Bug#385722: please consider splitting off sysvutils

2006-09-12 Thread Petter Reinholdtsen
I gave this another try, this time using version 2.86.ds1-21 both in the changelog entry and in the replaces header, and upgrading from version 2.86.ds1-21~1. It failed. Here is the error: # dpkg -i *-21*.deb [...] Unpacking sysvinit-utils (from sysvinit-utils_2.86.ds1-21_i386.deb ...

Bug#385722: please consider splitting off sysvutils

2006-09-12 Thread Michael Biebl
I gave this another try, this time using version 2.86.ds1-21 both in the changelog entry and in the replaces header, and upgrading from version 2.86.ds1-21~1. It failed. Here is the error: # dpkg -i *-21*.deb [...] Unpacking sysvinit-utils (from sysvinit-utils_2.86.ds1-21_i386.deb

Bug#385722: [Pkg-sysvinit-devel] Bug#385722: please consider splitting off sysvutils

2006-09-08 Thread Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
On Fri, 08 Sep 2006, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: [Henrique de Moraes Holschuh] Also, may I humbly suggest naming the new package sysvinit-utils instead of sysvutils? Personally I prefer the sysv prefix, to match sysv-rc. Part of my rationale is that the killall5, last, lastb, mesg and

Bug#385722: [Pkg-sysvinit-devel] Bug#385722: please consider splitting off sysvutils

2006-09-08 Thread Scott James Remnant
On Fri, 2006-09-08 at 09:46 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: As a sidenote, I'd really appreciate if the Ubuntu guys would consider adopting this instance (don't take this as you're doing a bad job, because you are not. Please take it as please go through a bit more pain to make

Bug#385722: [Pkg-sysvinit-devel] Bug#385722: please consider splitting off sysvutils

2006-09-08 Thread Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
On Fri, 08 Sep 2006, Scott James Remnant wrote: We'll adopt whatever name Debian ultimately decide. Thanks, although that was not the main point of my request :-) -- One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of

Bug#385722: [Pkg-sysvinit-devel] Bug#385722: please consider splitting off sysvutils

2006-09-08 Thread Scott James Remnant
On Fri, 2006-09-08 at 12:44 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: On Fri, 08 Sep 2006, Scott James Remnant wrote: We'll adopt whatever name Debian ultimately decide. Thanks, although that was not the main point of my request :-) Umm, then I missed it? :P What was the main point?

Bug#385722: [Pkg-sysvinit-devel] Bug#385722: please consider splitting off sysvutils

2006-09-08 Thread martin f krafft
also sprach Scott James Remnant [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.09.08.1754 +0200]: Thanks, although that was not the main point of my request :-) Umm, then I missed it? :P What was the main point? (I only bounced that last message of yours to Scott, Henrique) -- .''`. martin f. krafft [EMAIL

Bug#385722: [Pkg-sysvinit-devel] Bug#385722: please consider splitting off sysvutils

2006-09-08 Thread Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
On Fri, 08 Sep 2006, Scott James Remnant wrote: On Fri, 2006-09-08 at 12:44 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: On Fri, 08 Sep 2006, Scott James Remnant wrote: We'll adopt whatever name Debian ultimately decide. Thanks, although that was not the main point of my request :-)

Bug#385722: please consider splitting off sysvutils

2006-09-08 Thread Petter Reinholdtsen
[Henrique de Moraes Holschuh] Also, may I humbly suggest naming the new package sysvinit-utils instead of sysvutils? Personally I prefer the sysv prefix, to match sysv-rc. Part of my rationale is that the killall5, last, lastb, mesg and pidof binaries don't really have anything to do with the

Bug#385722: [Pkg-sysvinit-devel] Bug#385722: please consider splitting off sysvutils

2006-09-06 Thread Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
On Wed, 06 Sep 2006, martin f krafft wrote: Also, may I humbly suggest naming the new package sysvinit-utils instead of sysvutils? Well, except that this would be a divergance from Ubuntu, but on the other hand, there's no reason why the Ubuntu package cannot depend on

Bug#385722: [Pkg-sysvinit-devel] Bug#385722: please consider splitting off sysvutils

2006-09-06 Thread martin f krafft
also sprach Henrique de Moraes Holschuh [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.09.06.1548 +0200]: If I may be so humble, we don't have to follow Ubuntu 100%. Of course not. But any diff I don't have to keep track of is less work for me. The same way that the Debian team is happy to work to bring

Bug#385722: please consider splitting off sysvutils

2006-09-05 Thread Petter Reinholdtsen
tags 385722 + patch thanks I'm positive to splitting these tools off into their own package. I'm unsure about the effect this will have on debootstrap and the debian-installer, so I post the patch here first, for review. It is based on the code in sysvinit version 2.86.ds1-14.1ubuntu7 from

Bug#385722: please consider splitting off sysvutils

2006-09-05 Thread Petter Reinholdtsen
tags 385722 + pending thanks [Petter Reinholdtsen] I'm positive to splitting these tools off into their own package. I'm unsure about the effect this will have on debootstrap and the debian-installer, so I post the patch here first, for review. I've tested this package split with debootstrap,

Bug#385722: please consider splitting off sysvutils

2006-09-05 Thread Petter Reinholdtsen
tags 385722 - pending thanks [Petter Reinholdtsen] I've tested this package split with debootstrap, and it had no problem handling it. Because of this, I've commited the change to svn to have it included in the next upload. I did some more testing, trying to upgrade the package using 'dpkg

Bug#385722: [Pkg-sysvinit-devel] Bug#385722: please consider splitting off sysvutils

2006-09-05 Thread Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
On Tue, 05 Sep 2006, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: I did some more testing, trying to upgrade the package using 'dpkg -i', and ran into serious problems. It refuses to upgrade because sysvinit pre-depend on sysvutils, which include a file already in the old/existing sysvinit. I suspect the

Bug#385722: [Pkg-sysvinit-devel] Bug#385722: please consider splitting off sysvutils

2006-09-05 Thread martin f krafft
also sprach Henrique de Moraes Holschuh [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.09.06.0619 +0200]: A Replaces: sysvinit (= [whatever]) header in the sysvutils package should fix this. He had Replaces: last, sysvinit ( 2.86.ds1-15) in there... I am not sure about the use of the version though... Also, may

Bug#385722: please consider splitting off sysvutils

2006-09-02 Thread martin f krafft
Package: sysvinit Version: 2.86.ds1-15 Severity: wishlist Ubuntu has recently split several programmes from sysvinit into a separate binary package (same source), called sysvutils. The reason was upstart, which is designed to eventually replace sysvinit.