- Arch-general - lists.archlinux.org

[arch-general] Firefox user data autofill doesn't work as before
by Peter Nabbefeld 09 Mar '17

09 Mar '17

Hello, before latest update, firefox filled my login credentials automatically into the appropriate fields. Now I've first to select the user in a dropdown list - how can I revert this behaviour? Kind regards Peter

7 16

[arch-general] How to "decorate" a package build?
by Peter Nabbefeld 09 Mar '17

09 Mar '17

Hello, is it possible to decorate a package build, i.e. set some prconditions (like exporting variables) and probably even change the build process (compile instead of copying just the binaries)? E.g., to modify the firefox package update to first compile with "--enable-alsa". Of course, I would have to create my own package in a private repository. The new PKGBUILD file would need to refer the original one, to get e.g. the package version number. However, the private package would always have the same version, so the official package change needs to be hooked to the generic private package: Official Package Changed --«Signal»--> Private Package Update --«Inherits»--> Official Package Update Kind regards P.

6 15

Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] AUR ToS (aka making AUR user names public)
by Mauro Santos 08 Mar '17

08 Mar '17

On 05-03-2017 13:35, Lukas Fleischer wrote: > Hi, > > I was recently contacted by a Polish researcher asking for a list of AUR > account names. I did not expect this to be controversial but a couple of > Trusted Users raised concerns on IRC, so I decided to move this to the > public mailing list and discuss the whole topic in generality. I would > like to head more opinions but please read the whole email and give it a > second thought before simply bringing up the usual privacy arguments > mentioned below. > > My original questions was: Are we fine with sharing the list of AUR > accounts names (only user names, no real names or email addresses) with > a researcher that seems trustworthy and agrees to not share the data in > any form other than the resulting anonymized statistics? > > In this particular case, we are talking about Dorota Celinska [1] from > the University of Warsaw, Faculty of Economic Sciences [2], see [3] for > a list of her publications and [4] for a summary of her research project > funded recently by the Polish National Science Centre. She needs the > list of user names to perform a segmentation analysis, including users > which were active on the older AUR releases both do not show any > activity on AUR 4. She would also like to use the user names as > identifiers to establish connections with other platforms, such as > GitHub. > > The next question is: Would it make sense to even make this data > publicly available? Would it make sense to extend our RPC interface such > that one can search for users names? GitHub, for example, already > provides such an interface [5]. Let me quickly summarize some arguments > for this idea which came up on IRC: > > * User names are mostly identifiers. It is questionable whether they > can/should be considered personal/private information. Maybe this can > only be answered by a lawyer, though. > > * The user names of all accounts with any kind of public activity, like > uploading a package, filing a request, writing a comment, are public > already. > > * After logging into the aurweb interface, you can already check whether > an account with a given user name exists because the account details > page URIs have the form https://aur.archlinux.org/account/$username. > This means that for any platform providing a list of user names (such > as GitHub), you can "establish connections" with the AUR already. > > Now the arguments against: > > * Principle of data economy: We should not share any kind of information > we do not need to share. > > * Sharing user names lowers the threshold for sharing other information > which is considered more confidential. > > * Users can (and should) already use crawlers to fetch the user names. > For example, the user names of all package maintainers and comment > authors appear on the package details pages. The names of all users > filing package requests appear in the mailing list archives etc. > > * We do not have ToS so we better not share anything. > > I, personally, find the second last argument a very weak one. Telling > users to build crawlers scraping an brute-forcing our HTML pages makes > life difficult for both them and us. What do you think? > > On the other side of the coin, the last argument is a very good one and > it brings me to my last point. Independently of the outcome of this > discussion, I think we should add some ToS that users need to agree upon > when registering. It should contain information on liability and on > privacy. Is anybody willing to write a draft? Do we need the support of > a lawyer here? > > Thank you for your time and have a nice Sunday! > > Regards, > Lukas > > [1] http://coin.wne.uw.edu.pl/dcelinska/en/ > [2] https://www.wne.uw.edu.pl/index.php/en/ > [3] http://coin.wne.uw.edu.pl/dcelinska/en/pages/publications.html > [4] https://ncn.gov.pl/sites/default/files/listy-rankingowe/2016-03-15/streszcz… > [5] https://developer.github.com/v3/users/ > I'd say err on the caution side and don't share, even though the usernames are public and easy to find by scraping them from the website/mailing list/etc, handing the whole database of usernames in a silver platter is a whole different story, which is what is being asked. Is there any community/website that provides a full list of registered usernames on request? There is also the question of how useful that data would be, without any other data such as email the username list is useless, you have no guarantee that user foo on github is the same person as user foo on the AUR/Wiki/Forum or user foo somewhere else. In this case I'd also have to agree that sharing usernames lowers the threshold for sharing other information. It also doesn't fit with their stated research goals, only github and projects associated with scraping data from github are mentioned, why would they want to throw the AUR usernames in the mix? -- Mauro Santos

14 38

[arch-general] Linux LTS 4.4 continued or 4.9 coming soon?
by Pablo Roberto Lezaeta Reyes 08 Mar '17

08 Mar '17

>>I'm going to move to 4.9-lts branch pretty soon... Dont forget to take care of FS#51455 since for this is why I cant go beyond LTS for now, and if you go to 4.9 I could get lock out or word, I cant update the kernel in a rolling release distro. -- *Pablo Lezaeta*

5 4

[arch-general] Firefox 52 Audio broken
by jjgaris 07 Mar '17

07 Mar '17

Since the update to firefox 52 the audio support has been broken. This seems to be because pulse audio is now a dependency by default in firefox. However firefox can still be build with ALSA support. Without getting into any dicussion about issues about pulseaudio itself, I believe it should be possible to use firefox on arch without being forces to use pulse audio. I am certainly not the only one to have banned this package from my boxes. And having more choices is certainly a good thing. Not sure this is the right place but I would like to ask to change back to the old defaults (ALSA). With the old defaults, the user can choose to use pulse audio (or JACK) or stay with plain ALSA support.

13 25

[arch-general] [arch-dev-public] AUR ToS (aka making AUR user names public)
by fnodeuser 07 Mar '17

07 Mar '17

test

3 3

[arch-general] [arch-dev-public] AUR ToS (aka making AUR user names public)
by fnodeuser 07 Mar '17

07 Mar '17

Bartłomiej Piotrowski, it is the same email address that i have been using since the beginning. what opinions? i never talk with opinions. i always talk with facts.

3 2

[arch-general] [arch-dev-public] AUR ToS (aka making AUR user names public)
by fnodeuser 07 Mar '17

07 Mar '17

Eli Schwartz, no one is paranoid here. we do not want security and privacy issues. YANG Ling, sharing the requested data will not benefit us in any way. Lukas Fleischer, why are you talking on her behalf? why did she send a message to you instead of one to the ML? why is she not answering any questions in this ML?

2 1

[arch-general] sending emails with gmail WAS: [arch-dev-public] AUR ToS
by Martin Kühne 06 Mar '17

06 Mar '17

On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Henrik Danielsson via arch-general <arch-general(a)archlinux.org> wrote: > [...] the quote in Mauro's > mail did not render as a quote normally does in Gmail, hence I was not > sure it would render correctly if I messed up the copying it (HTML > entities and all). Just turn it off. GMail's web interface does plain text email really well to my tastes, and you can actively enable it from the dropdown menu on the right of the bottom toolbar. All html is then stripped by default and apart of newlines, you can have isprint()-only conversations from then on. You might want to subscribe to arch-dev-public. The conversation started there and was taken to arch-general at some point. cheers! mar77i

1 0

[arch-general] Strange update of libvirt
by Peter Nabbefeld 04 Mar '17

04 Mar '17

Hello, I got the following message when updating: Warnung: /etc/libvirt/qemu/networks/default.xml installed as /etc/libvirt/qemu/networks/default.xml.pacnew As I wanted to know what to copy from the pacnew file, I did: sudo diff /etc/libvirt/qemu/networks/default.xml /etc/libvirt/qemu/networks/default.xml.pacnew The result was: 1,7d0 <  < 10,14c3,6 < <uuid>cc98c916-edd7-4e5f-8fbc-60839e8fa692</uuid> < <forward mode='nat'/> < <bridge name='virbr0' stp='on' delay='0'/> < <mac address='52:54:00:3a:62:50'/> < <ip address='192.168.122.1' netmask='255.255.255.0'> --- > <uuid>73618f96-1a85-47a8-a809-7edd8ad7899a</uuid> > <bridge name="virbr0"/> > <forward/> > <ip address="192.168.122.1" netmask="255.255.255.0"> 16c8 < <range start='192.168.122.2' end='192.168.122.254'/> --- > <range start="192.168.122.2" end="192.168.122.254"/> First, I noticed the removal of the warning - obviously this file hasn't been used for manual configurations (instead auto-configured) - what has changed in configuration handling? Second, the uuid has changed - why? So, do I have to change my original file or better ignor the pacnew file? Kind regards Peter

2 1