[gentoo-embedded] Correct uclibc profile to use?

[gentoo-embedded] Correct uclibc profile to use?

[Joshua ChaitinPollak]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 511 bytes --]

Hello,

My embedded environment has gotten a bit stale, I was running with the  
stage1-x86-uclibc-2006.1.tar.gz and the /usr/portage/profiles/uclibc/ 
x86 profile, but this stage release and profile both seem pretty stale.

What is the recommended profile and method to bootstrap a uclibc  
environment with a more recent (2007.0 or 2008.0-beta2) stage tarball  
and the latest portage?

Thanks,

-Josh

-- 
Joshua ChaitinPollak | Software Engineer
Kiva Systems, Inc., 225 Wildwood Ave, Woburn, MA 01970







[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2995 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-embedded] Correct uclibc profile to use?

[Joe Lacombe]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/html, Size: 1871 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-embedded] Correct uclibc profile to use?

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 195 bytes --]

On Thursday 08 May 2008, Joe Lacombe wrote:
> <FONT face="Default Sans Serif,Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif"
> size=2>

i left my HTML eyeballs at home.  please fix your e-mail client.
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-embedded] Correct uclibc profile to use?

[Ed W]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 714 bytes --]

Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Thursday 08 May 2008, Joe Lacombe wrote:
>   
>> <FONT face="Default Sans Serif,Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif"
>> size=2>
>>     
>
> i left my HTML eyeballs at home.  please fix your e-mail client.
>   

You appear to be using KMail which supports html mail just fine...

(For reference I run an ISP serving customers over a 2,400 baud 
satellite link which costs significant $$ per min - if anyone should 
care about compact email I would be up there - however, I do think this 
reluctance to accept HTML email is pretty old fashioned these days....  
OK, Next up, banning websites which don't work perfectly in links...)

Anyway, better don the flameproof suit now...

:-)

Ed W

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1161 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-embedded] Correct uclibc profile to use?

[shawnzier]

On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 08:26:14PM +0100, Ed W wrote:
>
> You appear to be using KMail which supports html mail just fine...
>
> (For reference I run an ISP serving customers over a 2,400 baud satellite 
> link which costs significant $$ per min - if anyone should care about 
> compact email I would be up there - however, I do think this reluctance to 
> accept HTML email is pretty old fashioned these days....  OK, Next up, 
> banning websites which don't work perfectly in links...)
>
You can post html, thats fine. You do risk people not reading it though,
because they're lazy, like me and don't want to open an external viewer.
People still do use text clients, you know.

-- 
gentoo-embedded@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-embedded] Correct uclibc profile to use?

[Ed W]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 405 bytes --]

shawnzier@gmail.com wrote:
>
> You can post html, thats fine. You do risk people not reading it though,
> because they're lazy, like me and don't want to open an external viewer.
> People still do use text clients, you know.
>
>   

Genuine question - does Mutt not have an inline html filter/viewer?  I 
use claws on an N810 which seems to handle html fine, but never really 
got into mutt myself?

Ed W

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 815 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-embedded] Correct uclibc profile to use?

[Matthijs Kooijman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1219 bytes --]

Hi,

>> You can post html, thats fine. You do risk people not reading it though,
>> because they're lazy, like me and don't want to open an external viewer.
>> People still do use text clients, you know.
I strongly prefer text email as well, it conveys exactly the information I
want it to convey and does not come with the "feature" of email authors being
able to select their own favorite fonts and colour schemes. And yes, I know
that clients can override that, but what's the point in using HTML if you do?
:-p

Anyway, I wasn't planning on starting the next holy war, so let's answer your
question.

> Genuine question - does Mutt not have an inline html filter/viewer?  I use 
> claws on an N810 which seems to handle html fine, but never really got into 
> mutt myself?
I'm using mutt and it's not handling html itself. However, it can open html
parts just as any attachment, and my mailcap says it should use lynx (or w3m?)
to open text/html files. So, selecting the html part and pressing enter is
enough to get a reasonable readable version of HTML emails. Still, it's enough
to significantly break the routine in my work process, so half of the time I
don't bother.

Gr.

Matthijs

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-embedded] Correct uclibc profile to use?

[Peter Stuge]

On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 10:05:05AM +0200, Matthijs Kooijman wrote:
> I'm using mutt and it's not handling html itself. However, it can
> open html parts just as any attachment, and my mailcap says it
> should use lynx (or w3m?) to open text/html files. So, selecting
> the html part and pressing enter is enough to get a reasonable
> readable version of HTML emails. Still, it's enough to
> significantly break the routine in my work process, so half of the
> time I don't bother.

Try adding:

auto_view text/html
alternative_order text/plain text/html

To your .muttrc. Mutt will then prefer to show text/plain, but if
there is none it will use mailcap and display the output in the
normal pager. Make sure you have two entries in mailcap for
text/html, where the second should specify the copiousoutput flag.
Mutt will use the first one when you manually view HTML, but prefers
copiousoutput entries for autoviewing.

text/html; /usr/local/bin/latin1links %s
text/html; /usr/local/bin/latin1links -dump 1 -dump-charset %{charset} %s; copiousoutput

latin1links is a simple links wrapper that cleans up the charset.


//Peter
-- 
gentoo-embedded@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-embedded] Correct uclibc profile to use?

[Joshua ChaitinPollak]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 347 bytes --]


On May 14, 2008, at 4:05 AM, Matthijs Kooijman wrote:
>
> Anyway, I wasn't planning on starting the next holy war, so let's  
> answer your
> question.


Which was what? I've forgotten already. Maybe its in the subject of  
the thread. :)

-- 
Joshua ChaitinPollak | Software Engineer
Kiva Systems, Inc., 225 Wildwood Ave, Woburn, MA 01970







[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2815 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-embedded] Correct uclibc profile to use?

[Matthijs Kooijman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 185 bytes --]

> Which was what? I've forgotten already. Maybe its in the subject of the 
> thread. :)
Whether mutt supports html email. Never said I was gonna back on topic :-p

Gr.

Matthijs

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-embedded] Correct uclibc profile to use?

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1065 bytes --]

On Tuesday 13 May 2008, Ed W wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Thursday 08 May 2008, Joe Lacombe wrote:
> >> <FONT face="Default Sans Serif,Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif"
> >> size=2>
> >
> > i left my HTML eyeballs at home.  please fix your e-mail client.
>
> You appear to be using KMail which supports html mail just fine...

which ive disabled so i dont have to deal with it.  replies/quoting easily 
break and destroy followups.  all so people can force their preferred viewing 
font on others.

> (For reference I run an ISP serving customers over a 2,400 baud
> satellite link which costs significant $$ per min - if anyone should
> care about compact email I would be up there - however, I do think this
> reluctance to accept HTML email is pretty old fashioned these days....
> OK, Next up, banning websites which don't work perfectly in links...)

if you want to make the argument on a non-technical list, go for it.  open 
source technical lists (such as this one) have all banned html.  get with it 
or dont post.
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-embedded] Correct uclibc profile to use?

[Ed W]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1966 bytes --]

Mike Frysinger wrote:
>
>> You appear to be using KMail which supports html mail just fine...
>>     
>
> which ive disabled so i dont have to deal with it.  replies/quoting easily 
> break and destroy followups.  all so people can force their preferred viewing 
> font on others.
>   

Actually, getting all technical on you for a moment, but at least in 
theory HTML has the ability to properly support replies and quoting as 
part of it's standard

...Absolutely with you though that the most popular MUA in most circles 
is Outlook and this fails even to reply and create a proper indent let 
alone using decent use of HTML tags...  Oh well.

Not really sure what Thunderbird does - it prompts sometimes and 
othertimes does it's own thing..  Hope this is plain text?

> if you want to make the argument on a non-technical list, go for it.  open 
> source technical lists (such as this one) have all banned html.  get with it 
> or dont post.


I already nailed my colours to the mast as someone who cares (remember I 
serve customers with only 20KB/minute of bandwidth!) - I was pointing 
out that this debate pops up time and time again and basically it's like 
trying to hold back the tide...

For what it's worth I have a very clever filtering setup as part of my 
ISP arrangement which simply automatically converts html to plain text 
and archives the original so that you can get it back again if you need 
it, etc.  I think if you really want plain text only then it's far 
easier to just setup the mailing list to convert all mails automatically 
than it is to try and badger users to change their habits...

Personally I think this is a problem solvable by computer and I'm all in 
favour of stuff where teh computer does the work rather than humans 
having to press one more key just to do something (which is basically 
also your complaint).  I can point you towards some html flattener 
software if you are the admin for this list?

Good luck

Ed W

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2528 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-embedded] HTML vs plaintext email (Was: Correct uclibc profile to use?)

[Matthijs Kooijman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1829 bytes --]

Hi,

> I think if you really want plain text only then it's far easier to 
> just setup the mailing list to convert all mails automatically than it is 
> to try and badger users to change their habits...
Actually, I don't really agree with this. True, it solves problems when
dealing with mostly ignorant (Outlook) users, but isn't the right solution in
general. 

In particular, I like to know that the email I'm reading is actually
the way the author had intended it. Any automated HTML->text filter will
remove information.

Now you may argue that this removed information wasn't really useful and can
be left out without harm. This is probably the case most of the time, but in
that case the author shouldn't have been using HTML email in the first place.
So, I'd rather keep on badgering people to write plaintext emails whenever
possible, than having unsuspecting users see their carefully crafted HTML
formatting be ruined by an automated filter.

Still, it is mostly a matter of personal preference in general I think. I
prefer to email with people sending plaintext emails :-p

As pointed out however, most technical mailing lists require, or at least
stimulate, the use of plaintext email, which has been successful so far. I
don't see any problems with this in the near future, so we can probably keep
this up for quite some time :-)

> Personally I think this is a problem solvable by computer and I'm all in
> favour of stuff where teh computer does the work rather than humans having
> to press one more key just to do something 
Well, when using proper mailclients, pressing that button shouldn't be
neccesary (apart from the one time marking of a (mailing list) recipient as a
plaintext receiver.

Oh, and your last email did actually turn out plaintext :-)

Gr.

Matthijs

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-embedded] Correct uclibc profile to use?

[Ned Ludd]

On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 08:55 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Tuesday 13 May 2008, Ed W wrote:
> > Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > On Thursday 08 May 2008, Joe Lacombe wrote:
> > >> <FONT face="Default Sans Serif,Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif"
> > >> size=2>
> > >
> > > i left my HTML eyeballs at home.  please fix your e-mail client.
> >
> > You appear to be using KMail which supports html mail just fine...
> 
> which ive disabled so i dont have to deal with it.  replies/quoting easily 
> break and destroy followups.  all so people can force their preferred viewing 
> font on others.
> 
> > (For reference I run an ISP serving customers over a 2,400 baud
> > satellite link which costs significant $$ per min - if anyone should
> > care about compact email I would be up there - however, I do think this
> > reluctance to accept HTML email is pretty old fashioned these days....
> > OK, Next up, banning websites which don't work perfectly in links...)
> 
> if you want to make the argument on a non-technical list, go for it.  open 
> source technical lists (such as this one) have all banned html.  get with it 
> or dont post.

When Robin returns from Hong Kong etc.. We should see what we can do
about having our mailing lists outright reject posts that are text/html.
It messes up archives and the likes.


-- 
gentoo-embedded@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-embedded] Correct uclibc profile to use?

[wireless]

Ed W wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>
>>> You appear to be using KMail which supports html mail just fine...
>>>     
>>
>> which ive disabled so i dont have to deal with it.  replies/quoting easily 
>> break and destroy followups.  all so people can force their preferred viewing 
>> font on others.
>>   
> 
> Actually, getting all technical on you for a moment, but at least in 
> theory HTML has the ability to properly support replies and quoting as 
> part of it's standard
> 
> ...Absolutely with you though that the most popular MUA in most circles 
> is Outlook and this fails even to reply and create a proper indent let 
> alone using decent use of HTML tags...  Oh well.
> 

Ed,

This is an embedded technical list, most are avid Linux supporters if 
not Gentoo directly. It is a common convention to post without html,
as it does cause folks to spend time on things they ordinarily would 
not. I "hate" html email and many technical folks will just ignore your
postings.



> Not really sure what Thunderbird does - it prompts sometimes and 
> othertimes does it's own thing..  Hope this is plain text?
> 
>> if you want to make the argument on a non-technical list, go for it.  open 
>> source technical lists (such as this one) have all banned html.  get with it 
>> or dont post.
> 
> 
> I already nailed my colours to the mast as someone who cares (remember I 
> serve customers with only 20KB/minute of bandwidth!) - I was pointing 
> out that this debate pops up time and time again and basically it's like 
> trying to hold back the tide...
> 
> For what it's worth I have a very clever filtering setup as part of my 
> ISP arrangement which simply automatically converts html to plain text 
> and archives the original so that you can get it back again if you need 
> it, etc.  I think if you really want plain text only then it's far 
> easier to just setup the mailing list to convert all mails automatically 
> than it is to try and badger users to change their habits...

Again, no body usually wants to spend their time on such matters. 
Folks will just ignore you, or ban you from the list (are you listening ?)

> 
> Personally I think this is a problem solvable by computer and I'm all in 
> favour of stuff where teh computer does the work rather than humans 
> having to press one more key just to do something (which is basically 
> also your complaint).  I can point you towards some html flattener 
> software if you are the admin for this list?

I agree with the other posters. NO HTML EMAILs.



James
-- 
gentoo-embedded@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-embedded] Correct uclibc profile to use?

[David Ford]

Personally, I am for permitting HTML, or rich text email.  I quite
prefer to use rich mail.  I am also judicious in it's use so it's not
bloated like M$ mail.

This list has very rabid anti-html users.  They would rather pollute
emails with a large amount of spaces to position their content and odd
characters to represent barely decipherable graphic content than use a
language designed for marking up and laying out the presentation.

Eventually their kind will grow old and the younger generation will take
over.  They will go the way of the 74 column force wrapped emails who
went the way of the 36 column force wrapped emails, etc, etc.

All their excuses are entirely lame.  All modern mailing list software can:

  a) reform mail from HTML to plain text
  b) archive both plain text and HTML mail just fine

All modern MUAs can also present the end user with plain text
representations of HTML or use the text/plain mime part instead of the
text/html mime part whether it is native or by sub shell.

This particular subject comes up several times a year and will continue to.

HTML mail is neither ignorant nor non-standard but you will definitely
have several people on this list lambast you as such.

Further, I consider these people hypocrites since most of them run
websites and use HTML markup.  Why don't they make plain text web
pages?  Their content can be expressed just as stone age appearing as
their text email is expressed.

^_^

-david

Ed W wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>
>>> You appear to be using KMail which supports html mail just fine...
>>>     
>>
>> which ive disabled so i dont have to deal with it.  replies/quoting easily 
>> break and destroy followups.  all so people can force their preferred viewing 
>> font on others.
>>   
>
> Actually, getting all technical on you for a moment, but at least in
> theory HTML has the ability to properly support replies and quoting as
> part of it's standard
>
> ...Absolutely with you though that the most popular MUA in most
> circles is Outlook and this fails even to reply and create a proper
> indent let alone using decent use of HTML tags...  Oh well.
>
> Not really sure what Thunderbird does - it prompts sometimes and
> othertimes does it's own thing..  Hope this is plain text?
>
>> if you want to make the argument on a non-technical list, go for it.  open 
>> source technical lists (such as this one) have all banned html.  get with it 
>> or dont post.
>
>
> I already nailed my colours to the mast as someone who cares (remember
> I serve customers with only 20KB/minute of bandwidth!) - I was
> pointing out that this debate pops up time and time again and
> basically it's like trying to hold back the tide...
>
> For what it's worth I have a very clever filtering setup as part of my
> ISP arrangement which simply automatically converts html to plain text
> and archives the original so that you can get it back again if you
> need it, etc.  I think if you really want plain text only then it's
> far easier to just setup the mailing list to convert all mails
> automatically than it is to try and badger users to change their habits...
>
> Personally I think this is a problem solvable by computer and I'm all
> in favour of stuff where teh computer does the work rather than humans
> having to press one more key just to do something (which is basically
> also your complaint).  I can point you towards some html flattener
> software if you are the admin for this list?
>
> Good luck
>
> Ed W

-- 
gentoo-embedded@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-embedded] Correct uclibc profile to use?

[Joe Lacombe]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3968 bytes --]

Dear List,
Please listen to yourselves. I changed my email options a week ago. I can
live with any convention, and I am glad to be instructed. Does anybody have
an answer to the actual question that started this thread?

-----David Ford <david@blue-labs.org> wrote: -----

To: gentoo-embedded@lists.gentoo.org
From: David Ford <david@blue-labs.org>
Date: 05/14/2008 12:52PM
Subject: Re: [gentoo-embedded] Correct uclibc profile to use?

Personally, I am for permitting HTML, or rich text email.  I quite
prefer to use rich mail.  I am also judicious in it's use so it's not
bloated like M$ mail.

This list has very rabid anti-html users.  They would rather pollute
emails with a large amount of spaces to position their content and odd
characters to represent barely decipherable graphic content than use a
language designed for marking up and laying out the presentation.

Eventually their kind will grow old and the younger generation will take
over.  They will go the way of the 74 column force wrapped emails who
went the way of the 36 column force wrapped emails, etc, etc.

All their excuses are entirely lame.  All modern mailing list software can:

  a) reform mail from HTML to plain text
  b) archive both plain text and HTML mail just fine

All modern MUAs can also present the end user with plain text
representations of HTML or use the text/plain mime part instead of the
text/html mime part whether it is native or by sub shell.

This particular subject comes up several times a year and will continue to.

HTML mail is neither ignorant nor non-standard but you will definitely
have several people on this list lambast you as such.

Further, I consider these people hypocrites since most of them run
websites and use HTML markup.  Why don't they make plain text web
pages?  Their content can be expressed just as stone age appearing as
their text email is expressed.

^_^

-david

Ed W wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>
>>> You appear to be using KMail which supports html mail just fine...
>>>
>>
>> which ive disabled so i dont have to deal with it.  replies/quoting
easily
>> break and destroy followups.  all so people can force their preferred
viewing
>> font on others.
>>
>
> Actually, getting all technical on you for a moment, but at least in
> theory HTML has the ability to properly support replies and quoting as
> part of it's standard
>
> ...Absolutely with you though that the most popular MUA in most
> circles is Outlook and this fails even to reply and create a proper
> indent let alone using decent use of HTML tags...  Oh well.
>
> Not really sure what Thunderbird does - it prompts sometimes and
> othertimes does it's own thing..  Hope this is plain text?
>
>> if you want to make the argument on a non-technical list, go for it.
open
>> source technical lists (such as this one) have all banned html.  get
with it
>> or dont post.
>
>
> I already nailed my colours to the mast as someone who cares (remember
> I serve customers with only 20KB/minute of bandwidth!) - I was
> pointing out that this debate pops up time and time again and
> basically it's like trying to hold back the tide...
>
> For what it's worth I have a very clever filtering setup as part of my
> ISP arrangement which simply automatically converts html to plain text
> and archives the original so that you can get it back again if you
> need it, etc.  I think if you really want plain text only then it's
> far easier to just setup the mailing list to convert all mails
> automatically than it is to try and badger users to change their
habits...
>
> Personally I think this is a problem solvable by computer and I'm all
> in favour of stuff where teh computer does the work rather than humans
> having to press one more key just to do something (which is basically
> also your complaint).  I can point you towards some html flattener
> software if you are the admin for this list?
>
> Good luck
>
> Ed W

--
gentoo-embedded@lists.gentoo.org mailing list


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5398 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-embedded] Correct uclibc profile to use?

[David Ford]

Joe Lacombe wrote:
>
> Dear List,
> Please listen to yourselves. I changed my email options a week ago. I 
> can live with any convention, and I am glad to be instructed. Does 
> anybody have an answer to the actual question that started this thread?
>

If I had an answer, I'd be quite happy to provide it to you but I 
don't.  I'm sorry.

-david

-- 
gentoo-embedded@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-embedded] Correct uclibc profile to use?

[Ned Ludd]

On Wed, 2008-05-07 at 15:23 -0400, Joshua ChaitinPollak wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> 
> My embedded environment has gotten a bit stale, I was running with the
> stage1-x86-uclibc-2006.1.tar.gz and
> the /usr/portage/profiles/uclibc/x86 profile, but this stage release
> and profile both seem pretty stale.
> 
> 
> What is the recommended profile and method to bootstrap a uclibc
> environment with a more recent (2007.0 or 2008.0-beta2) stage tarball
> and the latest portage?


Grab the most recent stage from (hardened or non)
http://distributions.barfoo.org/gentoo/releases/x86/stages/uclibc/current/stage3-x86-uclibc-hardened-20080110.tar.bz2
unpack.

tar jxf stage3-x86-*.tar.bz2 -C /some_staging_dir
cd /some_staging_dir
mount -obind /proc proc
mount -obind /sys sys
cp /etc/resolv.conf etc/
chroot . /bin/bash --login
echo PKGDIR=/packages/ >> /etc/make.conf
echo FEATURES=buildpkg >> /etc/make.conf
emerge -q world

#finished.

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> -Josh
> 
> -- 
> Joshua ChaitinPollak | Software Engineer 
> Kiva Systems, Inc., 225 Wildwood Ave, Woburn, MA 01970
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
gentoo-embedded@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-embedded] Correct uclibc profile to use?

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1368 bytes --]

On Wednesday 14 May 2008, Ed W wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >> You appear to be using KMail which supports html mail just fine...
> >
> > which ive disabled so i dont have to deal with it.  replies/quoting
> > easily break and destroy followups.  all so people can force their
> > preferred viewing font on others.
>
> Actually, getting all technical on you for a moment, but at least in
> theory HTML has the ability to properly support replies and quoting as
> part of it's standard

i'm not saying that html isnt capable, just that the reality is, the clients 
that generate it do so in an unusable manner.  it is also useless and hates a 
lot on transforming into other random interfaces

> > if you want to make the argument on a non-technical list, go for it. 
> > open source technical lists (such as this one) have all banned html.  get
> > with it or dont post.
>
> I already nailed my colours to the mast as someone who cares (remember I
> serve customers with only 20KB/minute of bandwidth!) - I was pointing
> out that this debate pops up time and time again and basically it's like
> trying to hold back the tide...

sorry, i didnt mean for my reply to sound like i was directing it at you.  the 
answer was meant in general.  there is no discussion to have as we already 
have a policy and it isnt going to change.
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-embedded] Correct uclibc profile to use?

[Matthijs Kooijman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 637 bytes --]

Hi,

> Personally, I am for permitting HTML, or rich text email.  I quite
> prefer to use rich mail.  I am also judicious in it's use so it's not
> bloated like M$ mail.
How nice it is that we can have completely different opinions, and even have
completely polite discussions about them (There is really no sarcasm in that
sentence, btw).

> Eventually their kind will grow old and the younger generation will take
> over.  They will go the way of the 74 column force wrapped emails who
> went the way of the 36 column force wrapped emails, etc, etc.
Considering that I'm only 23, was I born in the wrong generation? :-p

Gr.

Matthijs

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-embedded] Correct uclibc profile to use?

[Natanael Copa]

On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 09:12 -0700, Ned Ludd wrote:

> When Robin returns from Hong Kong etc.. We should see what we can do
> about having our mailing lists outright reject posts that are text/html.
> It messes up archives and the likes.

yes please. that would be nice.

-nc

-- 
gentoo-embedded@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-embedded] Correct uclibc profile to use?

[Ed W]

> When Robin returns from Hong Kong etc.. We should see what we can do
> about having our mailing lists outright reject posts that are text/html.
> It messes up archives and the likes.
>   

I think this is a fairer option than simply moaning about it - at least 
there is sensible feedback then. 

Another middle option is to use an html to text convertor (demime is 
one, but it munges attachments).  It's fairly trivial to knock up 
something better in perl though

(Personally I am happy to receive HTML email though...)

Ed W
-- 
gentoo-embedded@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-embedded] Correct uclibc profile to use?

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 719 bytes --]

On Friday 23 May 2008, Ed W wrote:
> > When Robin returns from Hong Kong etc.. We should see what we can do
> > about having our mailing lists outright reject posts that are text/html.
> > It messes up archives and the likes.
>
> I think this is a fairer option than simply moaning about it - at least
> there is sensible feedback then.
>
> Another middle option is to use an html to text convertor (demime is
> one, but it munges attachments).  It's fairly trivial to knock up
> something better in perl though

from what ive seen with other lists, this tends to be a messy and overhead 
issue.  but i'm not admining our list servers, so i cannot say for sure.

best to reject & educate i think
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-embedded] Correct uclibc profile to use?

[Ned Ludd]

On Fri, 2008-05-23 at 18:10 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Friday 23 May 2008, Ed W wrote:
> > > When Robin returns from Hong Kong etc.. We should see what we can do
> > > about having our mailing lists outright reject posts that are text/html.
> > > It messes up archives and the likes.
> >
> > I think this is a fairer option than simply moaning about it - at least
> > there is sensible feedback then.
> >
> > Another middle option is to use an html to text convertor (demime is
> > one, but it munges attachments).  It's fairly trivial to knock up
> > something better in perl though
> 
> from what ive seen with other lists, this tends to be a messy and overhead 
> issue.  but i'm not admining our list servers, so i cannot say for sure.
> 
> best to reject & educate i think

No low hanging fruit that can be fixed here...
Going to have to stick with the educate method as Robin says there is no
easy way to accomplish html filtering with our list server setup.

-- 
Ned Ludd <solar@gentoo.org>

-- 
gentoo-embedded@lists.gentoo.org mailing list