Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #11889 > unrolled thread
| Started by | noydb@no.way (Bruce Sinclair) |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-09-02 23:35 +0000 |
| Last post | 2014-09-06 22:43 +0200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 181 — 36 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
What distros *don't* use systemd ? noydb@no.way (Bruce Sinclair) - 2014-09-02 23:35 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2014-09-02 20:47 -0400
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Andreas Kohlbach <sep14.5.ankman@spamgourmet.com> - 2014-09-03 18:20 -0400
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-03 23:40 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2014-09-03 18:44 -0400
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? zeeb <zeeb@zeeb.zeeb> - 2014-09-10 23:16 -0500
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Reinhardt Behm <rbehm@hushmail.com> - 2014-09-11 12:50 +0800
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? noydb@no.way (Bruce Sinclair) - 2014-09-07 23:06 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2014-09-07 20:51 -0400
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? "Charles T. Smith" <cts.private.yahoo@gmail.com> - 2014-10-28 16:35 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-10-28 16:48 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2014-10-28 14:18 -0400
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-10-28 22:00 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Baho Utot <baho-utot@columbus.rr.com> - 2014-10-28 18:53 -0400
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2014-10-29 09:03 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Baho Utot <baho-utot@columbus.rr.com> - 2014-10-29 17:32 -0400
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? "Charles T. Smith" <cts.private.yahoo@gmail.com> - 2014-11-01 09:17 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2014-11-01 08:07 -0700
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-11-02 04:58 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2014-11-02 06:59 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2014-11-02 09:57 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Clark Smith <noaddress@nowhere.net> - 2014-11-02 14:40 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-11-02 16:28 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2014-11-02 07:27 -0800
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Baho Utot <baho-utot@columbus.rr.com> - 2014-11-01 11:51 -0400
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-11-01 21:46 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Baho Utot <baho-utot@columbus.rr.com> - 2014-11-01 18:24 -0400
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-11-01 15:30 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Baho Utot <baho-utot@columbus.rr.com> - 2014-11-01 12:45 -0400
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Michael Baeuerle <michael.baeuerle@gmx.net> - 2014-11-02 17:08 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Baho Utot <baho-utot@columbus.rr.com> - 2014-11-02 15:59 -0500
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2014-11-02 22:22 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-11-01 20:13 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-11-02 04:58 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2014-10-28 14:15 -0400
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Michael Baeuerle <michael.baeuerle@gmx.net> - 2014-10-28 21:02 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2014-09-02 20:58 -0400
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2014-09-03 03:12 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? noydb@no.way (Bruce Sinclair) - 2014-09-07 23:10 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-08 07:00 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2014-09-08 10:51 -0400
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? notbob <notbob@nothome.com> - 2014-09-08 15:11 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2014-09-08 17:53 +0200
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2014-09-08 17:26 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Vilmos Soti <vilmos@soti.ca> - 2014-09-08 09:36 -0700
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2014-09-08 17:42 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-08 17:52 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2014-09-08 18:29 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-08 18:52 +0100
Re: Spam (thread drift) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2014-09-08 18:58 +0100
Re: Spam (thread drift) Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-08 19:10 +0100
Re: Spam (thread drift) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2014-09-08 19:18 +0100
Re: Spam (thread drift) Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2014-09-08 22:01 +0200
Re: Spam (thread drift) Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-08 21:23 +0100
Re: Spam (thread drift) Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2014-09-09 08:58 +0200
Re: Spam (thread drift) Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-09 09:58 +0100
Re: Spam (thread drift) Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2014-09-09 11:12 +0200
Re: Spam (thread drift) Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-09 11:14 +0100
Re: Spam (thread drift) Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-09 11:16 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2014-09-08 21:59 +0200
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-08 17:30 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? notbob <notbob@nothome.com> - 2014-09-08 16:32 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2014-09-08 13:31 -0400
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-08 17:28 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2014-09-08 17:40 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2014-09-08 13:41 -0400
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-08 19:05 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2014-09-08 14:57 -0400
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-08 21:21 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2014-09-08 17:59 -0400
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-09 07:25 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2014-09-08 15:29 -0500
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-08 22:47 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? noydb@no.way (Bruce Sinclair) - 2014-09-08 23:20 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? John McCue <jmccue@jmclin0.bstnma.east.verizon.net> - 2014-09-09 00:37 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-09 07:27 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-09-09 10:19 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2014-09-09 09:25 -0400
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Balwinder S Dheeman <bdheeman.SANSPAM@outlook.com> - 2014-09-09 17:00 +0530
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? noydb@no.way (Bruce Sinclair) - 2014-09-09 23:11 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2014-09-09 01:49 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? noydb@no.way (Bruce Sinclair) - 2014-09-09 04:03 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2014-09-09 12:37 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-09 13:03 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2014-09-09 13:13 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2014-09-09 14:49 +0200
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? noydb@no.way (Bruce Sinclair) - 2014-09-09 23:17 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-09-09 23:45 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? noydb@no.way (Bruce Sinclair) - 2014-09-09 23:14 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-09 07:29 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2014-09-09 08:11 -0500
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2014-09-09 15:03 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? notbob <notbob@nothome.com> - 2014-09-03 01:52 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-09-03 03:23 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2014-09-02 22:10 -0700
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? noydb@no.way (Bruce Sinclair) - 2014-09-07 23:12 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-09-08 00:51 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2014-09-07 18:50 -0700
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2014-09-08 08:00 +0200
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Thad Floryan <thad@thadlabs.com> - 2014-09-07 23:08 -0700
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-08 10:09 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2014-09-08 10:57 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? noydb@no.way (Bruce Sinclair) - 2014-09-08 03:57 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-08 07:02 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2014-09-08 10:48 -0400
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? noydb@no.way (Bruce Sinclair) - 2014-09-08 23:32 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2014-09-08 19:58 -0500
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? noydb@no.way (Bruce Sinclair) - 2014-09-09 04:04 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? "J@J.J" <j@j.j> - 2014-09-10 15:17 -0700
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? John McCue <jmccue@jmclin0.bstnma.east.verizon.net> - 2014-09-11 02:02 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2014-09-10 19:20 -0700
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2014-09-11 08:27 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Stef <not@this.address.com> - 2014-09-03 04:52 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-03 08:43 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Stef <not@this.address.com> - 2014-09-03 14:40 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Andreas Kohlbach <sep14.5.ankman@spamgourmet.com> - 2014-09-03 18:26 -0400
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2014-09-04 08:01 +0200
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-04 08:28 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2014-09-04 10:14 +0200
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2014-09-04 11:02 +0200
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2014-09-04 09:33 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-04 11:16 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-04 11:13 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-09-04 11:03 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2014-09-04 14:22 +0200
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-04 15:06 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2014-09-04 12:26 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-04 15:09 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Joe Beanfish <joebeanfish@nospam.duh> - 2014-09-05 13:15 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-05 15:16 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2014-09-04 10:10 -0400
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2014-09-04 14:15 +0200
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-04 15:03 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Benjamin Rochefort <ben@benwen.info> - 2014-09-04 20:23 -0400
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2014-09-05 06:41 +0200
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Joe Beanfish <joebeanfish@nospam.duh> - 2014-09-05 13:23 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2014-09-05 13:47 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-05 15:26 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-05 15:17 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2014-09-05 20:51 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2014-09-05 22:57 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2014-09-05 22:03 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2014-09-05 23:25 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2014-09-06 01:52 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-06 07:49 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-09-06 13:11 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? notbob <notbob@nothome.com> - 2014-09-06 15:09 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2014-09-06 12:06 -0700
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-09-06 01:44 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-09-05 18:17 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Joe Beanfish <joebeanfish@nospam.duh> - 2014-09-08 13:47 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2014-09-08 09:15 -0500
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2014-09-04 12:24 +0200
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2014-09-04 07:53 -0700
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2014-09-08 14:40 -0400
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-04 10:56 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2014-09-04 12:25 +0200
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-04 13:03 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2014-09-04 21:56 +0200
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2014-09-04 14:30 +0200
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Stef <not@this.address.com> - 2014-09-04 15:42 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-04 17:19 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-09-04 22:35 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Stef <not@this.address.com> - 2014-09-05 06:14 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Balwinder S Dheeman <bdheeman.SANSPAM@outlook.com> - 2014-09-03 23:42 +0530
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-09-03 19:58 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Jerry Peters <jerry@example.invalid> - 2014-09-03 20:36 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-09-03 21:40 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2014-09-05 09:15 -0700
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-05 17:44 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2014-09-05 13:18 -0700
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2014-09-05 20:57 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-09-06 01:53 +0000
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2014-09-06 05:55 +0200
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-09-06 07:53 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2014-09-06 10:49 +0200
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2014-09-06 09:45 -0700
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2014-09-06 11:59 -0700
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2014-09-06 21:29 +0100
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Baho Uttot <baho-utot@columbus.rr.com> - 2014-09-07 07:04 -0400
Re: What distros *don't* use systemd ? Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2014-09-06 22:43 +0200
Page 3 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 10 Next page →
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-09-08 10:51 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <lukfpv$ht3$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #12007 |
Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> writes: > On 08/09/14 00:10, Bruce Sinclair wrote: >> In article <op.xlk6ccdqa3w0dxdave@hodgins.homeip.net>, "David >> W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> wrote: >>> On Tue, 02 Sep 2014 19:35:45 -0400, Bruce Sinclair <noydb@no.way> wrote: >>> >>>> I vaguely followed a discussion or 2 on one of more of the linux groups >>>> recently about systemd and its uses and pitfalls. I wasn't greatly concerned >>>> at the time, but having chatted to someone that knows a bit more than me >>> about >>>> it, I am now. :) >>> >>> While I'm not interested in getting into an argument about how systemd >>> has been implemented, in general, I'm in favour of the ideas behind it. >>> >>> I am curious though, about what is making you want to avoid it. >> >> The words that frightened me the most during the discussion were ... >> >> "like the windows registry". :) > > Ignoring the monolithic binary blob nature, it did have some merits - > notably a consistent method of storing config data with a separation > between per-user settings and machine wide stuff. > > But the app developers buggered it up with settings all over the place > and I still don't know why there were 4 root nodes and not two. > > Then you had another executive API just for that. > > The same thing could have been done perfectly well with a library > interface to ini style files as were and a well stated policy of > system settings plus user settings. Lot less cruft, lot easier to > debug and clean up. > > Oh and it would have been like unix. Reinvented. Poorly ;-> > >> I don't like the windows registry (though it was marginally OKbecause it wasa >> text file). IIRC, I was told systemd was a binary, not text file. That seems >> to have all the makings of a cock up waiting to happen to me. :) > > Yes. The more this discussion goes on, the more it sounds like systemd > is the spawn of satan. I suggest you keep in mind that the posters so far are displaying a lot of ignorance and no better alternatives. -- Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | notbob <notbob@nothome.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-09-08 15:11 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <c75v84FttjfU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #12019 |
On 2014-09-08, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: > I suggest you keep in mind that the posters so far are > displaying a lot of ignorance and no better alternatives. My take on it is, sure there's a lotta ignorance. No doubt due to the lack of good documentation on systemd. That and the pro-systemd advocates not explaining anything. I recently asked a pro-sysd person a very specific and simple question. As usual, I was not given an understandable answer. This lack of documentation and transparency is one of the main concerns of the anti-sysd faction. But, the sysd devs are more concerned about what they are doing than they are about explaining what/why they are doing it. I thought Linux was supposed to be a community supported/driven OS, with everyone contributing what they can. I don't see the systemd ppl wanting any part of the overall community, but rather deciding they know what is best for the entire community. I certainly don't feel a part of their community. :( nb
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-09-08 17:53 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <lukjdr$hh1$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #12020 |
On Monday 08 September 2014 17:11, notbob conveyed the following to
comp.os.linux.misc...
> On 2014-09-08, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> I suggest you keep in mind that the posters so far are
>> displaying a lot of ignorance and no better alternatives.
>
> My take on it is, sure there's a lotta ignorance. No doubt due to the
> lack of good documentation on systemd. That and the pro-systemd
> advocates not explaining anything. I recently asked a pro-sysd person
> a very specific and simple question. As usual, I was not given an
> understandable answer. This lack of documentation and transparency is
> one of the main concerns of the anti-sysd faction. But, the sysd devs
> are more concerned about what they are doing than they are about
> explaining what/why they are doing it.
>
> I thought Linux was supposed to be a community supported/driven OS,
> with everyone contributing what they can. I don't see the systemd ppl
> wanting any part of the overall community, but rather deciding they
> know what is best for the entire community. I certainly don't feel a
> part of their community. :(
That is all because of that one company: RedHat. They're a corporation
which makes its living off of enterprise-grade GNU/Linux solutions, and
the only other major player in that area used to be Novell with SUSE,
but Novell has been sold to Attachmate. SUSE still exists, but
commercially, RedHat has the upper hand, and SUSE has for a long time
already been RedHat-based - by which I mean LSB-compliant and using .rpm
packages. Oracle's own distribution is also directly based on RedHat,
and so is CERN's Scientific Linux. Mandriva (formerly Mandrake) started
off as a RedHat clone with KDE added to it and a more recent kernel than
RedHat offered. Mageia and PCLinuxOS are forks from the Mandriva
distribution - PCLinuxOS uses Debian's Synaptic and apt-get, but in
combination with .rpm packages. The list goes on.
udev was initially developed by Greg Kroah-Hartman, but then he left its
further development in the hands of Kay Sievers of RedHat. Sievers and
Lennart Poettering - also an employee of RedHat - then merged udev into
systemd. pulseaudio is also a creation of Poettering. GNOME and GDM
are also being developed at RedHat, and Poettering is also on that team.
Are we seeing a pattern yet? ;-)
"I am Poettering of RedHat. Resistance is futile. You will be
assimilated."
--
= Aragorn =
http://www.linuxcounter.net - registrant #223157
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-09-08 17:26 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <luklck$7on$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #12021 |
On 08/09/14 16:53, Aragorn wrote: > On Monday 08 September 2014 17:11, notbob conveyed the following to > comp.os.linux.misc... > >> On 2014-09-08, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >> >>> I suggest you keep in mind that the posters so far are >>> displaying a lot of ignorance and no better alternatives. >> >> My take on it is, sure there's a lotta ignorance. No doubt due to the >> lack of good documentation on systemd. That and the pro-systemd >> advocates not explaining anything. I recently asked a pro-sysd person >> a very specific and simple question. As usual, I was not given an >> understandable answer. This lack of documentation and transparency is >> one of the main concerns of the anti-sysd faction. But, the sysd devs >> are more concerned about what they are doing than they are about >> explaining what/why they are doing it. >> >> I thought Linux was supposed to be a community supported/driven OS, >> with everyone contributing what they can. I don't see the systemd ppl >> wanting any part of the overall community, but rather deciding they >> know what is best for the entire community. I certainly don't feel a >> part of their community. :( > > That is all because of that one company: RedHat. They're a corporation > which makes its living off of enterprise-grade GNU/Linux solutions, and > the only other major player in that area used to be Novell with SUSE, > but Novell has been sold to Attachmate. SUSE still exists, but > commercially, RedHat has the upper hand, and SUSE has for a long time > already been RedHat-based - by which I mean LSB-compliant and using .rpm > packages. Oracle's own distribution is also directly based on RedHat, > and so is CERN's Scientific Linux. Mandriva (formerly Mandrake) started > off as a RedHat clone with KDE added to it and a more recent kernel than > RedHat offered. Mageia and PCLinuxOS are forks from the Mandriva > distribution - PCLinuxOS uses Debian's Synaptic and apt-get, but in > combination with .rpm packages. The list goes on. > > udev was initially developed by Greg Kroah-Hartman, but then he left its > further development in the hands of Kay Sievers of RedHat. Sievers and > Lennart Poettering - also an employee of RedHat - then merged udev into > systemd. pulseaudio is also a creation of Poettering. GNOME and GDM > are also being developed at RedHat, and Poettering is also on that team. > > Are we seeing a pattern yet? ;-) > > "I am Poettering of RedHat. Resistance is futile. You will be > assimilated." > I have to say that pulseaudio and udev are among the bits of code that never quite seemed to work correctly. But they ae assuredly not alone. SYSV printing (lp and friends) is another curse that CUPS has thankfully overlaid with admin screens that are actually usable. X-windows is another total abortion that you would die rather than hand edit its raw configs without a window manager. A lot of linux and unix is a frikkin mess that we just got used to and eventually got the bugs out of I am convinced the world post 1975 would have benefited if regexps had never been invented. -- Everything you read in newspapers is absolutely true, except for the rare story of which you happen to have first-hand knowledge. – Erwin Knoll
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Vilmos Soti <vilmos@soti.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-09-08 09:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <lqvboy9ii9.fsf@pia.msmri.medicine.ubc.ca> |
| In reply to | #12022 |
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes: > I have to say that pulseaudio and udev are among the bits of code that > never quite seemed to work correctly. I had the same experience with pulse. Now that Microsoft blocked the old skype client and the new one uses only pulse, I stopped using skype. > SYSV printing (lp and friends) is another curse that CUPS has > thankfully overlaid with admin screens that are actually usable. I agree that printing was a mess, but I am not sure that cups is the right solution. There is a reason why ESR had a rant about CUPS (ok, eight years ago). > X-windows is another total abortion that you would die rather than > hand edit its raw configs without a window manager. What's wrong with X config files? I have hand-wrote my X config files for a while since at home I use multiuser X setup. While I agree that X config files should be a bit better, but if you want a true horror config file, then look at sendmail. No wonder that somebody came up with this great line: The world is complicated. Sendmail.cf reflects it. Vilmos
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-09-08 17:42 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <lukm92$9fo$2@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #12027 |
On 08/09/14 17:36, Vilmos Soti wrote: > The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes: > >> I have to say that pulseaudio and udev are among the bits of code that >> never quite seemed to work correctly. > > I had the same experience with pulse. Now that Microsoft blocked the old > skype client and the new one uses only pulse, I stopped using skype. > >> SYSV printing (lp and friends) is another curse that CUPS has >> thankfully overlaid with admin screens that are actually usable. > > I agree that printing was a mess, but I am not sure that cups is the > right solution. There is a reason why ESR had a rant about CUPS (ok, > eight years ago). > >> X-windows is another total abortion that you would die rather than >> hand edit its raw configs without a window manager. > > What's wrong with X config files? I have hand-wrote my X config files > for a while since at home I use multiuser X setup. While I agree that > X config files should be a bit better, but if you want a true horror > config file, then look at sendmail. No wonder that somebody came up > with this great line: > > The world is complicated. Sendmail.cf reflects it. > I rewrote sendmail.cf in about 50 lines starting from the bare minimum and only adding what was needed and then got it to use a simple set of tables. Its another mess that grew like topsy and should have been ironed out years ago. > Vilmos > -- Everything you read in newspapers is absolutely true, except for the rare story of which you happen to have first-hand knowledge. – Erwin Knoll
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-09-08 17:52 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tf31eb-9s8.ln1@squidward.local.dionic.net> |
| In reply to | #12029 |
On 08/09/14 17:42, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > Its another mess that grew like topsy and should have been ironed out > years ago. IMHO the correct response to sendmail is apt-get install exim4 OK - even exim takes some getting used to - but it is clean, very powerful and a simple config is pretty simple. A clever config is still readable. and it is *very* robust IME.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-09-08 18:29 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <lukp2e$fro$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #12030 |
On 08/09/14 17:52, Tim Watts wrote: > On 08/09/14 17:42, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > >> Its another mess that grew like topsy and should have been ironed out >> years ago. > > IMHO the correct response to sendmail is > > apt-get install exim4 > > OK - even exim takes some getting used to - but it is clean, very > powerful and a simple config is pretty simple. A clever config is still > readable. > > and it is *very* robust IME. > > Stiull trying to get it to reject Mail from: <> as the spammers have started using that. I might actually go back to sendmail and write my own sendmail.cf again. Or write my own sodding MTA. -- Everything you read in newspapers is absolutely true, except for the rare story of which you happen to have first-hand knowledge. – Erwin Knoll
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-09-08 18:52 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <3071eb-fub.ln1@squidward.local.dionic.net> |
| In reply to | #12033 |
On 08/09/14 18:29, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > Stiull trying to get it to reject > > Mail from: <> > > as the spammers have started using that. > > I might actually go back to sendmail and write my own sendmail.cf again. > > Or write my own sodding MTA. > > Have you posed that question to the mailing list?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-09-08 18:58 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Spam (thread drift) |
| Message-ID | <lukqok$k0b$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #12036 |
On 08/09/14 18:52, Tim Watts wrote: > On 08/09/14 18:29, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > >> Stiull trying to get it to reject >> >> Mail from: <> >> >> as the spammers have started using that. >> >> I might actually go back to sendmail and write my own sendmail.cf again. >> >> Or write my own sodding MTA. >> >> > > > Have you posed that question to the mailing list? Nope, because on investigation the problem is that Mail from: <> is a perfectly valid thing to send meaning 'dont tell me if it bounces' i.e. if a mailer daemon bounces a message, it doesn't want to get a bounce of the bounce... So I am stuck with it I think. I am basically trying to bounce as much spam upstream as possible so that the marketing companies will take my name off their lists. I do wish I knew why I get tons of mail for addresses that cant possibly be expected to exist though. 550-550-fxg34dr@mydomain.co.uk seems a fairly crass thing to expect to get through -- Everything you read in newspapers is absolutely true, except for the rare story of which you happen to have first-hand knowledge. – Erwin Knoll
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-09-08 19:10 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Spam (thread drift) |
| Message-ID | <2181eb-fkc.ln1@squidward.local.dionic.net> |
| In reply to | #12037 |
On 08/09/14 18:58, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 08/09/14 18:52, Tim Watts wrote: >> On 08/09/14 18:29, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> >>> Stiull trying to get it to reject >>> >>> Mail from: <> >>> >>> as the spammers have started using that. >>> >>> I might actually go back to sendmail and write my own sendmail.cf again. >>> >>> Or write my own sodding MTA. >>> >>> >> >> >> Have you posed that question to the mailing list? > > Nope, because on investigation the problem is that Mail from: <> is a > perfectly valid thing to send meaning 'dont tell me if it bounces' > > i.e. if a mailer daemon bounces a message, it doesn't want to get a > bounce of the bounce... > > So I am stuck with it I think. Could you get whatever spam thingy you if any use to "+1" such mails? ie it's a bad point but not enough by itself to junk the mail... > > I am basically trying to bounce as much spam upstream as possible so > that the marketing companies will take my name off their lists. > > I do wish I knew why I get tons of mail for addresses that cant possibly > be expected to exist though. 550-550-fxg34dr@mydomain.co.uk seems a > fairly crass thing to expect to get through I implemented a throwaway scheme: me_somecrap@mydomain is actually mail for me@mydomain "somecrap" is replaced by the company name, eg me_bbc@mydomain (I did use "+" as is more conventional and works with Gmail, but you would not believe how many idiot web developers think they know how to parse an email address, but don't!) It is also interesting to see which companies lose/sell my email data. Easy to blacklist too - 1 line in a filter file.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-09-08 19:18 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Spam (thread drift) |
| Message-ID | <lukru0$mop$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #12039 |
On 08/09/14 19:10, Tim Watts wrote: > On 08/09/14 18:58, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> On 08/09/14 18:52, Tim Watts wrote: >>> On 08/09/14 18:29, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>> >>>> Stiull trying to get it to reject >>>> >>>> Mail from: <> >>>> >>>> as the spammers have started using that. >>>> >>>> I might actually go back to sendmail and write my own sendmail.cf >>>> again. >>>> >>>> Or write my own sodding MTA. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> Have you posed that question to the mailing list? >> >> Nope, because on investigation the problem is that Mail from: <> is a >> perfectly valid thing to send meaning 'dont tell me if it bounces' >> >> i.e. if a mailer daemon bounces a message, it doesn't want to get a >> bounce of the bounce... >> >> So I am stuck with it I think. > > Could you get whatever spam thingy you if any use to "+1" such mails? ie > it's a bad point but not enough by itself to junk the mail... > Actually thunderbirds spam filter picks them up but the idea is to reject them on the upstream server. Its all about being as rude and brutal as possible as early as possible. >> >> I am basically trying to bounce as much spam upstream as possible so >> that the marketing companies will take my name off their lists. >> >> I do wish I knew why I get tons of mail for addresses that cant possibly >> be expected to exist though. 550-550-fxg34dr@mydomain.co.uk seems a >> fairly crass thing to expect to get through > > I implemented a throwaway scheme: > > me_somecrap@mydomain is actually mail for me@mydomain > > "somecrap" is replaced by the company name, eg me_bbc@mydomain > > (I did use "+" as is more conventional and works with Gmail, but you > would not believe how many idiot web developers think they know how to > parse an email address, but don't!) > > It is also interesting to see which companies lose/sell my email data. > Easy to blacklist too - 1 line in a filter file. > Yes. The flurry of emails my wife gets after EVERY online purchase. Why do they do it? It just pisses me off. -- Everything you read in newspapers is absolutely true, except for the rare story of which you happen to have first-hand knowledge. – Erwin Knoll
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-09-08 22:01 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Spam (thread drift) |
| Message-ID | <lul1uj$qu5$1@news1.tnib.de> |
| In reply to | #12037 |
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >I am basically trying to bounce as much spam upstream as possible so >that the marketing companies will take my name off their lists. That assumes that they bother to clean non-existent addresses from their lists. They don't. Greetings Marc -- -------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! ----- Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " | http://www.zugschlus.de/ Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-09-08 21:23 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Spam (thread drift) |
| Message-ID | <oqf1eb-4ag.ln1@squidward.local.dionic.net> |
| In reply to | #12046 |
On 08/09/14 21:01, Marc Haber wrote: > The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >> I am basically trying to bounce as much spam upstream as possible so >> that the marketing companies will take my name off their lists. > > That assumes that they bother to clean non-existent addresses from > their lists. > > They don't. If you really want to mess with these guys, you need to "tarpit" their connection - that essentially locks up a slot at their end and stops that thread/process bothering someone else for a while.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-09-09 08:58 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Spam (thread drift) |
| Message-ID | <lum8ev$a3u$1@news1.tnib.de> |
| In reply to | #12048 |
Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> wrote: >On 08/09/14 21:01, Marc Haber wrote: >> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >>> I am basically trying to bounce as much spam upstream as possible so >>> that the marketing companies will take my name off their lists. >> >> That assumes that they bother to clean non-existent addresses from >> their lists. >> >> They don't. > >If you really want to mess with these guys, you need to "tarpit" their >connection - that essentially locks up a slot at their end and stops >that thread/process bothering someone else for a while. Agreed. Using plussed mail addresses also helps big time because the majority of spammers don't consider a plus sign part of a mail address and break addresses during their filtering. Greetings Marc -- -------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! ----- Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " | http://www.zugschlus.de/ Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-09-09 09:58 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Spam (thread drift) |
| Message-ID | <c3s2eb-9ol.ln1@squidward.local.dionic.net> |
| In reply to | #12067 |
On 09/09/14 07:58, Marc Haber wrote: > Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> wrote: >> On 08/09/14 21:01, Marc Haber wrote: >>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >>>> I am basically trying to bounce as much spam upstream as possible so >>>> that the marketing companies will take my name off their lists. >>> >>> That assumes that they bother to clean non-existent addresses from >>> their lists. >>> >>> They don't. >> >> If you really want to mess with these guys, you need to "tarpit" their >> connection - that essentially locks up a slot at their end and stops >> that thread/process bothering someone else for a while. > > Agreed. > > Using plussed mail addresses also helps big time because the majority > of spammers don't consider a plus sign part of a mail address and > break addresses during their filtering. Interesting... I wonder if that applies to underscores as well? Sadly many web devs are ill educated and don't consider + to be part of an email address (me - I actually read the RFCs and checked). I've even had one where it was accepted during signup to buy something then when they spammed me, the unsubscribe web page refused to work as it was "an invalid email address". So It stuck them in my exim blacklist file :)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-09-09 11:12 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Spam (thread drift) |
| Message-ID | <lumg95$rt5$1@news1.tnib.de> |
| In reply to | #12069 |
Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> wrote: >Sadly many web devs are ill educated and don't consider + to be part of >an email address (me - I actually read the RFCs and checked). > >I've even had one where it was accepted during signup to buy something >then when they spammed me, the unsubscribe web page refused to work as >it was "an invalid email address". Yes, such things happen as well. There are even web devs that wouldn't accept local---tag@domain.example, which I have configured in my exim as an alternative to +. Greetings Marc -- -------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! ----- Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " | http://www.zugschlus.de/ Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-09-09 11:14 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Spam (thread drift) |
| Message-ID | <ag03eb-iup.ln1@squidward.local.dionic.net> |
| In reply to | #12070 |
On 09/09/14 10:12, Marc Haber wrote: > Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> wrote: >> Sadly many web devs are ill educated and don't consider + to be part of >> an email address (me - I actually read the RFCs and checked). >> >> I've even had one where it was accepted during signup to buy something >> then when they spammed me, the unsubscribe web page refused to work as >> it was "an invalid email address". > > Yes, such things happen as well. There are even web devs that wouldn't > accept local---tag@domain.example, which I have configured in my exim > as an alternative to +. A single instead of "plus" has not caused me any problems so far - including the same sites that choke on a plus. Stupid really as Gmail allows plussed addresses by default.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-09-09 11:16 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Spam (thread drift) |
| Message-ID | <4l03eb-iup.ln1@squidward.local.dionic.net> |
| In reply to | #12071 |
On 09/09/14 11:14, Tim Watts wrote:
> On 09/09/14 10:12, Marc Haber wrote:
>> Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> wrote:
>>> Sadly many web devs are ill educated and don't consider + to be part of
>>> an email address (me - I actually read the RFCs and checked).
>>>
>>> I've even had one where it was accepted during signup to buy something
>>> then when they spammed me, the unsubscribe web page refused to work as
>>> it was "an invalid email address".
>>
>> Yes, such things happen as well. There are even web devs that wouldn't
>> accept local---tag@domain.example, which I have configured in my exim
>> as an alternative to +.
>
> A single instead of "plus" has not caused me any problems so far -
^^^ underscore
> including the same sites that choke on a plus.
>
> Stupid really as Gmail allows plussed addresses by default.
>
How did I leave out the most important word!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-09-08 21:59 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <lul1re$qfp$1@news1.tnib.de> |
| In reply to | #12036 |
Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> wrote: >On 08/09/14 18:29, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > >> Stiull trying to get it to reject >> >> Mail from: <> >> >> as the spammers have started using that. >> >> I might actually go back to sendmail and write my own sendmail.cf again. >> >> Or write my own sodding MTA. > >Have you posed that question to the mailing list? It's an FAQ and the answer is No, for reasons obvious to anybody has actually ever looked at a bounce. Greetings Marc -- -------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! ----- Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " | http://www.zugschlus.de/ Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 10 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web