< mari
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
chi >
[ Page 70 of 76 ]
From: Ann Barcomb
Date: 15:55 on 05 Sep 2003
Subject: More Mozilla
When trying to view the source of a page which results from a form
submission, a handy little warning pops up:
The page you are trying to view contains POSTDATA that has expired from
cache. If you resend the data, any action the form carried out (such as
a search or online purchase) will be repeated. To resend the data, click
OK. Otherwise, click Cancel.
It's the same warning you see if you try to reload the page, or sometimes
go back to it. And it is true. I checked the web server logs, and view
source really is generating an additional hit. You would think they would
consider caching the result unrendered at least long enough to allow the
page to be viewed, given the consequences of resubmission.
The offending software is
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2.1)
Gecko/20021130, build 2002113015
From: Ann Barcomb
Date: 15:42 on 05 Sep 2003
Subject: find verbosity
I admit...this may not be find's fault. I just notice it with find,
but it really annoys me. I want a simple way to reduce verbosity.
Specifically, I don't want to hear messages about all the directories
I don't have permission to access. I know I don't have permission to
access them, so just ignore them and continue! It's pretty common
for someone to not have access to every file...or are you only
supposed to run the command as root to avoid missing the result hiding
amid the error messages? Why can't it just ignore directories I don't
have access to?
Example output:
hrm[1] /home/ann> find /tmp -name foo
find: /tmp/1/fd: Permission denied
find: /tmp/2/fd: Permission denied
find: /tmp/3/fd: Permission denied
/tmp/foo
find: /tmp/4/fd: Permission denied
find: /tmp/5/fd: Permission denied
Ideal output:
hrm[2] /home/ann> find /tmp -name foo
/tmp/foo
(If you want to defend find by giving me a solution to this problem, I
actually welcome rationality in this instance.)
From: Earle Martin Date: 18:42 on 04 Sep 2003 Subject: Thunderbird / dependencies I decided to try installing Mozilla Thunderbird (the mail and news app) to try it out. Turns out it wants a bunch of libraries that are provided by libc++5. Of course, this is in Debian's testing development, not stable, so my apt-get can't find it. (Can I tell apt-get about testing?) Anyway, downloading the dependencies by hand (sigh...) from packages.debian.org I get to this charming state of affairs: earle@batou:~/debs$ sudo dpkg -i libc6_2.3.1-16_i386.deb (Reading database ... 75274 files and directories currently installed.) Preparing to replace libc6 2.3.1-16 (using libc6_2.3.1-16_i386.deb) ... Unpacking replacement libc6 ... dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libc6: libc6 depends on libdb1-compat; however: Package libdb1-compat is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libc6 (--install): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: libc6 earle@batou:~/debs$ sudo dpkg -i libdb1-compat_2.1.3-7_i386.deb (Reading database ... 75274 files and directories currently installed.) Preparing to replace libdb1-compat 2.1.3-7 (using libdb1-compat_2.1.3-7_i386.deb) ... Unpacking replacement libdb1-compat ... dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libdb1-compat: libdb1-compat depends on libc6 (>= 2.2.5-13); however: Package libc6 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libdb1-compat (--install): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: libdb1-compat earle@batou:~/debs$ sudo dpkg --configure libdb1-compat dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libdb1-compat: libdb1-compat depends on libc6 (>= 2.2.5-13); however: Package libc6 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libdb1-compat (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: libdb1-compat earle@batou:~/debs$ sudo dpkg --configure libc6 dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libc6: libc6 depends on libdb1-compat; however: Package libdb1-compat is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libc6 (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: libc6 In other words - circular dependencies! How in God's name is it possible to install these libraries then? Screw this, I'm sticking with Mozilla Mail & News.
From: peter (Peter da Silva) Date: 18:38 on 04 Sep 2003 Subject: bastard standards http://peter.hates-software.com/2003/09/04/7af43925.html To be precise: --9XMFo0eNrVFj6oBf Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable [...] --9XMFo0eNrVFj6oBf Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE/V3RlWaB7jFU39ScRApZvAKDIrqZiQ77jDQLSRP95uxU+OnWDzACgwDbW mOPNYEdOPtDTXnd+LjrOG84= =01u8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --9XMFo0eNrVFj6oBf-- WTF? It's not that it's PGP-singed, mind you, but that it's also encapsulated inside a bunch of MIME turds ... but not using the MIME-PGP stuff. So if you're doing MIME you get to share with the old-PGP stuff, and if you're not you still have to deal with the MIME turds... which are likely to break the old-PGP-stuff because it's encoded in quoted-unspeakable. Let's combine the worst of all worlds.
From: peter (Peter da Silva) Date: 17:50 on 04 Sep 2003 Subject: bastard software developers I hate bastard software developers. When someone sends me a patch for something they actually use, I'll either add it or I'll come up with a better way of doing things, or at worst suggest they try another approach in the patch. I can't understand why someone, after you've gone to the trouble of coming up with a patch for their software that doesn't break anything, is in the right format, doesn't duplicate functionality, and is generally a good patch... why someone will then turn around and say "I don't need that feature, so I won't consider putting it in". Not, "that will break a feature I use" or "it's too much work" or "I don't understand it" or "tell me more", but "I don't need it, so it's not going in, period". It's not just me either. I've gone hunting patches for other packages and had other people tell the same tale. I'm going to have to re-apply a patch someone did for an old version of Postfix later this week because RBL tagging apparently offended Weitse. And it's a straightforward patch, doesn't hardly change anything, and doesn't hurt anything. And he's not even one of the hard-to-get-along-with ones. We all know the poster-boy there...
From: Simon Wistow Date: 17:07 on 04 Sep 2003 Subject: browsing is a world of hurt At work we use a heavily customised version of BSD and our own packagement system. Don't ask. There are good reasons or so I've been told. During the course of my work I have to do a lot of stuff in a web browser. Some, nay, most of this is in areas where I have to be authenticated using our single-signon doodad. Just now, my browser crashed. Again. This must be the thirtieth time today. As I was firing up the various windws I had open before and typing in my username and password a squillion times it occured to me that WHY SHOULD I PUT UP WITH THIS SHIT? I've tried a variety of browsers - mozilla, firebird, galeon. Galeon used to work fine but for some reason, one day, somebody suddenly flicked the "look like ass" switch and all the fonts came out weird. Firebird and Mozilla looked fine. They all had the same font settings. Go figure. So I start using Firebird. It starts off fine, then starts crashing once a day. Then practically constantly. So I switch to Mozilla. Which is slow, And has some really annoying features (like switching immediately to a tab I've just opened). But it worked. Except now it crashes all the time as well. Muttering something about shmmap being out of space or something. Fuck knows what that's all about. I'm guessing I may have to reboot. Sometimes it mutters about illegal space access or something. And crashes. Nice. Oooh. It's just crashed again. Fan-fucking-tastic. And I'm putting up with this. I accept that this is a normal thing. Well, obviosuly not at the moment because I'm ranting to you but tomorrow I'm going to go back to accepting it. Because I have to. Because I have no other choice other than Netscape which seems stable and appears to be faster but which no fucker is supporting because "only 5% of people have it" and because it doesn't let them do their fancy fucking dotted line boxes round the meaningless, empty, hollow, self congratualtory wank that they spew all over the place. "We only design for IE, it's the market leader". NOT SO FUCKING FUNNY NOW IS IT YOU FUCKS! IE is abandoned, maybe to become part of the OS again (wasn't that decalred illegal?) but at the moment it's like some crippled half browser comapred to other ones. So mostly Netscape is unusable. So I have to keep using Sir-Crash-A-Lot. What I don't understand is - why are browsers so fucking complicated? Why do people seem incapable of writing a decent one (although I hear that under the stable monocultured homogenity of MacOS X things are fine). I mean - they're not that big a deal. It's a document viewer. With a network retrieval layer. Yet they seem to have evolved into the most fricking difficult programs to write ever. They shouldn't crash. In fact - no software should really crash. Especially not from segfaulting. Memory corrupting is so 30 years ago. ... And again. Fuck this. I'm going to go and get drunk.
From: Paul Mison Date: 16:14 on 04 Sep 2003 Subject: I hate the Finder more each day Folder. List view. Nicely arranged. Create new folder. (Command Shift N. Huh.) Niggle the first: the folder is selected, but not editable. I have to hit return or enter to change the name. Niggle the second: the folder hasn't inherited the views of the previous folder. Like that'd be hard to accomplish. But no, I have to manually set it to list view. Then change all the column widths. Then remove or add any columns that were non-standard. Sigh. Of course, all you Unix people are probably looking at me like I'm odd. "Why should it inherit?" But that's what I'm used to. The old Finder used to manage to get both of the above niggles right. Sigh. I sense this could go on and on.
From: peter (Peter da Silva) Date: 12:57 on 03 Sep 2003 Subject: I hate MDI I hate MDI. But... it never occurred to me that Microsoft might screw up whatever little value MDI has... until now... > Don't get me started. Here's a nice example of Windows applications in > action: > http://www.jshift.com/services/design/horrors/taskbar_abuse.asp To me, each thing in the task bar is a *document*. I hate MDI. I hate the whole "single-instance" nature of Windows. Windows is so relentlessly 'there is a single instance of an application, a single instance of a user' that they had to invent a whole extra "session" layer that digs its filthy fingers deep into the OS to make each session act like a separate virtual machine to allow multiple user sessions. And then Jobs had to bloody well copy that on Mac OS X, when Mac OS X (being UNIX) already has a better way of dealing with multiple users. [remainder of subrant deleted to spare the Internet from my filthy language] I've seen that pseudo-MDI-ha-ha-fooled-you behaviour before. Acrobat Reader on UNIX does the same thing, without the courtesy of giving you a hint that closing the last window won't close the last window but turn it into an "empty MDI". I think that they're trying to emulate Apple's "close-isn't-exit" behaviour. But I had no idea how far Microsoft was willing to go in search of suck: Thank god I've never had to use access: "Unfortuntely, MS decided to treat each object as a document and give it its own slot in the taskbar." Jesus Harold Christ on a pogo stick. That picture has so much suckage I'm completely blown away. Whatever drugs those people were on when they created MULTIPLE taskbar slots for a single objects... Windows, Just Say No. But, anyway, MDI sucks. The only program I like using MDI in is Notes because I don't *care* about Notes: it's an obstacle, not a tool, so hiding it all off in a single window is great. Otherwise, MDI is just a way to make virtual desktops annoying so Microsoft has an excuse not to implement them. There's a useful subset to MDI: tabbed windows. That makes the "new window or new subwindow" choice mine, not the application's. http://www.jshift.com/services/design/honors/mdi_browsers.asp Oh god, I wish Opera did tabs rather than MDI.
From: Simon Wistow Date: 11:28 on 03 Sep 2003 Subject: gimp by name, gimp by nature It's not just the Gimp actually, I hate most imaging software but I suspect that's because I don't know how to drive it. My be-smocked designer friends seem to be able to whizz around Photoshop doing anything they want using a combination of esoteric keyboard chords that would make a Vi addict blanche and an Emacs apologist startbegging for text pad. But I digrees. I'm hear to complain about the Gimp. Spencer Gimball's program seemed to mature rapidly. I had high hopes. Ok, so the usability seems to be a bit of an issue but these things often are and all they need to do is basically copy Photoshop. Photoshop may not be the ideal interface but it's the one people are used to. Right? Right? So I'm using (umm, CHECKS) Gimp 1.3.3. I ahve a picture. I wnat to put some text on it. Actually what I want to do is have an image with a white layer on top and then use the text as a mask to stamp through the white layer to show the image underneath. But we'll get onto that. So I hit the text tool. And a floating selection of text appears the text being 'Gimp'. So I look around about how to change that. Can I find it? Can I bollocks. Yes, I can read the manual. But should I need to? I'm sure it shouldn't be this hard. I'm sure it wasn't before. Actually, reading the manual it says that "The Text Tool dialog box will open and display a list of the installed fonts. Type in the text you want in the text box in the bottom of the dialog." Ok, so text Dialog opens. Check. Is there a text entry box? No. I presume the manual is out of date. *sigh* Whilst I'm ranting why is it spewing out copious amounts of debug stuff to my terminal? Do I care? No! Surely that should only be printed out if I start with gimp --verbose or something. I honestly don't need to know that logical rect: 234 x 116 @ 0, 0 ink rect: 229 x 94 @ 0, 19 logical rect: 234 x 116 @ 0, 0 ink rect: 229 x 94 @ 0, 19 logical rect: 234 x 116 @ 0, 0 subsample_region: (500 x 374) -> (256 x 191) subsample_region: (500 x 374) -> (256 x 191) subsample_region: (500 x 374) -> (256 x 191) subsample_region: (500 x 374) -> (256 x 191) subsample_region: (500 x 374) -> (256 x 191) subsample_region: (500 x 374) -> (256 x 191) subsample_region: (500 x 374) -> (256 x 191) subsample_region: (500 x 374) -> (256 x 191) gimp_container_remove_handler: id = 2012 gimp_container_remove_handler: id = 2013 gimp_container_remove_handler: id = 2014 (gimp:77692): Gimp-GUI-CRITICAL **: file colormap-dialog.c: line 301 (gimp_colormap_dialog_set_image): assertion `GIMP_IS_COLORMAP_DIALOG (ipal)' failed gimp_display_disconnect: gimage->ref_count before unrefing: 2 Galeon seems to do this as well. Stop it! Stop it! Stop it! If it's really, really important that I see it then print it out but I don't need to to know the internal ID of the container you're removing. *sigh*
From: Paul Mison Date: 11:11 on 03 Sep 2003 Subject: Bluetooth File Exchange So the Mac has wonderful Bluetooth support, apparently. (As long as you partake of the Jaguar koolaid, of course. Buying expensive new hardware helps too.) Yes, iSync does seem to work for me, so that's good. Now, though, I have a camera phone. I've taken some photos. I borrow a dongle and start up Bluetooth File Exchange. Coo, it works! I can see a list of files, so I shift-click to multiple select the photos I want to download. It's not working, though. There's only one file selected at a time. Hmm. I choose one photo, then, and double-click, and it's saved. Good, good. Maybe I can drag out instead? That'll save some time going through file dialogs. Oh, no, you don't support that, do you? What happens when I click one of the column-sorting title bars then? The whole column turns the selection colour. Surely that's not right, is it? Of course all the files aren't really selected. The Get... button is dimmed. So it's back to double-clicking the thirty or so photos I have. Sigh. It almost goes without saying that there's no useful information (file creation date, for example) available, nor a choice of views (it's list view, or, er, nothing). Wouldn't it have been much nicer if BFE simply mounted the phone as a drive on the desktop, so I could use the Finder instead of some half-arsed reimplementation of it? Yes, it would. Bah.
< mari
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
chi >
[ Page 70 of 76 ]
Generated at 10:28 on 16 Apr 2008 by mariachi