Steve Litt sl...@troubleshooters.com writes:
OK, I'll be the first to admit that after Red Hat caused the demise of
ConsoleKit (and probably lots more important software), I am free to
take significant time out of my day job (that feeds my family) and
rescue all sorts of software that Red Hat
On Thu, 16 Oct 2014 00:54:02 +0100
Jonathan de Boyne Pollard j.deboynepollard-newsgro...@ntlworld.com
wrote:
wande...@fastmail.fm:
I have a similar lack of awareness and/or understanding about all
of
the *kit packages / projects / tools / what-have-you, actually; I'm
not positive I
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 01:12:51AM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
OK, I'll be the first to admit that after Red Hat caused the demise of
ConsoleKit (and probably lots more important software), I am free to
take significant time out of my day job (that feeds my family) and
rescue all sorts of
On Thu, 16 Oct 2014 08:10:47 +0200
Ansgar Burchardt ans...@debian.org wrote:
Steve Litt sl...@troubleshooters.com writes:
OK, I'll be the first to admit that after Red Hat caused the demise
of ConsoleKit (and probably lots more important software), I am
free to take significant time out of
2014/10/16 15:34 Jonathan Dowland j...@debian.org:
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 01:12:51AM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
OK, I'll be the first to admit that after Red Hat caused the demise of
ConsoleKit (and probably lots more important software), I am free to
take significant time out of my day job
Steve Litt sl...@troubleshooters.com writes:
Ansgar Burchardt ans...@debian.org wrote:
Steve Litt sl...@troubleshooters.com writes:
OK, I'll be the first to admit that after Red Hat caused the demise
of ConsoleKit (and probably lots more important software), I am
free to take significant
On Thu, 16 Oct 2014 00:54:02 +0100
Jonathan de Boyne Pollard j.deboynepollard-newsgro...@ntlworld.com
wrote:
wande...@fastmail.fm:
I have a similar lack of awareness and/or understanding about all
of
the *kit packages / projects / tools / what-have-you, actually; I'm
not positive I
On Thu, 16 Oct 2014 07:33:38 +0100
Jonathan Dowland j...@debian.org wrote:
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 01:12:51AM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
OK, I'll be the first to admit that after Red Hat caused the demise
of ConsoleKit (and probably lots more important software), I am
free to take
On Jo, 16 oct 14, 07:31:56, Joel Rees wrote:
2014/10/16 5:59 Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com:
The problem with this approach is that it's not fine-grained enough,
i.e. it can't distinguish between users logged in locally or via ssh.
This means Mallory could easily spy on Alice
Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
Steve Litt sl...@troubleshooters.com writes:
Ansgar Burchardt ans...@debian.org wrote:
Steve Litt sl...@troubleshooters.com writes:
OK, I'll be the first to admit that after Red Hat caused the demise
of ConsoleKit (and probably lots more important software), I am
free
On 10/16/2014 14:07, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
No, what I find annoying is telling volunteer what they have to do
without doing anything yourself on the issues you raise and repeating
don't break Linux endlessly. I think everybody knows by now you
believe that, there's no
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 02:31:15PM +0200, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
On 10/16/2014 14:07, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
No, what I find annoying is telling volunteer what they have to do
without doing anything yourself on the issues you raise and repeating
don't break Linux
On Ma, 14 oct 14, 17:56:58, Steve Litt wrote:
Because you don't want to inextricably drag a giant monolith into your
Desktop Environment just to do a few things.
If you compare systemd with a Desktop Environment I'm not quite sure
who's the giant ;)
And how were they handling
this task
On Ma, 14 oct 14, 22:56:15, The Wanderer wrote:
Not to mention that just offhand I'm not sure I'd even know how to turn
off basic tab completion - whereas turning off programmable tab
completion is pretty much just a matter of not sourcing the
tab-completion files in the effective bash
On 14/10/14 22:56, Steve Litt wrote:
On Wed, 15 Oct 2014 00:15:40 +0300
Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com wrote:
As far as I understand none of the upstreams are actually requiring
systemd itself (or more accurately systemd-logind), but the
interfaces it is providing.
I fail to see the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 15/10/2014 6:02 PM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
ConsoleKit, unmaintained.
But fixed, for kFreeBSD
A.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)
iF4EAREIAAYFAlQ+ZOQACgkQqBZry7fv4vtv5gEAqxefTmCV1PLqwNWgJOGeFwGD
On 10/15/2014 at 04:08 AM, Martin Read wrote:
On 14/10/14 22:56, Steve Litt wrote:
On Wed, 15 Oct 2014 00:15:40 +0300 Andrei POPESCU
andreimpope...@gmail.com wrote:
And it also seems to make sense (why should every Desktop
Environment implement it's own solution for this?).
And how were
On 10/14/2014 at 04:15 PM, Olav Vitters wrote:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 06:18:01PM +0200, lee wrote:
Considering that the users are Debians' priority, couldn't this
issue be a case in which significant concerns from/of the users
about an issue might initiate a GR? Wouldn't it speak loudly
On Wed, 15 Oct 2014 10:02:03 +0300
Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com wrote:
On Ma, 14 oct 14, 17:56:58, Steve Litt wrote:
Because you don't want to inextricably drag a giant monolith into
your Desktop Environment just to do a few things.
If you compare systemd with a Desktop
On Wed, 15 Oct 2014 09:08:26 +0100
Martin Read zen75...@zen.co.uk wrote:
On 14/10/14 22:56, Steve Litt wrote:
And how were they handling this task before systemd?
They were using ConsoleKit, which was orphaned upstream some time
after systemd-logind came along.
I rest my case.
SteveT
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 12:42:58PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
They were using ConsoleKit, which was orphaned upstream some time
after systemd-logind came along.
I rest my case.
There's nothing at all (not even Red Hat) preventing anyone (even you!) from
stepping up and taking over
Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 12:42:58PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
They were using ConsoleKit, which was orphaned upstream some time
after systemd-logind came along.
I rest my case.
There's nothing at all (not even Red Hat) preventing anyone (even you!) from
stepping up and
On 15/10/14 17:30, Steve Litt wrote:
Pre-cisely. I see Red Hat's fingerprints all over that unmaintained
status. If not for Red Hat, somebody would have picked up ConsoleKit.
After all, as shown in
http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/software/whos-writing-linux ,
there's plenty of money floating
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 03:16:38PM -0400, Miles Fidelman wrote:
In theory. But in practice, folks make practical decisions as to
expenditure of time and resources. For example, once Debian
committed to systemd, Ubuntu followed suit - I expect that upstart
will promptly whither and die.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 16/10/2014 6:49 AM, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
reported bugs will get less attention nowtoo). But the consolekit
deprecation happened a long time before the tech-ctte decision
about systemd. Some one/people could have picked it up long ago.
If
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 07:22:55AM +1100, Andrew McGlashan wrote:
ConsoleKit has been fixed for kFreeBSD build, I expect fixing it in
normal Debian/GNU wouldn't have been harder than choosing systemd.
It really needs (needed) adopting upstream, not just in Debian, because it's
upstream where
Martin Read zen75...@zen.co.uk writes:
(snip)
* The set of people hostile to systemd seems to include a lot of people
who don't see much need for the likes of ConsoleKit either.
(snip)
This is actually a rather good point. The machines I am most
conservative about, and wanting to make sure
On Mi, 15 oct 14, 09:46:47, The Wanderer wrote:
I suspect that the answer is they just didn't provide the functionality
which ConsoleKit, and later systemd-logind, now enable them to provide,
but I'm not aware - in a clear-understanding, defined-boundaries sense -
of exactly what that
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 12:42:58PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
On Wed, 15 Oct 2014 09:08:26 +0100
Martin Read zen75...@zen.co.uk wrote:
On 14/10/14 22:56, Steve Litt wrote:
And how were they handling this task before systemd?
They were using ConsoleKit, which was orphaned upstream
2014/10/16 5:59 Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com:
On Mi, 15 oct 14, 09:46:47, The Wanderer wrote:
I suspect that the answer is they just didn't provide the functionality
which ConsoleKit, and later systemd-logind, now enable them to provide,
but I'm not aware - in a
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 12:30:26PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
I completely understand not reinventing the wheel, but if all you need
is a spoke, you don't construct an interface to a whole wheel just to
get your spoke.
A wise old owl lived in an oak
The more he saw the less he spoke
The less
2014/10/16 8:14 Chris Bannister cbannis...@slingshot.co.nz:
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 12:30:26PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
I completely understand not reinventing the wheel, but if all you need
is a spoke, you don't construct an interface to a whole wheel just to
get your spoke.
A wise
wande...@fastmail.fm:
I have a similar lack of awareness and/or understanding about all of
the *kit packages / projects / tools / what-have-you, actually; I'm
not positive I even know how many there are, much less all of their
names.
This should help:
Put yourself in the position of
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 08:53:36AM +0900, Joel Rees wrote:
2014/10/16 8:14 Chris Bannister cbannis...@slingshot.co.nz:
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 12:30:26PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
I completely understand not reinventing the wheel, but if all you need
is a spoke, you don't construct an
On 10/15/2014 07:54 PM, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard wrote:
snip
* http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/hostnamed/
* http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/timedated/
* http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/localed/
* http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/logind/
On Wed, 15 Oct 2014 19:27:20 +0100
Jonathan Dowland j...@debian.org wrote:
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 12:42:58PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
They were using ConsoleKit, which was orphaned upstream some time
after systemd-logind came along.
I rest my case.
There's nothing at all (not even
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 07:46:11PM -0400, Miles Fidelman wrote:
I assume you find it more productive to bury your head in the sand
about potential impacts of really major changes to the plumbing of a
platform, and wait for things to break after-the-fact?
I suspect Steve will continue to work
Hi,
Ian Jackson:
You put me in an awkward position. My email was an attempt to get
this discussion shut down on -devel, where it is off-topic and a total
waste of energy.
In that case, you did a poor job of getting this point across.
(I misinterpreted it too.)
But your response, using
On Lu, 13 oct 14, 18:30:41, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Gee assuming that you don't run anything that has systemd dependencies
and/or systemd-shim is actually maintained and kept up-to-date.
Have you actually looked into what depends on systemd?
Kind regards,
Andrei
--
Miles Fidelman mfidel...@meetinghouse.net writes:
Joey Hess wrote:
(snip)
A reasonably proactive admin would probably want to try out systemd (on
eg, a test server) and if it causes problems for their deployment, they
then have at least the year or two from when Debian jessie is released
On Lu, 13 oct 14, 19:46:11, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Of course Joey is correct regarding trying out systemd on a test server.
Personally, though, I find it a lot MORE productive to keep track of other
people's experience in testing things, and deploy after a release is really,
really stable...
On Ma, 14 oct 14, 10:40:34, Andrew McGlashan wrote:
On 14/10/2014 9:50 AM, Joey Hess wrote:
Sysvinit will continue to be supported on servers in Debian 8
(jessie) release of Debian. So you can continue to boot your
production servers with sysvinit.
Okay, for now, that is until more
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Lu, 13 oct 14, 18:30:41, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Gee assuming that you don't run anything that has systemd dependencies
and/or systemd-shim is actually maintained and kept up-to-date.
Have you actually looked into what depends on systemd?
Trying to.
As a start -
On 10/13/2014 at 01:01 PM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Mon, 13 Oct 2014, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
In any case, users _do_ have a say. They can force their systems to
remain on sys5 init, or switch to a different distro if that should
also turn out
Which, I should add, is
On 14/10/14 13:54, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
Have you actually looked into what depends on systemd?
Trying to.
As a start - anything that depends on udev and logging come to mind;
Strictly speaking, yes, udev is part of the systemd suite. However, it
is perfectly capable
Martin Read wrote:
On 14/10/14 13:54, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
Have you actually looked into what depends on systemd?
Trying to.
As a start - anything that depends on udev and logging come to mind;
Strictly speaking, yes, udev is part of the systemd suite. However, it
On 10/14/2014 at 09:26 AM, Martin Read wrote:
On 14/10/14 13:54, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
Have you actually looked into what depends on systemd?
Trying to.
As a start - anything that depends on udev and logging come to
mind;
Strictly speaking, yes, udev is part
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 09:08:06AM -0400, The Wanderer wrote:
In my case, I don't install popcon because it pollutes the
tab-completion namespace for 'popd' in a root shell. That interferes
with my workflow to the point that I've reluctantly decided to just not
install popcon - with the
On 10/14/2014 at 09:44 AM, Carl Fink wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 09:08:06AM -0400, The Wanderer wrote:
In my case, I don't install popcon because it pollutes the
tab-completion namespace for 'popd' in a root shell. That
interferes with my workflow to the point that I've reluctantly
On 14/10/14 23:54, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Lu, 13 oct 14, 18:30:41, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Gee assuming that you don't run anything that has systemd
dependencies
and/or systemd-shim is actually maintained and kept up-to-date.
Have you actually looked into what
On Tue, 14 Oct 2014 02:50:32 +0200
lee l...@yagibdah.de wrote:
Joey Hess jo...@debian.org writes:
So at this point, most of us are pretty tired of the subject.
And just ignore it and the consequences because you're tired of
thinking about it?
Lee, he has a point. He sees nothing wrong
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 10:40:59AM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
The solution is trivial. If, as everyone claims, we're such a minority,
he could filter us all out and never see our posts again. Problem
solved.
Sadly not. If I were reading -user entirely for my own delectation, I'd have
filtered
Scott Ferguson wrote:
On 14/10/14 23:54, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Lu, 13 oct 14, 18:30:41, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Gee assuming that you don't run anything that has systemd
dependencies
and/or systemd-shim is actually maintained and kept up-to-date.
Have you actually
On Tue, 14 Oct 2014 07:56:17 +0100
Jonathan Dowland j...@debian.org wrote:
You are still writing as if you are going to be forced to run
systemd, despite being repeatedly told that multiple init systems
will be supported. I'm really struggling to continue to presume good
faith on your part
On Tue, 14 Oct 2014 11:25:23 +0300
Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com wrote:
On Lu, 13 oct 14, 18:30:41, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Gee assuming that you don't run anything that has systemd
dependencies and/or systemd-shim is actually maintained and kept
up-to-date.
Have you
On 14/10/14 14:33, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Which brings us back to how upgrades and new installs will be handled -
will there be an option to go right to sysvinit-core, or will we have to
manually uninstall systemd and anything that depends on it? Getting all
the metapackages and dependencies
Hi Miles,
On 10/14/2014 16:54, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Actually, udev is the ONLY thing I've had issues with in over a decade
of production use. Changed out a nic card, and everything changed -
because udev decided to assign the new interface to some other port (or
some such - it's been a
On Tue, 14 Oct 2014 11:33:56 +0300
Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com wrote:
On Ma, 14 oct 14, 10:40:34, Andrew McGlashan wrote:
On 14/10/2014 9:50 AM, Joey Hess wrote:
Sysvinit will continue to be supported on servers in Debian 8
(jessie) release of Debian. So you can continue to
On Tue, 14 Oct 2014 15:51:09 +0100
Jonathan Dowland j...@debian.org wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 10:40:59AM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
The solution is trivial. If, as everyone claims, we're such a
minority, he could filter us all out and never see our posts again.
Problem solved.
Sadly
On 15/10/14 01:51, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 10:40:59AM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
The solution is trivial. If, as everyone claims, we're such a minority,
he could filter us all out and never see our posts again. Problem
solved.
Sadly not. If I were reading -user
Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
Hi Miles,
On 10/14/2014 16:54, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Actually, udev is the ONLY thing I've had issues with in over a decade
of production use. Changed out a nic card, and everything changed -
because udev decided to assign the new interface to some other port (or
some
Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 07:46:11PM -0400, Miles Fidelman wrote:
I assume you find it more productive to bury your head in the sand
about potential impacts of really major changes to the plumbing of a
platform, and wait for things to break after-the-fact?
I suspect Steve
On 10/14/2014 11:09 AM, Ansgar Burchardt ans...@43-1.org wrote:
In a quest to ensure your personal happiness the systemd maintainers
took your problem and changed udev to assign predictable names to
network interfaces.
And which resulted in much wailing and gnashing of teeth.
--
To
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 10:40:59AM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
On Tue, 14 Oct 2014 02:50:32 +0200
lee l...@yagibdah.de wrote:
Joey Hess jo...@debian.org writes:
So at this point, most of us are pretty tired of the subject.
And just ignore it and the consequences because you're tired
On 14/10/14 16:06, Steve Litt wrote:
1) Boycott (and be vocal about it) Gnome
2) Pressure all other upstreams into a no systemd dependencies
pledge, and to the best of our abilities, boycott (and be vocal about
it) those who don't comply.
Well, you should have no problem with the
On 14/10/14 15:56, Steve Litt wrote:
On Tue, 14 Oct 2014 11:25:23 +0300
Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com wrote:
Have you actually looked into what depends on systemd?
PAM is enough for me, considering everything that uses PAM. They could
have made their PAM plug compatible with the old
On Tue, 14 Oct 2014 16:37:30 +0100
Martin Read zen75...@zen.co.uk wrote:
On 14/10/14 15:56, Steve Litt wrote:
On Tue, 14 Oct 2014 11:25:23 +0300
Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com wrote:
Have you actually looked into what depends on systemd?
PAM is enough for me, considering
On Tue, 10/14/14, Jonathan Dowland j...@debian.org wrote:
Subject: Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Date: Tuesday, October 14, 2014, 1:56 AM
You are still writing as if you are going to be forced to run systemd,
despite
being repeatedly told
On 15/10/14 01:54, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Scott Ferguson wrote:
On 14/10/14 23:54, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Lu, 13 oct 14, 18:30:41, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Gee assuming that you don't run anything that has systemd
dependencies
and/or systemd-shim is actually
On Wed 15 Oct 2014 at 04:29:50 +1300, Chris Bannister wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 10:40:59AM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
On Tue, 14 Oct 2014 02:50:32 +0200
lee l...@yagibdah.de wrote:
Joey Hess jo...@debian.org writes:
So at this point, most of us are pretty tired of the
Scott Ferguson wrote:
On 15/10/14 01:54, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Scott Ferguson wrote:
On 14/10/14 23:54, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Lu, 13 oct 14, 18:30:41, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Gee assuming that you don't run anything that has systemd
dependencies
and/or
On Tue 14 Oct 2014 at 10:47:13 -0500, goli...@riseup.net wrote:
On Tue, 10/14/14, Jonathan Dowland j...@debian.org wrote:
Subject: Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Date: Tuesday, October 14, 2014, 1:56 AM
You are still writing as if you
On 14/10/14 16:48, Steve Litt wrote:
So are you saying I could use sysvinit or nosh as my PID1, drop in
libpam-systemd and no other systemd components, and have all PAM
functionalities run properly?
Thank you for the clarification.
The short and vague answer is no; PAM modules that depend on
On Tue 14 Oct 2014 at 12:33:06 -0400, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Scott Ferguson wrote:
I'm guessing you really don't want an OS without logging... :)
syslog works just fine - don't need (or want) systemd to take over
logging with a binary format
The journal logs to rsyslog by default on Debian.
On 15/10/14 03:33, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Scott Ferguson wrote:
On 15/10/14 01:54, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Scott Ferguson wrote:
On 14/10/14 23:54, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Lu, 13 oct 14, 18:30:41, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Gee assuming that you don't run anything that
Brian wrote:
On Tue 14 Oct 2014 at 12:33:06 -0400, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Scott Ferguson wrote:
I'm guessing you really don't want an OS without logging... :)
syslog works just fine - don't need (or want) systemd to take over
logging with a binary format
The journal logs to rsyslog by
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 11:27:14AM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:
On 10/14/2014 11:09 AM, Ansgar Burchardt ans...@43-1.org wrote:
In a quest to ensure your personal happiness the systemd maintainers
took your problem and changed udev to assign predictable names to
network interfaces.
And which
Scott Ferguson wrote:
On 15/10/14 03:33, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Scott Ferguson wrote:
On 15/10/14 01:54, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Scott Ferguson wrote:
On 14/10/14 23:54, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Lu, 13 oct 14, 18:30:41, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Gee assuming that you
On Tue 14 Oct 2014 at 14:22:03 -0400, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Brian wrote:
Depends what you mean by supported. There is no problem in installing
sysvinit after an upgrade or before upgrading. It works really well.
No problem is easier to say than to validate.
First off, there's a big
On Tue, 10/14/14, Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk wrote:
Subject: Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Date: Tuesday, October 14, 2014, 12:22 PM
On Tue 14 Oct 2014 at 10:47:13 -0500, goli...@riseup.net wrote:
On Tue, 10/14/14, Jonathan Dowland j
Hi,
The Wanderer wande...@fastmail.fm writes:
Unfortunately, not everyone - or even everyone who would be willing to
provide such feedback, or even actively interested in doing so - is
going to install that.
Luckily, popcon is opt-in anyway, so this has no effect whatsoever on
it's quality as
On Ma, 14 oct 14, 16:03:07, Martin Read wrote:
[0] I've seen the relevant fragment posted recently, but I can't remember
where and I don't remember the exact contents.
Package: systemd-sysv
Pin: version *
Pin-Priority: -1
Explanation: prevent installation of systemd-sysv
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 06:18:01PM +0200, lee wrote:
Considering that the users are Debians' priority, couldn't this issue be
a case in which significant concerns from/of the users about an issue
might initiate a GR? Wouldn't it speak loudly for Debian and its ways
and for what it stands for,
On Tue, 14 Oct 2014 18:35:34 +0100
Martin Read zen75...@zen.co.uk wrote:
On 14/10/14 16:48, Steve Litt wrote:
So are you saying I could use sysvinit or nosh as my PID1, drop in
libpam-systemd and no other systemd components, and have all PAM
functionalities run properly?
Thank you for
On Ma, 14 oct 14, 15:51:09, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
Sadly not. If I were reading -user entirely for my own delectation, I'd have
filtered many regulars long ago. Or simply stopped reading it, since I rarely
ask questions anyway. But I, and I imagine many of my DD colleagues, are
particularly
On Ma, 14 oct 14, 09:55:55, The Wanderer wrote:
I could, but that would have to be re-done on every upgrade of the
package, and doing it on every machine where I'm likely to want to work
in a root shell would be a pain at best - and doing it on just some of
them would result in my tripping
On Ma, 14 oct 14, 16:31:04, Steve Litt wrote:
Of course, then there's the matters of upstreams requiring systemd...
As far as I understand none of the upstreams are actually requiring
systemd itself (or more accurately systemd-logind), but the interfaces
it is providing. And it also seems to
On Wed, 15 Oct 2014 00:15:40 +0300
Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com wrote:
On Ma, 14 oct 14, 16:31:04, Steve Litt wrote:
Of course, then there's the matters of upstreams requiring
systemd...
As far as I understand none of the upstreams are actually requiring
systemd itself (or
Steve Litt sl...@troubleshooters.com writes:
On Tue, 14 Oct 2014 02:50:32 +0200
lee l...@yagibdah.de wrote:
Joey Hess jo...@debian.org writes:
So at this point, most of us are pretty tired of the subject.
And just ignore it and the consequences because you're tired of
thinking about
Jonathan Dowland j...@debian.org writes:
ask questions anyway. But I, and I imagine many of my DD colleagues, are
particularly interested in ensuring -user is a useful resource for our users,
and by filtering out people, we don't get a clear picture of just how broken
the list is.
There is a
Jerry Stuckle jstuc...@attglobal.net writes:
On 10/13/2014 7:57 PM, lee wrote:
Martin Read zen75...@zen.co.uk writes:
On 12/10/14 23:04, lee wrote:
Bas Wijnen wij...@debian.org writes:
Because for a GR, a member of Debian has to request it and it needs to
be seconded by at least 5 other
The Wanderer wande...@fastmail.fm writes:
In my case, I don't install popcon because it pollutes the
tab-completion namespace for 'popd' in a root shell. That interferes
with my workflow
Are you actually using this completion stuff? It always gets into my
way and I keep it disabled or
Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl writes:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 06:18:01PM +0200, lee wrote:
Considering that the users are Debians' priority, couldn't this issue be
a case in which significant concerns from/of the users about an issue
might initiate a GR? Wouldn't it speak loudly for Debian
On 10/14/2014 6:50 PM, lee wrote:
Jerry Stuckle jstuc...@attglobal.net writes:
On 10/13/2014 7:57 PM, lee wrote:
Martin Read zen75...@zen.co.uk writes:
On 12/10/14 23:04, lee wrote:
Bas Wijnen wij...@debian.org writes:
Because for a GR, a member of Debian has to request it and it needs to
On 10/14/2014 at 04:35 PM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Ma, 14 oct 14, 09:55:55, The Wanderer wrote:
I could, but that would have to be re-done on every upgrade of the
package, and doing it on every machine where I'm likely to want to
work in a root shell would be a pain at best - and doing it
On 10/14/2014 at 08:02 PM, lee wrote:
The Wanderer wande...@fastmail.fm writes:
In my case, I don't install popcon because it pollutes the
tab-completion namespace for 'popd' in a root shell. That
interferes with my workflow
Are you actually using this completion stuff? It always gets
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 14/10/2014 3:14 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Joey Hess wrote:
Well I guess I'd find it a lot cleaner to make the choice as part of
installation, rather than have systemd installed as a default and then
have to uninstall it. I hate
On 15/10/14 06:01, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Scott Ferguson wrote:
On 15/10/14 03:33, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Scott Ferguson wrote:
On 15/10/14 01:54, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Scott Ferguson wrote:
On 14/10/14 23:54, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Lu, 13 oct 14, 18:30:41, Miles
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 13/10/2014 9:04 AM, lee wrote:
Bas Wijnen wij...@debian.org writes:
Considering that the users are Debians' priority, couldn't this
issue be a case in which significant concerns from/of the users
about an issue might initiate a GR?
No.
Hi,
lee:
I'm sure we could find quite a few supporters for having a GR amongst
the users (here).
We don't do a GR among our users. We do that among Debian
members/maintainers/developers/take-your-pick.
Of those, most …
* are perfectly happy with the TC's decision
* can live with it
* are
1 - 100 of 162 matches
Mail list logo
