865.html

"Open" Manufacturing Group's mailing list:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/openmanufacturing/5Wi1poeK4B4/02CC4uLMAAAJ
(https://groups.google.com/forum/#!aboutgroup/openmanufacturing)

Free Software Foundation community mailing list LibrePlanet-discuss:

Thread #1: EOMA68 - We have to get Free Hardware!

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreplanet-discuss/2016-07/msg00023.html

Thread #2:  EOMA68 - libre software, libre hardware, and eco-

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreplanet-discuss/2016-07/msg00002.html

And the list can go on.


From adfeno at openmailbox.org  Fri Aug 26 13:44:43 2016
From: adfeno at openmailbox.org (Adonay Felipe Nogueira)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 10:44:43 -0300
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <1472204767.1291.3.camel@paulk.fr>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
 <57BEC18C.3070209@ceata.org>
 <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BFA37C.6080303@ceata.org> <87d1kw6wor.fsf@wjsullivan.net>
 <1472204767.1291.3.camel@paulk.fr>
Message-ID: <1472219083.8463.3.camel@adfeno-VPCEG17FB>

My first attempt was to discuss and suggest better wordings for both
older and upcoming publications. I didn't intend to make accusations and
such.

This is why I sent several messages here suggesting both "parties" of
the discussion to simply analise the issue and, if needed, correct not
only the future publications, but also the older ones.



From lovell.joshyyy at gmail.com  Fri Aug 26 16:05:07 2016
From: lovell.joshyyy at gmail.com (Josh Branning)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 17:05:07 +0100
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <57C0284E.8000108@ceata.org>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
 <57BEC18C.3070209@ceata.org>
 <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BFA37C.6080303@ceata.org> <87d1kw6wor.fsf@wjsullivan.net>
 <1472204767.1291.3.camel@paulk.fr> <57C0284E.8000108@ceata.org>
Message-ID: <57C068B3.7030207@gmail.com>

Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic

Maybe they /do/ intend to release the CAD files when they say they will. 
In which case, has it occurred to you that the kind of things you are 
saying:

A) May look a bit silly once (and if) they're released.
and
B) Are in-fact not constructive. People may not want to create this kind 
of hardware in future and will read this conversation and think "I need 
to be extremely careful about the things I can and can't say when 
dealing with those libre peeps", and it will put them off.

That said, I am glad the news article has been amended, because at the 
moment, you are right: The CAD files haven't been released, and the 
project does, perhaps wrongly, hint that it's libre hardware from right 
from the start.

But really, it wouldn't bother me a bit, if they did in-fact release the 
CAD files afterwards.

As it is, I didn't back their crowd funding, because I'd rather wait 
till they are actually released before even thinking of buying anything.

I know of other similar projects (won't mention them here) that have 
already released their CAD files, and seem to be doing very well despite 
this fact.

In time, of course, we will be able to see if EOMA68 was telling the 
truth, or just librewashing. But at the moment, I wouldn't want to put 
money on it either way.


From tct at ceata.org  Fri Aug 26 16:18:19 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 19:18:19 +0300
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <9BF8C9B9-A1AC-4AB1-BE4B-1BD8FF079846@alirazeen.com>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
 <57BEC18C.3070209@ceata.org>
 <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BFA37C.6080303@ceata.org> <87d1kw6wor.fsf@wjsullivan.net>
 <1472204767.1291.3.camel@paulk.fr> <57C0284E.8000108@ceata.org>
 <9BF8C9B9-A1AC-4AB1-BE4B-1BD8FF079846@alirazeen.com>
Message-ID: <57C06BCB.6090602@ceata.org>

Thank you, Ali. I really appreciate you taking the time to answer my
call and share your opinion on the libreplanet-discuss mailing list.

On 26.08.2016 16:28, Ali Razeen wrote:
> If this is true in the libre hardware world,

I follow your logic, but I'm not sure there is an exact analogy libre
software <-> libre hardware.

> then at the moment, EOMA68 is libre hardware right from the beginning.

I can identify several times used in this sentence and the one below: T1
is the inception (beginning) of the project. T2 is the present day
(now). T3 is the earliest shipping time of the hardware to the backers.

It is my understanding that the sequence is T1 < T2 < T3 and not T2 < T3
= T1.

> If they release the hardware to their backers like myself, but do not provide the PCB design sources, *then* we can say they are not libre hardware.

If at T3 the hardware ships with free PCB design sources, then at T3
we'll have proof and thus be able to say EOMA68 *is* libre hardware (by
today's standards = at board level, not necessarily at chip level).

At T2 based on the proof that the laptop case CAD files have been made
available under GPLv3+ at some point in the interval [T1, T2) we are
only able to say EOMA68 has the laptop case as libre hardware, but we
can't say EOMA68 is libre hardware, because at T2 we don't have proof
that the EOMA68 computer itself (EOMA68-A20) is libre hardware (at board
level).

But, if at T2 we have the EOMA68 project's guarantee (I don't think we
have that guarantee stated, at least not on the campaign's page) that at
T3 EOMA68 computer will ship to the backers with free PCB design
sources, then at T2 the *EOMA68 project* can say that at T3 the EOMA68
will be libre hardware (they have the power to do know that, because
they have designed the board and it's their decision if and when to
release the design sources). And at T2 *we* can say (like PaulK said)
that the EOMA68 "may be" libre hardware in the future or, based on the
track record of the project leaders with the laptop case CAD files under
GPLv3+, that it's *probably* going/*likely* to be libre hardware at T3.

>From T1 to T2 and continuing until T3, neither the EOMA68 project can
say their hardware *is* libre hardware, nor we can say it *is* libre
hardware. Instead, they can say that only the laptop case *is* libre
hardware.

Now, let's assume that the EOMA68 project has a change of heart and
decides to release the free PCB design sources at least to its
campaign's backers at T2, and not wait until T3. Then at T2/now we are
able to say that the EOMA68 hardware *is* libre hardware.

But I fail to see how sending the free PCB design sources to the backers
at T2 and not wait until T3 will modify/reflect in the statement quoted
many times here that "[EOMA68 hardware] is libre hardware right from the
beginning".

Also, I don't see any reason why this statement refers to T1, since at
T2 (and T2 > T1) we don't have any proof that EOMA68 hardware is libre
hardware. If at T2 not even the backers don't have the free PCB design
sources, I wouldn't consider true to even state that "[EOMA68 hardware]
is libre hardware *now*", yet alone essentially stating that "[EOMA68
hardware] is libre hardware since T1".

I hope this makes sense for everyone.


From adam.vany at gmail.com  Fri Aug 26 03:55:24 2016
From: adam.vany at gmail.com (Adam Van Ymeren)
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 23:55:24 -0400
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <9a3ca2e7049546c5b0d1baf6e6ea4518@thinkpenguin.com>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <1472127934.3259.10.camel@adfeno-VPCEG17FB> <57BEE8C4.4000006@ceata.org>
 <57BF7084.9080908@ceata.org> <1472164439.1216.2.camel@paulk.fr>
 <57BF7B32.5070604@ceata.org>
 <2f2deb30f2ba0be1b287e10b3db824ec@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BFA989.6090908@ceata.org>
 
 <9a3ca2e7049546c5b0d1baf6e6ea4518@thinkpenguin.com>
Message-ID: 

On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 11:41 PM, Christopher Waid 
wrote:

> On 2016-08-25 10:44 PM, Adam Van Ymeren wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 10:29 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic
>>  wrote:
>>
>> On 26.08.2016 05 [1]:22, Christopher Waid wrote:
>>>
>>>> The project is claiming to be a libre hardware/software project,
>>>>
>>> not
>>>
>>>> that everything has been released yet.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Then it's not a libre hardware project yet!
>>>
>>> And need I remind you that outside your organization there is an
>>> organization/user of an EOMA68 computer which haven't received the
>>> product as a libre hardware product, because free PCB files have
>>> not
>>> been provided?
>>>
>>
>> Did they ask for the PCB files?
>>
>
> No.
>

Didn't think so :p.  I was pointing out that it's not a violation simple to
have not received the schematics if you didn't request them.  Just like
when you receive a binary from a GPL'd software product it's not a GPL
violation to not receive the source code at the same time.


>
>>
>>> https://trisquel.info/en/forum/re-dev-misleading-information
>> -eoma68-news#comment-101871
>>
>>> [2]
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Links:
>> ------
>> [1] tel:26.08.2016%2005
>> [2]
>> https://trisquel.info/en/forum/re-dev-misleading-information
>> -eoma68-news#comment-101871
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

From alirazeen at alirazeen.com  Fri Aug 26 13:28:10 2016
From: alirazeen at alirazeen.com (Ali Razeen)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 09:28:10 -0400
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <57C0284E.8000108@ceata.org>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
 <57BEC18C.3070209@ceata.org>
 <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BFA37C.6080303@ceata.org> <87d1kw6wor.fsf@wjsullivan.net>
 <1472204767.1291.3.camel@paulk.fr> <57C0284E.8000108@ceata.org>
Message-ID: <9BF8C9B9-A1AC-4AB1-BE4B-1BD8FF079846@alirazeen.com>

Hi Tiberiu-Cezar,

I am only a libre software/hardware user and a backer of EOMA.

> On Aug 26, 2016, at 7:30 AM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic  wrote:
> 
> On 26.08.2016 12:46, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
>> Le jeudi 25 ao?t 2016 ? 23:22 -0400, John Sullivan a ?crit :
>>> Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic  writes:
>>> Below are more attempts of ThinkPenguin to brainwash people.
>>> 
>>> This stops now on this list. ThinkPenguin is not deliberately attempting
>>> to brainwash anyone, and we won't tolerate accusations of bad faith
>>> here.
> 
> John, have you read in detail the discussion and followed the links?
> Anyone is free to find counter-arguments to the arguments/proof I have
> provided. And it's time someone else than Christopher Waid does that on
> the libreplanet-discuss mailing list.
> 
>>> What this *should* be is a discussion among people on the same side to
>>> refine text and messaging such that it is accurate, approachable, and
>>> effective. Please make it that.
>> 
>> Thank-you for intervening here. This is what I meant this discussion to be in
>> the first place, not a targeted attack at Christopher, Luke, Thinkpenguin or
>> Rhombus Tech. I'm really sad it has turned this way and condemn those
>> accusations as well.
> 
> These accusations are my conclusions based on my several-year experience
> as business competitor of ThinkPenguin and believe me I learned the hard
> way he's doing it deliberately, me more than anyone else (except maybe
> Minifree).
> 
> Essentially, the "EOMA68 as libre hardware" debate comes down to these
> three simple questions:
> 
> Question #1:
> 
> What does "right from the beginning" mean in this paragraph:
> 
> "This project has been extremely unusual in that it has been a Libre
> Hardware and Software project right from the beginning. Many projects
> claim a degree of ?open-ness?, using the word ?open? in order to attract
> users and developers, but a simple in-depth investigation of such
> projects quickly reveals the claim of ?open-ness? to be misleading or
> outright false." -- https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68/micro-desktop
> 
> Shouldn't that be corrected if the PCB design sources are not free at
> this moment? It takes only 1 minute to correct it (for instance, state
> that the computer will probably become "libre hardware" at some point).
> 

As pointed out earlier by Christopher, the PCB sources only need to be released to those who have the hardware for it to be considered libre hardware. This is the same (at least in my understanding) in libre software: the whole world does not need to have the source code to a software that is under the GPL license. Strictly speaking, the users of a GPL software may request for the source code from the developer. They may wish to distribute it later and the developer has no right to stop that. But the developer of a GPL software is not under any obligation to provide the source code to someone who is *not* a user of the software.

If this is true in the libre hardware world, then at the moment, EOMA68 is libre hardware right from the beginning. If they release the hardware to their backers like myself, but do not provide the PCB design sources, *then* we can say they are not libre hardware.

Do you think my reasoning is right?

Best,
Ali

From tct at ceata.org  Fri Aug 26 16:32:08 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 19:32:08 +0300
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <958243B1-1BE8-4631-8A1C-AC57E8D601B3@alirazeen.com>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
 <57BEC18C.3070209@ceata.org>
 <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BFA37C.6080303@ceata.org> <87d1kw6wor.fsf@wjsullivan.net>
 <1472204767.1291.3.camel@paulk.fr> <57C0284E.8000108@ceata.org>
 <9BF8C9B9-A1AC-4AB1-BE4B-1BD8FF079846@alirazeen.com>
 <57C06BCB.6090602@ceata.org>
 <958243B1-1BE8-4631-8A1C-AC57E8D601B3@alirazeen.com>
Message-ID: <57C06F08.9060101@ceata.org>

On 26.08.2016 19:27, Ali Razeen wrote:
> I follow your argument but to make sure we?re on the same page, let me try to rephrase it in my own words so that you can agree or disagree. I believe you claim that we cannot say that the EOMA68 is ?libre hardware from the beginning? because we have no proof that it has indeed been libre hardware since the very beginning of the EOMA68 project (which would be T1, in your email). Perhaps we can claim that ?EOMA68 is libre hardware from the time the hardware is shipped to its backers? when they eventually release their PCB designs, or maybe we can claim ?EOMA68 is libre hardware today? (which would be T2) if they released the PCB today. But even if they did release it today, we cannot claim that ?EOMA68 is libre hardware from the beginning?.
> 
> Have I understood you correctly?

I think so.


From pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de  Fri Aug 26 17:02:04 2016
From: pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de (pelzflorian (Florian Pelz))
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 19:02:04 +0200
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <57C06F08.9060101@ceata.org>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
 <57BEC18C.3070209@ceata.org>
 <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BFA37C.6080303@ceata.org> <87d1kw6wor.fsf@wjsullivan.net>
 <1472204767.1291.3.camel@paulk.fr> <57C0284E.8000108@ceata.org>
 <9BF8C9B9-A1AC-4AB1-BE4B-1BD8FF079846@alirazeen.com>
 <57C06BCB.6090602@ceata.org>
 <958243B1-1BE8-4631-8A1C-AC57E8D601B3@alirazeen.com>
 <57C06F08.9060101@ceata.org>
Message-ID: <4d187d1f-5a07-a269-01e2-8f63e11e12b8@pelzflorian.de>

It seems the problem is the meaning of ?libre? in terms of unreleased
hardware/software. EOMA68 certainly is aligned with libre culture and
significant for freedom because of its modularity standard. It also is
GPL-compliant like any unreleased product, but this does not mean much.
I believe the claim that it is ?free from the very beginning? is
imprecise but not deceptive and *not a problem* if all available sources
will eventually be released.

A clear promise to release what is missing would seem fair though.

Regards,
Florian Pelz


From alirazeen at alirazeen.com  Fri Aug 26 16:27:20 2016
From: alirazeen at alirazeen.com (Ali Razeen)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 12:27:20 -0400
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <57C06BCB.6090602@ceata.org>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
 <57BEC18C.3070209@ceata.org>
 <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BFA37C.6080303@ceata.org> <87d1kw6wor.fsf@wjsullivan.net>
 <1472204767.1291.3.camel@paulk.fr> <57C0284E.8000108@ceata.org>
 <9BF8C9B9-A1AC-4AB1-BE4B-1BD8FF079846@alirazeen.com>
 <57C06BCB.6090602@ceata.org>
Message-ID: <958243B1-1BE8-4631-8A1C-AC57E8D601B3@alirazeen.com>

(Removed John Sullivan from the CC list because I?m sure he gets this email via libreplanet-discuss and doesn?t need (want?) me to address him directly :))

I follow your argument but to make sure we?re on the same page, let me try to rephrase it in my own words so that you can agree or disagree. I believe you claim that we cannot say that the EOMA68 is ?libre hardware from the beginning? because we have no proof that it has indeed been libre hardware since the very beginning of the EOMA68 project (which would be T1, in your email). Perhaps we can claim that ?EOMA68 is libre hardware from the time the hardware is shipped to its backers? when they eventually release their PCB designs, or maybe we can claim ?EOMA68 is libre hardware today? (which would be T2) if they released the PCB today. But even if they did release it today, we cannot claim that ?EOMA68 is libre hardware from the beginning?.

Have I understood you correctly?

Best,
Ali



> On Aug 26, 2016, at 12:18 PM, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic  wrote:
> 
> Thank you, Ali. I really appreciate you taking the time to answer my
> call and share your opinion on the libreplanet-discuss mailing list.
> 
> On 26.08.2016 16:28, Ali Razeen wrote:
>> If this is true in the libre hardware world,
> 
> I follow your logic, but I'm not sure there is an exact analogy libre
> software <-> libre hardware.
> 
>> then at the moment, EOMA68 is libre hardware right from the beginning.
> 
> I can identify several times used in this sentence and the one below: T1
> is the inception (beginning) of the project. T2 is the present day
> (now). T3 is the earliest shipping time of the hardware to the backers.
> 
> It is my understanding that the sequence is T1 < T2 < T3 and not T2 < T3
> = T1.
> 
>> If they release the hardware to their backers like myself, but do not provide the PCB design sources, *then* we can say they are not libre hardware.
> 
> If at T3 the hardware ships with free PCB design sources, then at T3
> we'll have proof and thus be able to say EOMA68 *is* libre hardware (by
> today's standards = at board level, not necessarily at chip level).
> 
> At T2 based on the proof that the laptop case CAD files have been made
> available under GPLv3+ at some point in the interval [T1, T2) we are
> only able to say EOMA68 has the laptop case as libre hardware, but we
> can't say EOMA68 is libre hardware, because at T2 we don't have proof
> that the EOMA68 computer itself (EOMA68-A20) is libre hardware (at board
> level).
> 
> But, if at T2 we have the EOMA68 project's guarantee (I don't think we
> have that guarantee stated, at least not on the campaign's page) that at
> T3 EOMA68 computer will ship to the backers with free PCB design
> sources, then at T2 the *EOMA68 project* can say that at T3 the EOMA68
> will be libre hardware (they have the power to do know that, because
> they have designed the board and it's their decision if and when to
> release the design sources). And at T2 *we* can say (like PaulK said)
> that the EOMA68 "may be" libre hardware in the future or, based on the
> track record of the project leaders with the laptop case CAD files under
> GPLv3+, that it's *probably* going/*likely* to be libre hardware at T3.
> 
> From T1 to T2 and continuing until T3, neither the EOMA68 project can
> say their hardware *is* libre hardware, nor we can say it *is* libre
> hardware. Instead, they can say that only the laptop case *is* libre
> hardware.
> 
> Now, let's assume that the EOMA68 project has a change of heart and
> decides to release the free PCB design sources at least to its
> campaign's backers at T2, and not wait until T3. Then at T2/now we are
> able to say that the EOMA68 hardware *is* libre hardware.
> 
> But I fail to see how sending the free PCB design sources to the backers
> at T2 and not wait until T3 will modify/reflect in the statement quoted
> many times here that "[EOMA68 hardware] is libre hardware right from the
> beginning".
> 
> Also, I don't see any reason why this statement refers to T1, since at
> T2 (and T2 > T1) we don't have any proof that EOMA68 hardware is libre
> hardware. If at T2 not even the backers don't have the free PCB design
> sources, I wouldn't consider true to even state that "[EOMA68 hardware]
> is libre hardware *now*", yet alone essentially stating that "[EOMA68
> hardware] is libre hardware since T1".
> 
> I hope this makes sense for everyone.



From pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de  Fri Aug 26 18:48:15 2016
From: pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de (pelzflorian (Florian Pelz))
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 20:48:15 +0200
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <958243B1-1BE8-4631-8A1C-AC57E8D601B3@alirazeen.com>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
 <57BEC18C.3070209@ceata.org>
 <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BFA37C.6080303@ceata.org> <87d1kw6wor.fsf@wjsullivan.net>
 <1472204767.1291.3.camel@paulk.fr> <57C0284E.8000108@ceata.org>
 <9BF8C9B9-A1AC-4AB1-BE4B-1BD8FF079846@alirazeen.com>
 <57C06BCB.6090602@ceata.org>
 <958243B1-1BE8-4631-8A1C-AC57E8D601B3@alirazeen.com>
Message-ID: <1dd89773-d049-caa9-866e-48ff1b82d00e@pelzflorian.de>

(I forgot to reply to all lists? Sorry.)

It seems the problem is the meaning of ?libre? in terms of unreleased
hardware/software. EOMA68 certainly is aligned with libre culture and
significant for freedom because of its modularity standard. It also is
GPL-compliant like any unreleased product, but this does not mean much.
I believe the claim that it is ?free from the very beginning? is
imprecise but not deceptive and *not a problem* if all available sources
will eventually be released.

A clear promise to release what is missing would seem fair though.

Regards,
Florian Pelz


From tct at ceata.org  Fri Aug 26 19:26:42 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 22:26:42 +0300
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <1dd89773-d049-caa9-866e-48ff1b82d00e@pelzflorian.de>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
 <57BEC18C.3070209@ceata.org>
 <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BFA37C.6080303@ceata.org> <87d1kw6wor.fsf@wjsullivan.net>
 <1472204767.1291.3.camel@paulk.fr> <57C0284E.8000108@ceata.org>
 <9BF8C9B9-A1AC-4AB1-BE4B-1BD8FF079846@alirazeen.com>
 <57C06BCB.6090602@ceata.org>
 <958243B1-1BE8-4631-8A1C-AC57E8D601B3@alirazeen.com>
 <1dd89773-d049-caa9-866e-48ff1b82d00e@pelzflorian.de>
Message-ID: <57C097F2.4010305@ceata.org>

On 26.08.2016 21:48, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote:
> It seems the problem is the meaning of ?libre? in terms of unreleased
> hardware/software. EOMA68 certainly is aligned with libre culture and
> significant for freedom because of its modularity standard. It also is
> GPL-compliant like any unreleased product, but this does not mean much.

You're mixing so many concepts here.

> I believe the claim that it is ?free from the very beginning? is
> imprecise but not deceptive 

I disagree, since that claim has made people believe it's already libre
hardware (as news articles prove). Which is not. The exception is
actually the computer itself.

> and *not a problem* if all available sources
> will eventually be released.

Well, if it's not true that said hardware is libre hardware now (or
since "the very beginning" until now) and we consider it "not a problem"
if at some unspecified point in time it's going to be libre hardware,
than we are justifying the practice of falsely marketing hardware as
free-design hardware. And the same logic ("not a problem") can apply to
GPL-violaters who at some point in time they comply with GPL.

> A clear promise to release what is missing would seem fair though.

A clear deadline for the release is what's needed. Previously I have
compiled a list of demands for this crowdfunded project backed by the users:

https://trisquel.info/en/forum/re-dev-misleading-information-eoma68-news#comment-101927

Copying them here:

Here is what I think backers should do:

1. Demand a clear deadline for the release of the circuit design sources
under a free license.

2. Demand to stop promoting their Computer as "libre hardware" until
they release the circuit design sources under a free license.

3. Demand the Computer is shipped to them along with the circuit design
sources under a free license, even though the shipping is done before
the official deadline.

4. Demand the above conditions are met for further backing the
crowdfunding campaign.


From alirazeen at alirazeen.com  Fri Aug 26 19:43:23 2016
From: alirazeen at alirazeen.com (Ali Razeen)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 15:43:23 -0400
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <1dd89773-d049-caa9-866e-48ff1b82d00e@pelzflorian.de>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
 <57BEC18C.3070209@ceata.org>
 <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BFA37C.6080303@ceata.org> <87d1kw6wor.fsf@wjsullivan.net>
 <1472204767.1291.3.camel@paulk.fr> <57C0284E.8000108@ceata.org>
 <9BF8C9B9-A1AC-4AB1-BE4B-1BD8FF079846@alirazeen.com>
 <57C06BCB.6090602@ceata.org>
 <958243B1-1BE8-4631-8A1C-AC57E8D601B3@alirazeen.com>
 <1dd89773-d049-caa9-866e-48ff1b82d00e@pelzflorian.de>
Message-ID: 

Hi all,

I?m not even sure that it?s imprecise to say that it is ?free from the very beginning.? However, since my reasoning may be wrong, let me write it below and you folk can point out my mistakes.

To quote Christopher: ?Everybody who has the devices has the schematics and rights thereof.? Suppose that the *only* ones who have the hardware are people within the EOMA68 and ThinkPenguin groups, and suppose that they have the designs and source code. That is enough to say that it has been a libre hardware from the beginning (which is T1 from Tiberiu-Cezar?s email). Sure, it might not be useful to anyone else since it wasn?t released to anyone but it?s still libre to the people with the devices and they can release it should they wish to.

There are two ways I can think of to defeat this argument.

1) We can ask a person who has the hardware whether they have the rights to distribute it and the rights to ask for the PCB designs. If the answer to both is ?no?, then it is not ?libre from the very beginning.? But if the answer to both is ?yes?, then the project is indeed ?libre from the very beginning."

2) As per Tiberiu-Cezar?s email, we can object to this on the grounds that we do not have proof of their claim. I don?t have a clear reply to this except to ask what kind of proof can we reasonably expect? Christopher has already said that ?Everybody who has the devices has the schematics and the rights thereof.?. I, personally, don?t have any reason to not trust that statement. But let?s say I don?t trust Christopher and that I still lack proof of the claim. Would that be grounds for me to claim that the statement ?libre from the very beginning? to be misleading. Some stronger words were used but I will not repeat them here. Perhaps the most we can say is that the claim ?libre from the very beginning? is unverifiable. Such a claim is far less problematic.

What do you think Tiberiu-Cezar? (By the way, how should I address you? Tiberiu, Tiberiu-Cezar, or something else? I?m sorry for my cultural ignorance!)

Best,
Ali



> On Aug 26, 2016, at 2:48 PM, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)  wrote:
> 
> (I forgot to reply to all lists? Sorry.)
> 
> It seems the problem is the meaning of ?libre? in terms of unreleased
> hardware/software. EOMA68 certainly is aligned with libre culture and
> significant for freedom because of its modularity standard. It also is
> GPL-compliant like any unreleased product, but this does not mean much.
> I believe the claim that it is ?free from the very beginning? is
> imprecise but not deceptive and *not a problem* if all available sources
> will eventually be released.
> 
> A clear promise to release what is missing would seem fair though.
> 
> Regards,
> Florian Pelz



From tct at ceata.org  Fri Aug 26 19:53:42 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 22:53:42 +0300
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <57C068B3.7030207@gmail.com>
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
 <57BEC18C.3070209@ceata.org>
 <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BFA37C.6080303@ceata.org> <87d1kw6wor.fsf@wjsullivan.net>
 <1472204767.1291.3.camel@paulk.fr> <57C0284E.8000108@ceata.org>
 <57C068B3.7030207@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57C09E46.7080501@ceata.org>

On 26.08.2016 19:05, Josh Branning wrote:
> Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic
> 
> Maybe they /do/ intend to release the CAD files when they say they will.
> In which case, has it occurred to you that the kind of things you are
> saying:
> 
> A) May look a bit silly once (and if) they're released.

They haven't provided a deadline for the release or such a guarantee for
their backers for when they start shipping the hardware. It's not silly
to put pressure on people to offer deadlines and guarantees when they
make such statements about hardware freedom. It's activism. Even if some
people might see your actions as silly.

> B) Are in-fact not constructive. People may not want to create this kind
> of hardware in future and will read this conversation and think "I need
> to be extremely careful about the things I can and can't say when
> dealing with those libre peeps", and it will put them off.

If they want to make free-design hardware, then it means:

1) they make it out of conviction (believing in hardware freedom), or
2) they make it for the money (having discovered a niche)
3) they make it for both reasons above

Regardless of their reasons, they won't stop because hardware freedom
activists (or "libre peeps" as some of them might think we are) have
criticized in the past other projects with false claims. If anything,
they will learn it's not good tactics to make false claims.

> That said, I am glad the news article has been amended, because at the
> moment, you are right: The CAD files haven't been released, and the
> project does, perhaps wrongly, hint that it's libre hardware from right
> from the start.

Of course.

> But really, it wouldn't bother me a bit, if they did in-fact release the
> CAD files afterwards.

That would be a sad thing for the society and detrimental thing for
their project.

> As it is, I didn't back their crowd funding, because I'd rather wait
> till they are actually released before even thinking of buying anything.

Me too.

> I know of other similar projects (won't mention them here) 

Why not.

> that have
> already released their CAD files, and seem to be doing very well despite
> this fact.

That's good, we can use success stories.

> In time, of course, we will be able to see if EOMA68 was telling the
> truth, or just librewashing. But at the moment, I wouldn't want to put
> money on it either way.

I wish they would agree to announce a deadline for the release and send
their backers a guarantee that they will ship all the hardware sources
along with the hardware.


From tct at ceata.org  Fri Aug 26 20:04:26 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 23:04:26 +0300
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: 
References: 
 <1472034304.1112.26.camel@paulk.fr>
 <2314eca63a5198f93e0b2ca1f3899201@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BDF61A.80107@ceata.org>
 
 <57BEC18C.3070209@ceata.org>
 <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BFA37C.6080303@ceata.org> <87d1kw6wor.fsf@wjsullivan.net>
 <1472204767.1291.3.camel@paulk.fr> <57C0284E.8000108@ceata.org>
 <9BF8C9B9-A1AC-4AB1-BE4B-1BD8FF079846@alirazeen.com>
 <57C06BCB.6090602@ceata.org>
 <958243B1-1BE8-4631-8A1C-AC57E8D601B3@alirazeen.com>
 <1dd89773-d049-caa9-866e-48ff1b82d00e@pelzflorian.de>
 
Message-ID: <57C0A0CA.1060900@ceata.org>

Ali, thanks for your arguments. Schematics don't make a hardware
free-design hardware, as PaulK has stated and as Richard's essay
explains. It's the PCB design sources. Schematics are usually PDF files.

I doubt any of the people who now hold the EOMA68-A20 computer boards
would disobey the project's leader(s) and share the PCB design sources,
if they have them at all. And definitely they are not legally allowed to
share them under a free license such as GPLv3+.

On 26.08.2016 22:43, Ali Razeen wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I?m not even sure that it?s imprecise to say that it is ?free from the very beginning.? However, since my reasoning may be wrong, let me write it below and you folk can point out my mistakes.
> 
> To quote Christopher: ?Everybody who has the devices has the schematics and rights thereof.? Suppose that the *only* ones who have the hardware are people within the EOMA68 and ThinkPenguin groups, and suppose that they have the designs and source code. That is enough to say that it has been a libre hardware from the beginning (which is T1 from Tiberiu-Cezar?s email). Sure, it might not be useful to anyone else since it wasn?t released to anyone but it?s still libre to the people with the devices and they can release it should they wish to.
> 
> There are two ways I can think of to defeat this argument.
> 
> 1) We can ask a person who has the hardware whether they have the rights to distribute it and the rights to ask for the PCB designs. If the answer to both is ?no?, then it is not ?libre from the very beginning.? But if the answer to both is ?yes?, then the project is indeed ?libre from the very beginning."
> 
> 2) As per Tiberiu-Cezar?s email, we can object to this on the grounds that we do not have proof of their claim. I don?t have a clear reply to this except to ask what kind of proof can we reasonably expect? Christopher has already said that ?Everybody who has the devices has the schematics and the rights thereof.?. I, personally, don?t have any reason to not trust that statement. But let?s say I don?t trust Christopher and that I still lack proof of the claim. Would that be grounds for me to claim that the statement ?libre from the very beginning? to be misleading. Some stronger words were used but I will not repeat them here. Perhaps the most we can say is that the claim ?libre from the very beginning? is unverifiable. Such a claim is far less problematic.
> 
> What do you think Tiberiu-Cezar? (By the way, how should I address you? Tiberiu, Tiberiu-Cezar, or something else? I?m sorry for my cultural ignorance!)
> 
> Best,
> Ali
> 
> 
> 
>> On Aug 26, 2016, at 2:48 PM, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)  wrote:
>>
>> (I forgot to reply to all lists? Sorry.)
>>
>> It seems the problem is the meaning of ?libre? in terms of unreleased
>> hardware/software. EOMA68 certainly is aligned with libre culture and
>> significant for freedom because of its modularity standard. It also is
>> GPL-compliant like any unreleased product, but this does not mean much.
>> I believe the claim that it is ?free from the very beginning? is
>> imprecise but not deceptive and *not a problem* if all available sources
>> will eventually be released.
>>
>> A clear promise to release what is missing would seem fair though.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Florian Pelz
> 


From tct at ceata.org  Fri Aug 26 20:07:23 2016
From: tct at ceata.org (Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 23:07:23 +0300
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <20160826200338.s4rgggyl3hdk4qi5@siri.cascardo.eti.br>
References: <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BFA37C.6080303@ceata.org> <87d1kw6wor.fsf@wjsullivan.net>
 <1472204767.1291.3.camel@paulk.fr> <57C0284E.8000108@ceata.org>
 <9BF8C9B9-A1AC-4AB1-BE4B-1BD8FF079846@alirazeen.com>
 <57C06BCB.6090602@ceata.org>
 <958243B1-1BE8-4631-8A1C-AC57E8D601B3@alirazeen.com>
 <1dd89773-d049-caa9-866e-48ff1b82d00e@pelzflorian.de>
 <57C097F2.4010305@ceata.org>
 <20160826200338.s4rgggyl3hdk4qi5@siri.cascardo.eti.br>
Message-ID: <57C0A17B.5060809@ceata.org>

On 26.08.2016 23:03, Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo wrote:
> I have to disagree here. Comparing this to GPL violation is outrageous.

You might be right and the parallelism I made is too extrapolated.
Thanks for noting that.

Tiberiu


From g4jc at openmailbox.org  Fri Aug 26 21:36:49 2016
From: g4jc at openmailbox.org (Luke)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 17:36:49 -0400
Subject: [Dev] Fwd: [gnu.org #1139613] Parabola GNU/Linux-libre Mirror
 Request
In-Reply-To: 
References: 
Message-ID: 

Our request was granted! We now have a new US based mirror courtesy of
the Free Software Foundation.



-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: 	[gnu.org #1139613] Parabola GNU/Linux-libre Mirror Request
Date: 	Fri, 26 Aug 2016 11:22:04 -0400
From: 	Lisa Maginnis via RT 
Reply-To: 	sysadmin at gnu.org
To: 	g4jc at openmailbox.org



Hello,

I have enabled the mirror (every 4 hours) for you project, it can be
found here: http://mirror.fsf.org/parabola/

Let me know if you have any issues, it is currently working on the
initial rsync.

Thanks & Happy Hackingz,

-- 
~Lisa Marie Maginnis
Senior System Administrator
Free Software Foundation
http://fsf.org http://gnu.org
GPG Key: 61EEC710

Support our infrastructure!
https://donate.fsf.org


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: 

From cascardo at cascardo.eti.br  Fri Aug 26 20:03:39 2016
From: cascardo at cascardo.eti.br (Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 17:03:39 -0300
Subject: [Dev] [libreplanet-discuss] Misleading information in EOMA68
 news
In-Reply-To: <57C097F2.4010305@ceata.org>
References: <29c6df9d5b901c858502e3997b5fbe9b@thinkpenguin.com>
 <57BFA37C.6080303@ceata.org> <87d1kw6wor.fsf@wjsullivan.net>
 <1472204767.1291.3.camel@paulk.fr> <57C0284E.8000108@ceata.org>
 <9BF8C9B9-A1AC-4AB1-BE4B-1BD8FF079846@alirazeen.com>
 <57C06BCB.6090602@ceata.org>
 <958243B1-1BE8-4631-8A1C-AC57E8D601B3@alirazeen.com>
 <1dd89773-d049-caa9-866e-48ff1b82d00e@pelzflorian.de>
 <57C097F2.4010305@ceata.org>
Message-ID: <20160826200338.s4rgggyl3hdk4qi5@siri.cascardo.eti.br>

On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 10:26:42PM +0300, Tiberiu-Cezar Tehnoetic wrote:
> On 26.08.2016 21:48, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote:
> > and *not a problem* if all available sources
> > will eventually be released.
> 
> Well, if it's not true that said hardware is libre hardware now (or
> since "the very beginning" until now) and we consider it "not a problem"
> if at some unspecified point in time it's going to be libre hardware,
> than we are justifying the practice of falsely marketing hardware as
> free-design hardware. And the same logic ("not a problem") can apply to
> GPL-violaters who at some point in time they comply with GPL.

Hi, Tiberiu-Cezar.

I have to disagree here. Comparing this to GPL violation is outrageous.
Taking out from recipients the freedoms the original authors intendend
them to have is a very serious thing. You can't compare that to a
hypothetical "not giving the information one said was libre to random
people".

First, in the GPL violation case, not only the recipients rights to
freedom are being violated, but also the original authors rights, one
that is also recognized by law.

Second, in the GPL violation case, we are talking about something that
exists, has been shipped and is in the hands of the recipients.

I would like to address other points you brought, but I will leave that
to another time, because I think this point is much more important now.

By the way, thanks for your work on Tehnoetic.

Regards.
Cascardo.


From g4jc at openmailbox.org  Sun Aug 28 16:25:15 2016
From: g4jc at openmailbox.org (Luke)
Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2016 12:25:15 -0400
Subject: [Dev] parabola.goodgnus.com.ar mirror down
In-Reply-To: <8673fdd3-bff6-10ae-c674-c045b3352feb@openmailbox.org>
References: <8673fdd3-bff6-10ae-c674-c045b3352feb@openmailbox.org>
Message-ID: <5f4a5887-b33e-3a7a-4f9f-8ba2de6148cf@openmailbox.org>

On 08/25/2016 07:39 PM, Luke wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Just so everyone knows in advanced, we have received a large spike in
> users over the past few days. While this is great news for the overall
> project, it is putting too much strain on the parabola.goodgnus.com.ar
> mirror.
>
> I received word today that the bandwidth usage has expired after
> surpassing 1TB during this payment period.
>
> Due to this, all users are advised to use server2.goodgnus.com.ar until
> I can find a better host for the main mirror.
>
> Thank you.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> Dev at lists.parabola.nu
> https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev

This issue has been resolved. Server location has moved.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: 

From isacdaavid at isacdaavid.info  Mon Aug 29 03:07:43 2016
From: isacdaavid at isacdaavid.info (Isaac David)
Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2016 22:07:43 -0500
Subject: [Dev] ARM port updates and RFC
Message-ID: <1472440063.7743.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

As promised, I've made a tiny change to the way ARM packages
are imported, in order to keep noise down at
maintenance at lists. It turns out that Arch ARM is using sort
of corrupt .files databases (some entries are missing
signature fields in the desc files). This causes the inotify
service endowed with tracking changes to databases to crash
upon encountering the first corrupt package, and package
contents aren't being filled in in parabolaweb as a result.
Then when an agent tries to access
https://www.parabola.nu/packages/core/armv7h/acl/files (for
instance), django serves an error.

I didn't merge changes to master yet; they live on a
separate branch[1]. A second commit fixes an unrelated
low-severity bug in the import scripts that was discovered
while working on this. They have been tested on a separate
dbscripts+parabolaweb setup[2]. The downside for building
our own databases from scratch is that the script takes
longer to complete. I welcome alternative solutions and
criticisms.

I have this feeling that the next item on the list would be
constructing import whitelists from x86 packages (hopefully
excluding 'any' packages) plus a few essential packages
unique to Arch ARM, because those databases are not in good
shape. There are some packages that Arch (x86) removed
months ago that we still take from Arch ARM. (Yet another
issue to inform to them). We can always blacklist nonfree
packages as we spot them, regardless of their origin; but
maybe we should stick to a single baseline. That would be
x86. I worry about losing practical control over our ability
to keep Parabola free if we just let packages arrive amok.
What do you think?

PD: I don't know if landing the change will automatically
fix package descriptions for all old broken ARM packages.
We may have to repopulate parabolaweb.

[1] 
https://git.parabola.nu/packages/dbscripts.git/?h=isacdaavid/isacdaavid
[2] http://178.62.204.135:8000/packages/core/armv7h/acl/files/

- --
isacdaavid
GPG: 38D33EF29A7691134357648733466E12EC7BA943

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=lqtd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



From emulatorman at riseup.net  Mon Aug 29 17:00:12 2016
From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Andr=c3=a9_Silva?=)
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2016 14:00:12 -0300
Subject: [Dev] Fwd: [gnu.org #1139613] Parabola GNU/Linux-libre Mirror
 Request
In-Reply-To: 
References: 
 
Message-ID: <9b6712fb-6cdf-6434-ad00-27ab94727dfa@riseup.net>

On 08/26/2016 06:36 PM, Luke wrote:
> Our request was granted! We now have a new US based mirror courtesy of
> the Free Software Foundation.

Could you let her know that mirror has issues? if you pay attention,
there aren't packages synced there yet [0][1]

[0]:http://mirror.fsf.org/parabola/pool/parabola/
[1]:http://mirror.fsf.org/parabola/libre/os/x86_64/linux-libre-4.7.2_gnu-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: 

From g4jc at openmailbox.org  Tue Aug 30 00:18:45 2016
From: g4jc at openmailbox.org (Luke)
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2016 20:18:45 -0400
Subject: [Dev] Fwd: [gnu.org #1139613] Parabola GNU/Linux-libre Mirror
 Request
In-Reply-To: <9b6712fb-6cdf-6434-ad00-27ab94727dfa@riseup.net>
References: 
 
 <9b6712fb-6cdf-6434-ad00-27ab94727dfa@riseup.net>
Message-ID: <6923c395-9ba5-835b-1bea-a134b4399930@openmailbox.org>

On 08/29/2016 01:00 PM, Andr? Silva wrote:
> On 08/26/2016 06:36 PM, Luke wrote:
>> Our request was granted! We now have a new US based mirror courtesy of
>> the Free Software Foundation.
> Could you let her know that mirror has issues? if you pay attention,
> there aren't packages synced there yet [0][1]
>
> [0]:http://mirror.fsf.org/parabola/pool/parabola/
> [1]:http://mirror.fsf.org/parabola/libre/os/x86_64/linux-libre-4.7.2_gnu-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz
>
The reason is because our rsync is unsustainable. I had to mirror from
yandex and then run rsync from our mirror to get
parabola.goodgnus.com.ar back online. Average speed 56kbps. (with timeouts)


I will let her know to mirror from yandex.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: 

From emulatorman at riseup.net  Tue Aug 30 00:26:32 2016
From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Andr=c3=a9_Silva?=)
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2016 21:26:32 -0300
Subject: [Dev] Fwd: [gnu.org #1139613] Parabola GNU/Linux-libre Mirror
 Request
In-Reply-To: <6923c395-9ba5-835b-1bea-a134b4399930@openmailbox.org>
References: 
 
 <9b6712fb-6cdf-6434-ad00-27ab94727dfa@riseup.net>
 <6923c395-9ba5-835b-1bea-a134b4399930@openmailbox.org>
Message-ID: 

On 08/29/2016 09:18 PM, Luke wrote:
> On 08/29/2016 01:00 PM, Andr? Silva wrote:
>> On 08/26/2016 06:36 PM, Luke wrote:
>>> Our request was granted! We now have a new US based mirror courtesy of
>>> the Free Software Foundation.
>> Could you let her know that mirror has issues? if you pay attention,
>> there aren't packages synced there yet [0][1]
>>
>> [0]:http://mirror.fsf.org/parabola/pool/parabola/
>> [1]:http://mirror.fsf.org/parabola/libre/os/x86_64/linux-libre-4.7.2_gnu-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz
>>
> The reason is because our rsync is unsustainable. I had to mirror from
> yandex and then run rsync from our mirror to get
> parabola.goodgnus.com.ar back online. Average speed 56kbps. (with timeouts)
> 
> 
> I will let her know to mirror from yandex.

ok, let me know when it is ready to add it as our main mirror from
pacman-mirrolist package...


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: 

From fauno at endefensadelsl.org  Wed Aug 31 20:31:39 2016
From: fauno at endefensadelsl.org (fauno)
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 17:31:39 -0300
Subject: [Dev] Fwd: [libreplanet-discuss] Aseprite is now proprietary
 software
Message-ID: <87zinsvfx0.fsf@endefensadelsl.org>


fyi

-- 
:O

-------------------- Start of forwarded message --------------------
To: libreplanet-discuss at libreplanet.org
From: Alexander Berntsen 
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 20:47:59 +0200
Subject: [libreplanet-discuss] Aseprite is now proprietary software

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

One of my favourite gamedev tools, Aseprite, is now proprietary
software[0].

Aseprite is a very good pixel art editor which is used by myself and
lots of others to make free games.

Please join me in letting the developers know that this is not okay,
and that we will not stand for the injustice of proprietary software.
It's possible to contact them via email[0], Twitter[1], and Facebook[2].

If the developers of Aseprite persist in this direction, we will have
to carry on by ourselves. Someone called R?mi Verschelde has forked it
on GitHub[4], so that we can discuss where to go from here, if there
is no chance of Aseprite returning to a freedom respecting licence.

[0]

[1]  
[2]  
[3]  
[4]  
- -- 
Alexander
alexander at plaimi.net
https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
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=ya7q
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-------------------- End of forwarded message --------------------
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 584 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

From emulatorman at riseup.net  Wed Aug 31 21:11:58 2016
From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Andr=c3=a9_Silva?=)
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 18:11:58 -0300
Subject: [Dev] Fwd: [libreplanet-discuss] Aseprite is now proprietary
 software
In-Reply-To: <87zinsvfx0.fsf@endefensadelsl.org>
References: <87zinsvfx0.fsf@endefensadelsl.org>
Message-ID: 

We could continue maintaining aseprite-gpl [0] since it is the libre
fork of aseprite, what do you think guys?

[0]:https://github.com/aseprite-gpl/aseprite

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: