On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 08:54:21AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > On 19/08/08 09:46, Paul Gevers wrote:
> > > I think we should also try to improve the visibility towards reverse
> > > dependencies that their autopkgtest is blocking other packages. I would
> > > love tracker (and the old pts) to sho
On Sun, 18 Aug 2019 at 13:57:58 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Aug 2019 18:30:51 +0100, Simon McVittie
> >bubblewrap and other container-runners often use this when setting
> >up containers - for example if you have a Flatpak app installed, try
> >something like
> >
> >flatpak run --com
On Tue, 13 Aug 2019 18:30:51 +0100, Simon McVittie
wrote:
>On Tue, 13 Aug 2019 at 14:22:31 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Aug 2019 12:01:13 +0100, Simon McVittie
>> wrote:
>> >(systemd cannot create a mount point that doesn't exist yet on a read-only
>> >file system, which is why a zero-b
On Sun, 11 Aug 2019 10:49:57 +0200, Vincent Bernat
wrote:
>systemd cannot guess if a SysV init script should leave a daemon behind
>or not. Therefore, they are converted as "Type=forking", "Restart=no"
>"GuessMainPID=no" and "RemainAfterExit=yes". So, when a daemon stops
>unexpectedly, it is not r
Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer writes ("Re: Bits from the Release Team:
ride like the wind, Bullseye!"):
> My personal point of view (and because of this it might be biased)
> is that the maintainers of the packages that ship autopkgtest should
> be the reponsibles for any breackage it might
5 matches
Mail list logo
