On Saturday 22 Mar 2014 00:28:04 Dale wrote:
Alan McKinnon wrote:
Judging by replies so far, I'd guess not many at all. You can't
possibly know how many will or will not plonk someone. In the meantime
Dale, I think you are projecting. Chill out brother, chill out. Plenty
stuff in the
Mick wrote:
On Saturday 22 Mar 2014 00:28:04 Dale wrote:
Alan McKinnon wrote:
Judging by replies so far, I'd guess not many at all. You can't
possibly know how many will or will not plonk someone. In the meantime
Dale, I think you are projecting. Chill out brother, chill out. Plenty
stuff in
On 22/03/2014 01:46, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Sat, 22 Mar 2014 00:34:55 +0200
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
2. A discussion forum. For these you do munge Reply-To: to be the list
so all discussion happens on-list and is visible to all
gentoo-user has always been the latter and
On Mar 22, 2014, at 12:34, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
On 22/03/2014 01:46, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Sat, 22 Mar 2014 00:34:55 +0200
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
2. A discussion forum. For these you do munge Reply-To: to be the list
so all discussion happens
Matti Nykyri wrote:
On Mar 22, 2014, at 12:34, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
On 22/03/2014 01:46, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Sat, 22 Mar 2014 00:34:55 +0200
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
2. A discussion forum. For these you do munge Reply-To: to be the list
so all
On Sat, 22 Mar 2014 12:34:53 +0200
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
I disagree.
Can we agree to disagree?
Your default position on things seems to be to favour the theoretical
position over the reality. I'm the opposite, being a sysadmin and not
a developer I'm a realist and not
On Sat, 22 Mar 2014 12:57:40 +0200
Matti Nykyri matti.nyk...@iki.fi wrote:
I agree. I think it is arrogant to disturb lots of people that have
done nothing to deserve it. People should be let to choose them self
what they wanna do with their lives. If they wish to disengage some
conversation,
On Sat, 22 Mar 2014 06:08:35 -0500
Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
To the point about folks unsubscribing, if they do unsubscribe from
the list, it may be because they got what they want and do NOT want
any more messages.
Or it may be because they are tired of the flow of mails, but yet they
On Sat, 22 Mar 2014 13:15:49 +0100, Tom Wijsman wrote:
Here's something that works for the both of us: Request someone to not
CC you in a follow-up mail when you catch them do it, they'll respect
that; that's a guarantee that we can be certain that you are subscribed.
I tried that, you cc'd
On 03/20/2014 06:42 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Wed, 19 Feb 2014 10:19:43 +
thegeezer thegee...@thegeezer.net wrote:
the difficulty is that without knowing
It is as easy as following the commits upstream makes, which is a
short daily visit (or for less important followers, even weekly);
On 03/22/2014 12:15 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
That way; you respect that I want to spent my time to be guaranteed to
be useful, I respect that you don't want to be CC-ed in follow-up
mails. Similarly; if someone is off-list; it takes a single mail to
keep me from sending additional mails. As it
On 03/22/2014 01:00 PM, thegeezer wrote:
On 03/20/2014 06:42 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Wed, 19 Feb 2014 10:19:43 +
thegeezer thegee...@thegeezer.net wrote:
the difficulty is that without knowing
It is as easy as following the commits upstream makes, which is a
short daily visit (or for
On 3/21/2014 5:57 PM, Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
How does one send email to*THIS* list, without being subscribed in
the first place? A bugzilla mailing list is a different matter.
I think that is the main and primary point.
I loathe lists that allow posts from non subscribers
On Sat, 22 Mar 2014 13:00:59 +
thegeezer thegee...@thegeezer.net wrote:
[...] so my point over 5 weeks ago was not about the difficulty in
_finding_ the changes,
Ah, thanks; I see.
but about keeping track of those changes and implementing htem.
Here, I would agree with if you have a lot
On Sat, 22 Mar 2014 12:56:17 +
Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote:
On Sat, 22 Mar 2014 13:15:49 +0100, Tom Wijsman wrote:
Here's something that works for the both of us: Request someone to
not CC you in a follow-up mail when you catch them do it, they'll
respect that; that's a
On Sat, 22 Mar 2014 09:35:50 -0400
Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote:
On 3/21/2014 5:57 PM, Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
How does one send email to*THIS* list, without being subscribed in
the first place? A bugzilla mailing list is a different matter.
I think that is
el 2014-03-22 a las 15:50 Tom Wijsman escribió:
How to set this up per folder?
rigth-click on the folder, Properties... - Compose - default to:
On Sat, 22 Mar 2014 12:28:25 -0300
luis jure l...@internet.com.uy wrote:
el 2014-03-22 a las 15:50 Tom Wijsman escribió:
How to set this up per folder?
rigth-click on the folder, Properties... - Compose - default
to:
Thank you very much +1; I see some other features there too that
On Sat, 22 Mar 2014 16:38:54 +0100
Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sat, 22 Mar 2014 12:28:25 -0300
luis jure l...@internet.com.uy wrote:
el 2014-03-22 a las 15:50 Tom Wijsman escribió:
How to set this up per folder?
rigth-click on the folder, Properties... - Compose -
Tanstaafl wrote:
On 3/21/2014 5:57 PM, Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
How does one send email to*THIS* list, without being subscribed in
the first place? A bugzilla mailing list is a different matter.
I think that is the main and primary point.
I loathe lists that allow posts
On Sat, 22 Mar 2014 16:52:56 +0100, Tom Wijsman wrote:
Thank you very much +1; I see some other features there too that can
be handy, eg. subject RegExp simplification.
Okay, the CCs have been removed; to anyone else wondering how to do,
you can tick the box of the field (here: CC) you
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 17:23:05 -0400
Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote:
On 3/20/2014 4:00 PM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, 21 Feb 2014 09:53:51 +0400
Andrew Savchenko birc...@gmail.com wrote:
OpenRC is default in Gentoo now, and it is my best hope it will be.
Do
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 17:25:18 -0400
Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote:
On 3/20/2014 4:14 PM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
Tom - please STOP CC'ing me on these emails.
I am on the list and don't need two copies.
Use 'Reply-To-List' function (or equivalent - or worst case,
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 19:32:28 +
Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote:
A login daemon should be started by the init system, not be an
integral part of it. What happens when logind no longer fulfils
developers needs, as is the case with ConsoleKit now, how can it be
replaced with an
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 10:54:55 +0100
J. Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Sun, February 16, 2014 22:16, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote:
oh? I can pipe that output into cat or any any daemon I like?
On Wed, 19 Feb 2014 09:50:07 +0100
J. Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
It all sounds too much like the MS Windows Event-viewer to me.
Too many events with no usefull logging information (And I am
referring to OS-level messages as to why default services are not
starting)
The MS Windows
On Sun, 16 Feb 2014 23:00:43 +0400
Yuri K. Shatroff yks-...@yandex.ru wrote:
I wonder why all systemd's fancy stuff hasn't yet been integrated
into any existing init system, because of theoretical impossibility
or just practical uselessness?
A lot of it is being integrated in some as we
On Wed, 19 Feb 2014 07:57:06 -0500
Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote:
Getting the Gentoo Council behind this idea, and providing an
officially supported - or maybe a better term is *mandated* - process
whereby systemd proponents can create and then maintain new systemd
versions of any
On 21 March 2014 12:24:04 CET, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 10:54:55 +0100
J. Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Sun, February 16, 2014 22:16, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 12:50:23 +0100
J. Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
Tom,
Please reply to list. No need to include me in the recipient list.
Please filter duplicate mails. No need to tell each other this.
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 17:25:18 -0400
Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote:
On 3/20/2014 4:14 PM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
Tom - please STOP CC'ing me on these emails.
I am on the list and don't need two copies.
Use 'Reply-To-List' function (or equivalent
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 12:13:28 +0100, Tom Wijsman wrote:
Use 'Reply-To-List' function (or equivalent - or worst case, delete
my direct email manually yourself) in your email program.
Like everyone else, use the 'Filter duplicates' function in your email
program or procmail; these requests
On Fri, March 21, 2014 12:59, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 12:50:23 +0100
J. Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
Tom,
Please reply to list. No need to include me in the recipient list.
Please filter duplicate mails. No need to tell each other this.
I filter on the server, using
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 07:10:49 -0500
Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
So let's get this straight. You want most everyone on this list to
change what they have to do to remove dups caused by you, instead of
you changing what you do to fix the problem?
Everyone else is okay with it, as only one
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 12:27:09 +
Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote:
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 12:13:28 +0100, Tom Wijsman wrote:
Use 'Reply-To-List' function (or equivalent - or worst case,
delete my direct email manually yourself) in your email program.
Like everyone else, use
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 8:49 AM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 12:27:09 +
Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote:
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 12:13:28 +0100, Tom Wijsman wrote:
Use 'Reply-To-List' function (or equivalent - or worst case,
delete my direct email
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 13:41:54 +0100
J. Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Fri, March 21, 2014 12:59, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 12:50:23 +0100
J. Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
Tom,
Please reply to list. No need to include me in the recipient list.
Please
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 09:13:27 -0400
Poison BL. poiso...@gmail.com wrote:
fighting on the topic of 'proper use of mailing lists' when you're
standing in stark contrast to the configuration of the mailing list
you're using to do it,
Which fight? It is a short notice as to why it is being done,
On Fri, March 21, 2014 14:20, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 13:41:54 +0100
J. Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Fri, March 21, 2014 12:59, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 12:50:23 +0100
J. Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
Tom,
Please reply to list. No need
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 15:06:12 +0100
J. Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
Is that one included in the Cyrus ebuild?
In Cyrus it is an actual feature, see the (first) FAQ[1] entry about
Duplicate Delivery Surpression; in imapd.conf you can do
duplicatesuppression: 1
to enable this. It
J. Roeleveld wrote:
I filter on the server, using SIEVE-scripts. Please provide the
correct syntax I need to do this. You are the only one causing
duplicate emails, all others on this list do NOT cause duplicate
emails. This means the cause is on your side and the solution should
then also be
Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 07:10:49 -0500
Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
So let's get this straight. You want most everyone on this list to
change what they have to do to remove dups caused by you, instead of
you changing what you do to fix the problem?
Everyone else is okay
On 3/21/2014 7:13 AM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 17:25:18 -0400
Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote:
On 3/20/2014 4:14 PM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
Tom - please STOP CC'ing me on these emails.
I am on the list and don't need two copies.
Use
Poison BL. wrote:
Just my 2c as one of the others who doesn't generally reply to what,
at face value, seemed an awful lot more combative/trolling of a tone
than actually useful (disregard != compliance on the internet),
fighting on the topic of 'proper use of mailing lists' when you're
Tanstaafl wrote:
On 3/21/2014 7:13 AM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 17:25:18 -0400
Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote:
On 3/20/2014 4:14 PM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
Tom - please STOP CC'ing me on these emails.
I am on the list and don't need
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 12:41:03 -0500
Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
FYI. Most people don't say anything, they just blacklist you. After
that, you don't exist to them.
Yes, that's up to those few; it could happen, but most respond instead.
To my knowledge, the only emails I have not got
On 21/03/2014 20:23, Dale wrote:
Tanstaafl wrote:
On 3/21/2014 7:13 AM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 17:25:18 -0400
Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote:
On 3/20/2014 4:14 PM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
Tom - please STOP CC'ing me on these emails.
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 02:29:48PM +0100, Tom Wijsman wrote
http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Procmail
The mailing list etiquette requires people to CC all the people
involved in a particular thread in replies to the mailing list, in case
any of them is not subscribed.
How does one send email
On 21/03/2014 23:57, Walter Dnes wrote:
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 02:29:48PM +0100, Tom Wijsman wrote
http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Procmail
The mailing list etiquette requires people to CC all the people
involved in a particular thread in replies to the mailing list, in case
any of them is
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 17:57:07 -0400
Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
How does one send email to *THIS* list, without being subscribed in
the first place?
You can do that on sites like GMANE; similarly, given a message ID,
you can request that specific from the mailing list daemon to
On Sat, 22 Mar 2014 00:34:55 +0200
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
2. A discussion forum. For these you do munge Reply-To: to be the list
so all discussion happens on-list and is visible to all
gentoo-user has always been the latter and all discussion always takes
place
Alan McKinnon wrote:
Judging by replies so far, I'd guess not many at all. You can't
possibly know how many will or will not plonk someone. In the meantime
Dale, I think you are projecting. Chill out brother, chill out. Plenty
stuff in the world more deserving of attention than this.
I fixed
Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 12:41:03 -0500
Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
FYI. Most people don't say anything, they just blacklist you. After
that, you don't exist to them.
Yes, that's up to those few; it could happen, but most respond instead.
I just read the last message
On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 21:52:55 +0400
Andrew Savchenko birc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, 16 Feb 2014 15:16:36 -0600 Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote:
Am 16.02.2014 21:08, schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
On Sun,
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 04:05:03 +0200
Gevisz gev...@gmail.com wrote:
How can you be sure if something is large enough if, as you say
below, you do not care about probabilities?
Statistics.
If you do not care (= do not now anything) about probabilities
(and mathematics, in general), you just
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 15:56:53 +0200
Gevisz gev...@gmail.com wrote:
No, by arguing that fixing bugs in a 200K line program is as easy as
fixing a bug in 20 10K line programs. It is just not true, just the
opposite.
So, as systemd is modular per the biggest myth #6[1]; that means that,
PID 1
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 21:06:33 +0400
Andrew Savchenko birc...@gmail.com wrote:
Real world code without mistakes and larger than Hello, world!
exercises is not possible. Large systems must have error suppression
and correction techniques, modular and replaceable design is one of
them, KISS is
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 14:09:42 -0500
Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote:
I totally get XFCE *supporting* the use of logind, but why should it
ever support *only* logind? That would seem insane to me.
If it were a decision, and other decisions were possible without cost,
yes; however,
On Wed, 19 Feb 2014 10:19:43 +
thegeezer thegee...@thegeezer.net wrote:
the difficulty is that without knowing
It is as easy as following the commits upstream makes, which is a
short daily visit (or for less important followers, even weekly);
that's really not too much asked for if you
On Sat, 22 Feb 2014 19:46:42 +0200
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
eselect manages config options between different implementation of a
thing. Usually by tweaking symlinks. Switching init OpenRC - SystemD
involves resetting uSE flags and recompiling some fundamental stuff.
That
On Fri, 21 Feb 2014 17:33:43 +
thegeezer thegee...@thegeezer.net wrote:
Personally i'm most likely to stay with openRC, because the switch is
non-trivial and have no faith in the xinetd-style socket arbitrator.
It should be trivial, it is here.
but would eselect be able to script the
On Fri, 21 Feb 2014 09:53:51 +0400
Andrew Savchenko birc...@gmail.com wrote:
Gnome required systemd without alternative. Coincidence? I don't
believe in them. I trust probabilities and statistics.
Gnome doesn't have such requirement; alternatives are possible, it's
not coincidence. I trust
On Fri, 21 Feb 2014 09:50:24 -0500
Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote:
All myself and others have been insisting on is that systemd
proponents be prevented from unilaterally creating some kind of
dependenc[y][ies] whereby, through that backdoor, they create a
situation where the
On 20/03/2014 20:57, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Sat, 22 Feb 2014 19:46:42 +0200
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
eselect manages config options between different implementation of a
thing. Usually by tweaking symlinks. Switching init OpenRC - SystemD
involves resetting uSE flags and
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 21:00:27 +0100 Tom Wijsman wrote:
OpenRC is default in Gentoo now, and it is my best hope it will be.
Do you have a source that backs up this claim?
http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-amd64.xml?part=1chap=6
It comes as part of
stage3, but a systemd stage3
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 22:22:22 +0200
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
On 20/03/2014 20:57, Tom Wijsman wrote:
Well, running systemd now I can reboot into OpenRC; it just works.
How is this done?
Here, two GRUB entries; alternatively, eselect init to switch symlinks.
It's
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 02:27:11 +0600
Andrew Savchenko birc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 21:00:27 +0100 Tom Wijsman wrote:
OpenRC is default in Gentoo now, and it is my best hope it will
be.
Do you have a source that backs up this claim?
On 20/03/2014 22:33, Tom Wijsman wrote:
Good, as you describe after this (cut out), I get the impression that
the opposite is the case and there are not enough; a solution to that
exists elwhere, in Funtoo, check out their Flavors and Mix-ins:
http://www.funtoo.org/Flavors_and_Mix-ins
On 3/20/2014 4:14 PM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
Tom - please STOP CC'ing me on these emails.
I am on the list and don't need two copies.
Use 'Reply-To-List' function (or equivalent - or worst case, delete my
direct email manually yourself) in your email program.
On 3/20/2014 4:00 PM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, 21 Feb 2014 09:53:51 +0400
Andrew Savchenko birc...@gmail.com wrote:
OpenRC is default in Gentoo now, and it is my best hope it will be.
Do you have a source that backs up this claim?
Are you seriously challenging the FACT
On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 22:22:22 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Well, running systemd now I can reboot into OpenRC; it just works.
How is this done?
Simply by booting without init=. although some packages have been built
with USE=systemd they still work when booting using openrc. Of course,
On Friday 28 Feb 2014 13:45:12 Stroller wrote:
On Fri, 28 February 2014, at 8:05 am, Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org
wrote:
This must be a US -only thing since I've never even heard of AOL
desktop/suite before, even while lived through the 90's and the bulletin
board times (as being
On 28/02/14 08:47, Stroller wrote:
On Wed, 26 February 2014, at 8:29 pm, Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org
wrote:
…
* Netscape (under AOL) aimed at becoming a pseudo-OS on top of Windows.
We know how that turned out.
You appear to be underestimating it - whilst the AOL suite was hated by
On Fri, 28 February 2014, at 8:05 am, Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org
wrote:
…
* Netscape (under AOL) aimed at becoming a pseudo-OS on top of Windows.
We know how that turned out.
You appear to be underestimating it - whilst the AOL suite was hated by many
of those forced to use it
On Wed, 26 February 2014, at 8:29 pm, Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
…
* Netscape (under AOL) aimed at becoming a pseudo-OS on top of Windows.
We know how that turned out.
You appear to be underestimating it - whilst the AOL suite was hated by many of
those forced to use it (I
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 12:32:32AM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote
Is it like perl? Support every possible way to do something if it
remotely makes sense to do it, no matter how bizarre the syntax?
The (d)evolution of perl reminds me of what's happened to Firefox,
GNOME, and KDE. To paraphrase
On 2014-02-24 4:48 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote:
In Gentoo you need systemd, but that's a decision from the Gentoo
maintainers. They do the job, they make the choices.
Interesting. Now I have to spin off a new thread as to why this decision
was made if it isn't forced by
On 25/02/2014 14:40, Tanstaafl wrote:
On 2014-02-24 4:48 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote:
In Gentoo you need systemd, but that's a decision from the Gentoo
maintainers. They do the job, they make the choices.
Interesting. Now I have to spin off a new thread as to why this
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 6:58 AM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
On 25/02/2014 14:40, Tanstaafl wrote:
On 2014-02-24 4:48 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote:
In Gentoo you need systemd, but that's a decision from the Gentoo
maintainers. They do the job, they make the
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 3:11 PM, Yuri K. Shatroff yks-...@yandex.ru wrote:
24.02.2014 02:32, Alan McKinnon wrote:
[1] For lack of a better term, let's just call systemd here a system
controller. What is this ONE thing a system controller should do and do
it well?
An init daemon generally
24.02.2014 16:39, Mark David Dumlao пишет:
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 3:11 PM, Yuri K. Shatroff yks-...@yandex.ru wrote:
24.02.2014 02:32, Alan McKinnon wrote:
[1] For lack of a better term, let's just call systemd here a system
controller. What is this ONE thing a system controller should do
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 9:42 PM, Yuri K. Shatroff yks-...@yandex.ru wrote:
24.02.2014 16:39, Mark David Dumlao пишет:
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 3:11 PM, Yuri K. Shatroff yks-...@yandex.ru
wrote:
24.02.2014 02:32, Alan McKinnon wrote:
[1] For lack of a better term, let's just call systemd
On 24.02.2014 18:33, Mark David Dumlao wrote:
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 9:42 PM, Yuri K. Shatroff yks-...@yandex.ru wrote:
24.02.2014 16:39, Mark David Dumlao пишет:
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 3:11 PM, Yuri K. Shatroff yks-...@yandex.ru
wrote:
24.02.2014 02:32, Alan McKinnon wrote:
[1] For
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 1:42 AM, Yuri K. Shatroff yks-...@yandex.ru wrote:
On 24.02.2014 18:33, Mark David Dumlao wrote:
Sorry but I think I was quite clear:
An init daemon generally does one thing well.
Following a Unix way design, Everything else should be done by something
else.
...
At
On 24.02.2014 22:55, Mark David Dumlao wrote:
[...]
I didn't attribute anything to you you didn't say. It just so happens, though
that there is a context to this conversation, which, if you ignore, just
tends to perpetuate a lot of confusion. I am responding to questions and
points in that
On Sunday 23 Feb 2014 23:54:32 Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 5:12 PM, Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote:
[ snip ]
Well, I'm no authority on this since I can't code,
My point exactly.
I think your point is not valid, unless you view Linux as an operating system
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday 23 Feb 2014 23:54:32 Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 5:12 PM, Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote:
[ snip ]
Well, I'm no authority on this since I can't code,
My point exactly.
I think
On Monday 24 Feb 2014 21:48:39 Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
At least KDE has not hardcoded a requirement for systemd as Gnome now
has.
GNOME has no hardcoded requirement for systemd; do your homework.
I beg your pardon, I got this wrong - I extrapolated from the Gentoo state of
affairs (I
On Monday 17 Feb 2014 07:01:53 Yuri K. Shatroff wrote:
17.02.2014 00:19, Canek Peláez Valdés пишет:
On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 1:00 PM, Yuri K. Shatroff yks-...@yandex.ru
wrote: [ snip ]
Isn't there too many if you believe and if you agree? A church of
systemd? ;)
As I said to
On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 7:35 AM, Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote:
[ snip ]
I am not sure if people object to the Lennart-way of messing up Linux, under
the blessings of RHL, or if they just don't like the immediate outcome.
Actually, most people that actually *try* using systemd and reads
On 23/02/2014 20:18, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
I don't think forking would attract much developers. Writing something
new trying to follow the*nix design principles, but being modern and
with the same features (all of them optional, of course) of systemd
will have more chances; although I
On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 4:32 PM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
On 23/02/2014 20:18, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
I don't think forking would attract much developers. Writing something
new trying to follow the*nix design principles, but being modern and
with the same features (all
On Sunday 23 Feb 2014 22:32:32 Alan McKinnon wrote:
On 23/02/2014 20:18, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
I don't think forking would attract much developers. Writing something
new trying to follow the*nix design principles, but being modern and
with the same features (all of them optional, of
On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 5:12 PM, Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote:
[ snip ]
Well, I'm no authority on this since I can't code,
My point exactly.
but here's a starter for 10:
http://www.faqs.org/docs/artu/ch01s06.html
Funny you mention this; the second definition is by Robert Pike,
On 24/02/2014 01:12, Mick wrote:
On Sunday 23 Feb 2014 22:32:32 Alan McKinnon wrote:
On 23/02/2014 20:18, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
I don't think forking would attract much developers. Writing something
new trying to follow the*nix design principles, but being modern and
with the same
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 03:07:09AM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote
We don't do error handling. We don't even try and deal with it at the
point it occurred, we just chuck it back up the stack, essentially
giving them message stuff it, I'm not dealing with this. You called me,
you fix it.
The
On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 8:10 PM, Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 03:07:09AM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote
We don't do error handling. We don't even try and deal with it at the
point it occurred, we just chuck it back up the stack, essentially
giving them message
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 9:07 AM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
On 24/02/2014 01:12, Mick wrote:
On Sunday 23 Feb 2014 22:32:32 Alan McKinnon wrote:
On 23/02/2014 20:18, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
I don't think forking would attract much developers. Writing something
new trying
On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 9:20 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 8:10 PM, Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 03:07:09AM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote
We don't do error handling. We don't even try and deal with it at the
point
24.02.2014 05:07, Alan McKinnon wrote:
[ ...]
We don't do error handling. We don't even try and deal with it at the
point it occurred, we just chuck it back up the stack, essentially
giving them message stuff it, I'm not dealing with this. You called me,
you fix it.
Doesn't sound like good
1 - 100 of 254 matches
Mail list logo
