You are not logged in.
Personally I'd prefer no out-of-tree drivers be included by default at all, but given how lazy some users are these days (note the celebration when images with non-free enabled by default were released, because apparently installing nvidia-kernel-dkms is hard), I can see why they do this.
The alternative to removing the package is using dkms to exclude it from being built for whichever $kernel_version is problematic - i.e. dkms remove [module] [-k kernel/arch]. The drawback is that you need to remember you did that, and remember to do it again when your shiny-new kernel is updated.
Better, just backport drivers that work as I mentioned earlier. It takes 5 minutes.
In this case though, you don't need tp-smapi unless you have a thinkpad, and one of a limited set of models at that... Debian with the kitchen-sink thing again. ![]()
Maybe it's possible to disable the build of 'tp_smapi'.
Well it's an out-of-tree DKMS module, so yeah, obviously, if you don't need it just remove the package.
I assumed that since you had it installed, you wanted it.
the next liquorix kernel
... Will have exactly the same problem. That's what I said above: Kernel packages and DKMS packages need to be in sync, so if you run a newer kernel you need to backport newer versions of any additional drivers as well.
kernel-hacking
This is not "kernel hacking", it's Debian packaging 102 and the usual stuff you need to be aware of if you deviate from the stable release or add non-devuan packages.
Entering directory '/var/lib/dkms/tp_smapi/0.44/build'
...
error: implicit declaration of function ‘del_timer_sync’ [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
That's nothing to do with liquorix specifically, the tp_smapi driver version you are trying to build is using an obsolete function name and will break with any kernel >6.14, because:
https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commi … 5ec856c916
This is fixed in tp_smapi v0.45, which is in unstable. If you want to run a kernel newer than the de[bi|vu]an release you're tracking ships, expect that you will need to backport any dkms modules as well.
The process is not particularly complicated, but it is manual work. Do not be lazy and just add the unstable repos to sources.list, without very careful per-package pins this will bork things sooner or later.
Devuan Ceres
Sure it is ![]()
Those conflicting packages appear to be from stable and unstable, respectively... So you have an incomplete dist-upgrade you need to finish, or you tried upgrading from stable to unstable directly (which is unsupported), or you have created a franken[debi/devu]an (again) by enabling sources for multiple releases.
All of the those are liable to break apt in fun ways, but you don't listen when people tell you why things like this are a bad idea, so, uhh, enjoy?
how to fix broken dep hell?
1: Pin your target release at priority 1001.
2: Dist-upgrade and --fix-broken, see if it works. If it doesn't (it probably won't), try aptitude's solver first, then resolve remaining conflicts manually (directly with dpkg if needs be).
3: Remove any remaining installed packages from any other release, and any mention of other releases from sources.list.
4: Dist-upgrade and autoremove.
5: Remove your pin.
6: Hope you found all the mess, so it doesn't bite you again later.
Well for one,
172.22.22.05 colossus.home colossus"172.22.22.05" isn't a correctly formatted IP address...
And for two,
getent hostswould have made it fairly obvious whether or not your /etc/hosts file was the problem, since it returns only valid entries.
$ printf '%s\n' "* File:"; cat /etc/hosts; printf '%s\n' "* Reality:"; getent hosts
* File:
127.0.0.1 localhost damnation.lan damnation
# The following lines are desirable for IPv6 capable hosts
::1 ip6-localhost ip6-loopback
fe00::0 ip6-localnet
ff00::0 ip6-mcastprefix
ff02::1 ip6-allnodes
ff02::2 ip6-allrouters
172.22.22.05 colossus.home colossus
* Reality:
127.0.0.1 localhost damnation.lan damnation
127.0.0.1 ip6-localhost ip6-loopback$ printf '%s\n' "* File:"; cat /etc/hosts; printf '%s\n' "* Reality:"; getent hosts
* File:
127.0.0.1 localhost damnation.lan damnation
# The following lines are desirable for IPv6 capable hosts
::1 ip6-localhost ip6-loopback
fe00::0 ip6-localnet
ff00::0 ip6-mcastprefix
ff02::1 ip6-allnodes
ff02::2 ip6-allrouters
172.22.22.5 colossus.home colossus
* Reality:
127.0.0.1 localhost damnation.lan damnation
127.0.0.1 ip6-localhost ip6-loopback
172.22.22.5 colossus.home colossusAs I said, networkmangler is a red herring and it was only brought up because everyone here loves to hate on it.
I mean I kinda hate it too, but going straight to "Damn new software, the old ways were better, life was simpler, bloody clouds etc. etc." before even trying to investigate the problem is plain ridiculous.
You mean everyone hasn't been setting 'browser.ml.enable == false' since this garbage first rolled out? The mind boggles.
got tired of seeing my /etc/resolv.conf continually being tampered with...
disabled the crap Network Manager...
whose bloody $%& workstation is it?
NetworkManager WILL affect the /etc/resolv.conf and take it out of the loop. Thats why I omit using NetworkManager
FFS people, get a grip. Networkmangler will mangle /etc/resolv.conf if it is configured to do so. You can shout about it, you can remove it... Or you could just do a 10 second search and set it up to do what you want.
remove the network manager. That's okay for a workstation PC, but NOT for a laptop.
Indeed. While there are many other ways to configure networking on a mobile device, networkmangler + modemmangler + [all the 50 plugins] does make a certain amount of sense.
Unfortunately, the prevailing attitude here seems to be shouting "[x] is crap, I hate [x], why does this new complicated [x] exist" rather than addressing the question in a sensible manner.
Yeah, this is pretty much expected behaviour given the purpose of that plugin. Auto-translating the X11 primary selection is a little unusual, but understandable if the intent is to provide live translation in a tooltip.
The only real problem I see here is that this behaviour doesn't appear to be mentioned in the project documentation... But then the website is a mess and I only read English, so it's entirely possible I just missed it.
In any case, this is a clipboard-monitoring online auto-translation tool sending clipboard content to a translation service. So what? How else would it work, magic?
If anyone is actually concerned, consider this a wakeup to exercise some garden-variety due-diligence with the software you run. The source code is right there in plain sight.
All the noise here is really because it's using the "insecure" X clipboard functionality (which must be demonised wherever possible), and the servers in question are in China (which is the current political boogeyman). Boring, predictable, yawn, etc.
harsh as usual I see
Oh, I see how it is.
People whose politics don't align with yours or you otherwise disagree with are "assholes", "parasites" or "facists", and saying so is fine... But calling out shallow clickbait for what it is is "harsh", because you agree with the the creator's views generally.
You want to play in the "Linux news videos" corner of the interwebs, you'll find the vast majority of it is regurgitated, rehashed nonsense from other sources.
Lunduke's videos are him reading his own blog posts about things he read on other blog posts, Brodie's are him making excited faces and waving his hands around while reading release announcements or clicking around other people's websites. Neither are particularly interesting, nor particularly creative.
As for muppets, you have seen Brodie's video thumbnails, right? I mean, if you go out of your way to pose like one...
rust not being a magical bullet
Of course it isn't, and anyone with a clue about programming knows it without watching some random not-very-technical video.
Rust is a tool like any other language, what you do with it is up to you, and using it doesn't magically make your code good (though it does make it harder to write particular kinds of bad).
he is making fun of GNOME developers silly
No shit, Sherlock.
The guy is still a muppet, and his videos are still all shallow clickbait devoid of any interesting technical merit. They range from "look, controversy" to "shiny new thing released"... Both kinds of "news" I can get elsewhere without the hype and hyperbole.
Given your signature I would have thought you would understand after watching it
It's blindingly obvious what he's getting at from the title, no need to watch it.
I'll go out on a limb and guess that this is just a "reaction video" clicking through some website he found, the "joke" probably isn't even his... As usual.
what the jest is
Uhh, how many bizarre faces and wild hand gestures Clickbait Robertson can make in one video?
liberate devuan from systemd
Hate to break it to you, but both eudev and elogind are systemd, or at least "liberated" parts of it. What both those (Gentoo, hence the "e") projects do is split out systemd components that we want into standalone packages.
given that eudev is optional, is it possible to have a functioning devaun install without eudev?
Sure, for some definition of "functioning".
no X11
AFAIK X only needs [e]udev for video and input device permissions, you could set those up manually (and fool apt with equivs)...
no /dev directory
[e]udev doesn't create the devtmpfs at /dev, the kernel does. What udev does do is handle dynamic creation of nodes there for device hotplug.
Way back when, /dev was a static directory and we made device nodes by hand when we installed new hardware (also automatic module loading when the corresponding node was accessed).
Then came devfs, where /dev was a virtual filesystem managed by the kernel and you mostly didn't need to think about mknod (unless you were fancy and had USB).
Finally udev (now absorbed into systemd) was created to deal with all the newfangled hotplug stuff, so now nobody even knows what it is they just plugged in or what driver it uses
.
would such a system be useable?
I know of people running Gentoo and Slackware systems with static /dev, but how well that works for Devuan is a good question. I see no reason it shouldn't, but you will obviously give up (most) hotplug functionality and anything else in the udev rules.
a: Stop using NetworkMangler and set up your nameservers manually.
b: Disable DNS management in NetworkMangler (add dns=none and rc-manager=unmanaged to the [main] section in the config file) and set up your nameservers manually.
c: Install something that allows multiple sources (i.e. NetworkMangler + You) to mess with nameserver records, such as openresolv, then set up NetworkMangler to use it.
Debian apparently has it's own implementation of (c), but I have no idea how (or if, absent systemd) it works.
I also have no idea what this "nextdns" privacy-koolaid thing and it's "pipe curl to a shell"
"installer" does to your DNS configuration, or whether it supports openresolv. That's for you to figure out if you want to use it.
TPM functionality isn't necessarily anti-freedom in itself, but it does provide some fairly obvious mechanisms for abuse... Personally I am almost as sceptical of Canonical's motives as I am of IBM/Redhat, and I suspect this will be yet another attempt to get a foot in the door in for something more unpleasant in the future.
IOW, same shit, different day. Same sub-optimal solutions.
The general public doesn't think enough to see through the "for your safety" bullshit or care enough to resist, and the legislators are either completely tech-illiterate or bought-and-paid-for.
So aside from (futile IME) "education", the only real answer is the same as it has always been: Reject these technologies, wear the "less safe convenient" hair-shirt, and when things get really screwed up - help build something that is less so.
Also, like, give the FSF and DBD some money or something. You get fun badges and stuff. ![]()
just use a user-agent that displays the actual o/s family (i.e. Linux).
From the torbrowser design docs:
Design Goal: All Tor Browser users MUST provide websites with an identical user agent and HTTP header set for a given request type. We omit the Firefox minor revision, and report a popular Windows platform.
I wonder what happens if your user-string says "MyBrowser 1.2.3.4" - will anubis block access entirely?
Likely, if the dev's attitude is anything to go by:
Maybe that one guy that sets his Chrome version to 150 would have issues
Installing a user-agent switcher is highly irregular behavior
It seems that user-agent switchers behave consistently in firefox and safari. You may want to use one of those two options
I would not suggest on relying on a user agent switcher in the future. Anubis is going to implement TLS fingerprinting support and that discrepancy between a Windows user agent with a Linux TLS fingerprint will be caught as suspect instantly.
AKA: "We only support ie6. Use a conforming browser. Anyone who doesn't conform is a weirdo and anubis will block them."
We rail against gratuitous javascript and browser fingerprinting, and we promote privacy... Except here, where apparently it's just fine.
We rail against forced systemd wayland adoption software-conformity, and advocate for user-choice... Except here, where apparently it's just fine.
This thing is blatantly speech-police for web browsers, and one small step away from a de-anonymisation engine. It uses all the same methods we love to hate when others do it. I'd make a slippery-slope comment, but you've heard them all already.
Your input website is without value visitors unless you can provide an alternative solution.
FTFY.
a good solution
Not of the top of my head, but this ridiculous arms-race sure isn't it. Not when the "cure" does exactly the same type of damage as the "disease", and certainly not when the open web, legitimate crawlers like the Internet Archive, and any users exhibiting "irregular behavior"[sic] (where the definition of "irregular" is up to Xe) are considered acceptable collateral damage.
To hammer home just how insane blocking based on a TLS fingerprint / UA mismatch is... Unless things have changed very recently, doing that will break sites for the TOR browser, of all things. Shall we just throw privacy in general under this bus as well?
What's next? Unmodified Chrome on a TPM-verified "approved" OS? How far are we going to take this madness? Google far?
@Xe Fixed my arse. What you mean is "Found a slightly different way to break the web".
Actually "fixed" would be "gone".
I am still not going anywhere near any site that intentionally wastes my CPU cycles, particularly when it does so with a bunch of javascript it would otherwise not need at all.
Further, to exhume a nugget from the '90s I thought we all grasped by now:
"Stop obsessing over user-agents" (because now you've created #269).
To pull some more gems from your own bugtracker:
"Congratulations, you just broke the web"
"this is a problem for this entire class of software"
"we only support IE6" and "we've known that's bad practice for 25+ years"
Your answer to #269:
"Anubis is going to implement TLS fingerprinting support and that discrepancy between a Windows user agent with a Linux TLS fingerprint will be caught as suspect instantly."
Will break sites for anyone running a privacy-centric browser or extension that always supplies a windows UA regardless of platform, something several currently do.
Go away. Stop breaking sites for non-mainstream browsers and people with user-agent switchers or anti-fingerprinting extensions. User-agent is an advisory header only, and the user can set it however they wish. (ab)using it the way you are is broken design.
You've already (disingenuously) removed mention of "proof of work" because you know people hate it, now you're going to draw the ire of anyone who has a problem with browser fingerprinting (ya know, that thing every asshat corporation does to track you) in general.
Uhh, congratulations on all the new enemies I guess?
Your british?
Nope. There's a clue in there if you really want to play guessing games, but that wasn't it.
Carrier branded phones might well have a locked bootloader as well (it's an option a carrier can request from the OEM), but IME that level of dickery is mostly a 'murican thing. Down here carrier locks of any kind are a rarity (outside of hire-purchase type arrangements), as is carrier branding in general... because we still have consumer-protection laws 'n stuff.
Personally I just refuse to deal with any provider that doesn't allow BYOD, and refuse to buy any device that's locked to a specific provider.
That usually means purchasing the hardware up-front at full price (or the used market, which I am a big proponent of in general), as opposed to the whole "sign up and get $phone on discount / glorified hire" thing. I'll gladly do that if it means I actually get to own my stuff. Matter of fact, everything I own I actually own, as a matter of principle.
My current phone came from England via ebay, and I did my own research on radio frequencies, carrier compatibility, lock status, parts availablilty and third-party OS support.
It was certainly more work than "sign up with $provider, get phone, use phone", but OTOH this one is mine, and I get to do whatever I want with it, for as long as I want (or at least until the next ridiculous [X]G hype-wave).
beware the Magic Smoke!?
Nah, wrangling angry pixies and sniffing magic smoke is kinda my day-job. Nothing to "beware" of really, just keep one hand in your pocket and a fire extinguisher change of trousers believable excuse handy.
Bad Wolves
Not quite my jam, but close enough for government work. \m/
There can be no offense when none is taken.
Or, to put it another another way...
"I like offending people, because I think people who get offended should be offended."
— Linus Torvalds, 2012
They were actually an intentional thing for a bit, back when active power-delivery negotiation specs were still a total mess.
If devices couldn't agree on a current limit, they would default to 100mA (which sucked), but there was a dumber standard that pretty much everything understood...
Bridging the data pins with a <200ohm resistor indicated a device was a charger that could deliver up to 1500mA, and it saved the manufacturer on both the power-delivery IC and the two extra wires.
This is supposed to happen inside the power supply/charger rather than a generic-looking cable of course, but Chinese manufacturers aren't exactly well-known for adhering to spec... So a few "magic" cables that would make your not-entirely-compatible (or just buggy) charger and device settle on an amp or so made it into the wild, as did cables that look like a standard USB cable but aren't, because they shipped with a charger and it saved a few cents to use normal connectors but only two wires.
I've made such cables myself, they're kinda handy if you want to get an old phone charger or powerbank to "just gimme power" for not-really-usb purposes (or blow fuses on old motherboards, to be tried only if you like fiddly soldering
).
All this went away with later USB specs and fast-charging, which mandate active negotiation.
bloatware samsung
That is was easily fixed by flashing an AOSP-based bloatware (and touchwiz) free ROM, of which there are were many. These days that's a non-starter, as most modern samsung phones use their in-house (exynos) SOC, and that requires unobtainable proprietary modem firmware for VoLTE and 5G support.
You can still root and debloat the stock ROM, and that's still a serious improvement, but AOSP builds are kinda dead until someone reverse engineers the modem.
If you want a reasonably priced bootloader-unlockable phone that ships (mostly) bloat-free OOTB and works well with third-party AOSP builds, I suggest Motorola. They're also not bad to work on, for when you inevitably smash the LCD or need to replace a port.
Google works too of course, and third-party ROM support is probably the best of all... It's just the price that stings. I really don't need a high-end device, and I have no interest in "premium" features or 50 cameras.
worse than google
It's just the bloatware and custom UI really, and that can mostly be fixed if you're willing to root it (and trip knox). Hardware and build-quality wise, Samsung are pretty good.
It could be worse... Most cheap Chinese brands are bootloader-locked and unrootable, and some even ship literal malware in the stock OS.
look on amazon or something to see what data cable
Dude, seriously, just a plain-old USB cable. The kind that comes in the box with pretty much every tech gadget and multiplies in everyone's desk drawers.
So long as it has appropriate plugs for the things you want to connect it to (likely USB-A[male] -> USB-C[male]) and all the wires (i.e. not a "charging only" cable, if those even still exist), it'll be fine.
appreciate you being helpful on this matter. Its a nice change.
Well, you're not raging at the sky or slandering anyone in this thread. vOv