On 28 Mar 2014 03:40, Olav Vitters wrote:
[...]
I can tell you right now, it is *vastly more difficult* to try to
adapt programs modified to work with systemd in their current state,
than it is to *revert* those programs to their pre-systemd state.
You're so certain while so utterly wrong
On 26 Mar 2014 12:30, Matthias Urlichs matth...@urlichs.de wrote:
[...]
But here is the vastly oversimplified technical argument...
To the point of being neither technical nor valid.
(Which admittedly was never in doubt even before I started reading.)
What do you consider technical?
Vastly
On 26 March 2014 05:40, Thomas Goirand z...@debian.org wrote:
[...]
If you want thing to move on, stop posting useless messages, and start
working on alternatives. For example, helping adding more features to
OpenRC would certainly help a way more than this post.
I am going to have to
On 26 March 2014 10:13, Cameron Norman camerontnor...@gmail.com wrote:
[...]
That is pretty much impossible, according to the developers of the logind
API and its single implementation. Perhaps a subset of the logind API for
use by desktop environments / compositors would be more useful in this
On 26 March 2014 13:42, Shachar Shemesh shac...@debian.org wrote:
[...]
As far as the systemd vs. upstart discussion, I was leaning in upstart (more
precisely, against systemd). As such, your email was very interesting to me.
Unfortunately, it was unreadable. You said you'll start with
On 25 March 2014 08:54, Federico Di Gregorio f...@dndg.it wrote:
[...]
Lots of asterisks won't make a point.
The asterisks are there to specifically focus your attention on those words.
Because - I find that if I don't use them - people tend to misread
what I write (or more so at least)
-Kev
On 25 March 2014 11:25, William Unruh un...@physics.ubc.ca wrote:
[...]
And if they are there, together with all the boldfacing, people tend to
think that you are a complete kook. So you makes your choices...
Okay, my apologies.
I am not very experienced with lists and the expectations that
On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 11:40:02 AM UTC-5, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
I was very proud of my fellow colleagues for not feeding the troll a
full 24 hours later. Thanks for breaking the record :(
Jonathan we've been through this before.
-
To all debian developers:
- systemd is *fundamentally incompatible* with linux
Now, I realize that's a bold claim, but if you are up for some reading, I
will prove it.
First - a little history just to put this into a context that's easier to
follow
Over a year ago (Nov 2012), I tried to
Sadly it is obvious from the rest of this message that you are not up
to speed on the topic here. If you want to usefully contribute to the
topic, at a very least you should familiarise yourself with the prior
threads about systemd to debian-devel. At a very, bare-minimum least.
It would then
Thu, 22 Nov 2012 12:56:09 +0800 from Chow Loong Jin hyper...@debian.org
- What role is systemd designed to facilitate?
An init daemon. But why don't you ask yourself -- what role(s) should an init
daemon play anyway?
Thank you.
Everyone raising a fuss and not many seeing the focus I am
Me too, please read:
http://catb.org/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Oh crap, my apologies.
I honestly forgot that the reply was still at the bottom of my email.
I did not intentionally leave it there.
It certainly wasn't some passive-aggressive kind of post-reply, I do
apologize for it being
...@physik.fu-berlin.de wrote:
Hello Kevin,
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 09:51:22PM -0600, Kevin Toppins wrote:
Just because something is very old, does not necessarily make it
wrong, obsolete, or require that it be changed.
Correct. But on the other hand, just because something is 40 years
old
13 matches
Mail list logo
