Hello Luke,
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 12:58 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
l...@lkcl.net wrote:
I understood most of these dependencies to be indirect: Packages that
depend on other packages that in turn depend on libsystemd. Is that
correct?
that's right. so, what that means is that the
Hi Luke,
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 3:08 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
l...@lkcl.net wrote:
the problem, zbigniew, is that the intended use of this silent noop
feature - to make it *possible* to have an alternative PID1 - *hasn't
happened*. any upstream software developer who has added in
On Mon, 23.02.15 01:37, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton (l...@lkcl.net) wrote:
Convince the upstream developers
in question not to link against systemd's libraries, or convince the
distros not to package it like that.
well, you could provide hints in the documentation (and force them to
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 6:17 AM, Martin Pitt martin.p...@ubuntu.com wrote:
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton [2015-02-23 2:08 +]:
the problem, zbigniew, is that the intended use of this silent noop
feature - to make it *possible* to have an alternative PID1 - *hasn't
happened*.
It sure has.
Am 23.02.2015 um 13:41 schrieb Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton:
also misses the larger picture.
what the distros do is fait-accomplit driven by the decisions of the
upstream developers. what the upstream developers do is
fait-accomplit driven by the decisions of their dependencies.
everyone has
On Mon, 23.02.15 12:41, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton (l...@lkcl.net) wrote:
Luke, you are now on moderation.
I am sorry, but I don't find what you are writing particularly useful
or new. You keep repeating the same untruths, and I'd prefer if we
could again focus on technical discussions on the
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 02:08:26AM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
the problem, zbigniew, is that the intended use of this silent noop
feature - to make it *possible* to have an alternative PID1 - *hasn't
happened*. any upstream software developer who has added in support
for
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 9:35 PM, Michael Biebl mbi...@gmail.com wrote:
There is no such dependency in Debian either [1].
Luke simply has no idea what he is talking about.
It would be great if Luke did some basic research and educate himself
and not spread such misinformation.
michael,
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 9:25 PM, Greg KH gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 08:24:37PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
so i'm not going to protest - i'm going to try a different approach.
i'd like you to look at this list of debian packages that are
dependent
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton [2015-02-23 2:08 +]:
the problem, zbigniew, is that the intended use of this silent noop
feature - to make it *possible* to have an alternative PID1 - *hasn't
happened*.
It sure has. Debian supports systemd, SysV init, and to a lesser
degree OpenRC and
El 22/02/15 a las 23:08, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton escribió:
the problem, zbigniew, is that the intended use of this silent noop
feature - to make it *possible* to have an alternative PID1 - *hasn't
happened*. any upstream software developer who has added in support
for systemd has done
El 22/02/15 a las 22:37, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton escribió:
well, you could provide hints in the documentation (and force them to
be read by deliberately changing the API)
Wow.. so what you want is even nuttier than I thought..
that would be a good place to start, showing people how
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
l...@lkcl.net wrote:
i don't know if you've seen this yet:
http://news.slashdot.org/story/15/02/15/1959209/removing-libsystemd0-from-a-live-running-debian-system
my name's luke leighton, i'm a software libre advocate, and the
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 11:58:25PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Tobias Hunger tobias.hun...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Luke,
I am mostly a lurker on the systemd mailing list, so my opinion does
not carry weight in this community.
On Tue, Feb
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
zbys...@in.waw.pl wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 11:58:25PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Tobias Hunger tobias.hun...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Luke,
I am mostly a lurker on the systemd
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 1:25 AM, Cameron Norman
camerontnor...@gmail.com wrote:
...except that its introduction (usually --with-libsystemd) in those
100 (or so) packages has been done in a mutually-exclusive,
hard-compile-time switch that *excludes* the possibility of dynamic
(runtime)
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Tobias Hunger tobias.hun...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Luke,
I am mostly a lurker on the systemd mailing list, so my opinion does
not carry weight in this community.
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
l...@lkcl.net wrote: so i'm not going
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:00 AM, Lennart Poettering
lenn...@poettering.net wrote:
On Tue, 17.02.15 20:24, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton (l...@lkcl.net) wrote:
i note that there was announcement recently that the systemd team
'listens to users', so i am taking you at your word on that.
Hmm,
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 12:52 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
zbys...@in.waw.pl wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 11:58:25PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
...except that its introduction (usually --with-libsystemd) in those
100 (or so) packages has been done in a mutually-exclusive,
On Tue, 17.02.15 20:24, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton (l...@lkcl.net) wrote:
i note that there was announcement recently that the systemd team
'listens to users', so i am taking you at your word on that.
Hmm, I am not aware of such an announcement. I generally listen
though, but I don't always
Hi Luke,
I am mostly a lurker on the systemd mailing list, so my opinion does
not carry weight in this community.
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
l...@lkcl.net wrote: so i'm not going to protest - i'm going to
try a different approach.
i'd like you to look at this
i don't know if you've seen this yet:
http://news.slashdot.org/story/15/02/15/1959209/removing-libsystemd0-from-a-live-running-debian-system
my name's luke leighton, i'm a software libre advocate, and the first
major contribution that i made to software libre was to help bridge
the impossible
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 08:24:37PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
so i'm not going to protest - i'm going to try a different approach.
i'd like you to look at this list of debian packages that are
dependent on libsystemd0:
2015-02-17 22:25 GMT+01:00 Greg KH gre...@linuxfoundation.org:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 08:24:37PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
so i'm not going to protest - i'm going to try a different approach.
i'd like you to look at this list of debian packages that are
dependent on
Hi Luke,
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
l...@lkcl.net wrote:
i note that there was announcement recently that the systemd team
'listens to users', so i am taking you at your word on that.
I believe we are listening a lot. That does not necessarily mean that
2015-02-17 22:35 GMT+01:00 Michael Biebl mbi...@gmail.com:
2015-02-17 22:25 GMT+01:00 Greg KH gre...@linuxfoundation.org:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 08:24:37PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
so i'm not going to protest - i'm going to try a different approach.
i'd like you to look at
26 matches
Mail list logo
