No, I think this has long since been overcome by events. Please feel free
to close. We live in a world of systemd today. Thanks for following up.
On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 1:33 PM Dmitry Bogatov wrote:
>
> control: tags -1 +moreinfo
>
> Dear submitter, are you still going to implement your suggest
control: tags -1 +moreinfo
Dear submitter, are you still going to implement your suggestion?
[2008-06-11 18:35] Petter Reinholdtsen
>
> part text/plain 448
> [Jay Berkenbilt]
> > A quick perusal of the code suggests that it should be a pretty
> > localized change.
>
> I
Petter Reinholdtsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [Jay Berkenbilt]
>> Do you think it is still relevant with the possibility of moving to
>> a dependency-based init system?
>
> Yes. I believe it is independent of that move, and welcome a patch.
>
>> I imagine we're too late for Lenny at this point
[Jay Berkenbilt]
> A quick perusal of the code suggests that it should be a pretty
> localized change.
I would recommend looking at how SuSe and Fedore does this, to see if
they got some nice ideas. In SuSe, I know that parallel booting is
disabled when interactive boot is activated, and I suspec
[Jay Berkenbilt]
> Do you think it is still relevant with the possibility of moving to
> a dependency-based init system?
Yes. I believe it is independent of that move, and welcome a patch.
> I imagine we're too late for Lenny at this point. Oh well.
So do I, but send a patch and I'll see what
5 matches
Mail list logo
