]] Russ Allbery
Peter Dolding oia...@gmail.com writes:
ExecStartPre=, ExecStartPost= can be written many times.
ExecStartPre= rm somewhere
ExecStartPre= touch somewhere
That really doesn't help, because...
In fact lot of cases I see one line entries in systemd and I see bad
* Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) [131104 18:21]:
Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez clo...@igalia.com writes:
Regarding the development force behind each project, I find the following
comparison at Ohloh very illustrative
On Tuesday, November 05, 2013 10:05:40 Andreas Barth wrote:
[...]
However, it shows two things: one is as you said that systemd contains
many more subsystems as the others (whether this is good or not is a
different question), the other is that code documentation seems to be
not as verbose as
* Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) [131102 04:12]:
If Canonical *is* the sole upstream, the upstream future here is troubling
to me, particularly given Canonical's current strategic direction towards
Unity. To give a specific example of the sort of thing that I'm worried
about, suppose that
Andreas Barth a...@ayous.org writes:
I would like to ask this question even a bit more general (for all
involved init systems):
How much would we have vendor lock-in by each init system? Means, is
there more software except the pure init system we might need to take if
we switch to that
* Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) [131106 01:21]:
We'll want to look at both sides of that question, and try to understand
how much work like that is potentially on the horizon with the various
choices.
Yes, and I hope that all potential init systems add appropriate
information to their
On Wed, November 6, 2013 01:16, Russ Allbery wrote:
We'll want to look at both sides of that question, and try to understand
how much work like that is potentially on the horizon with the various
choices.
Do you? In the past Debian has not shied away from making the choice that
it considers
7 matches
Mail list logo
