On 2013-05-30 13:59:09 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Also, determining which flags to pass to the daemon from some other
configuration file, which is a common use of /etc/default files, is a hack
to work around the fact that an init script is not really user-editable.
We therefore move the parts
On 02/06/13 13:15, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
Most config files are not really user-editable under Debian.
...
So, splitting config files is a
way to avoid that, not in all cases but in most cases (this is not
specific to sysvinit, apparently just a consequence of the old
wishlist bug 32877, from
Vincent Lefevre vinc...@vinc17.net writes:
Most config files are not really user-editable under Debian. I mean:
they can be editable, but there are serious drawbacks during upgrades.
Indeed most often the user has the choice between installing the new
version (but his local changes are lost)
Hi Russ,
Am 02.06.2013 18:59, schrieb Russ Allbery:
For example, here's the complete systemd file for rsyncd:
[Unit]
Description=fast remote file copy program daemon
ConditionPathExists=/etc/rsyncd.conf
[Service]
ExecStart=/usr/bin/rsync --daemon --no-detach
[Install]
Russ Allbery wrote:
There's really no reason to have something like an /etc/default setting
for that, the way there is for the rsyncd init script. You can just edit
that directly (well, it's systemd, so you have to copy it into /etc and
make a new version and then won't know if anything about
Michael Biebl bi...@debian.org writes:
Am 02.06.2013 18:59, schrieb Russ Allbery:
There's really no reason to have something like an /etc/default setting
for that, the way there is for the rsyncd init script. You can just
edit that directly (well, it's systemd, so you have to copy it into
]] Russ Allbery
There's really no reason to have something like an /etc/default
setting for that, the way there is for the rsyncd init script. You
can just edit that directly (well, it's systemd, so you have to copy
it into /etc and make a new version and then won't know if anything
about
On 03/06/2013 00:33, Simon McVittie wrote:
[...]
The current upstream systemd has an include mechanism by which the
unit in /etc can say copy all keys from the upstream version in /lib,
then set Foo=bar, and also a mechanism by which individual keys in a
unit can be overridden by a separate
Tollef Fog Heen tfh...@err.no writes:
]] Russ Allbery
There's really no reason to have something like an /etc/default
setting for that, the way there is for the rsyncd init script. You
can just edit that directly (well, it's systemd, so you have to copy
it into /etc and make a new version
On 2013-06-02 11:10:34 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Michael Biebl bi...@debian.org writes:
Am 02.06.2013 18:59, schrieb Russ Allbery:
There's really no reason to have something like an /etc/default setting
for that, the way there is for the rsyncd init script. You can just
edit that
On Thu, 30 May 2013 13:59:09 -0700, Russ Allbery r...@debian.org
wrote:
Marc Haber mh+debian-de...@zugschlus.de writes:
Russ Allbery r...@debian.org wrote:
Get rid of some of that complexity because it is pointless (you'll find
that much of it is working around inadequacies in sysvinit).
Marc Haber mh+debian-de...@zugschlus.de writes:
Russ Allbery r...@debian.org wrote:
When the source of the configuration is debconf, we know exactly when
it changes and don't need anything like inotify to know when to rebuild
it.
Disagreed, one can change a debconf-generated file manually,
Le mercredi 29 mai 2013 à 21:43 +0200, Marc Haber a écrit :
That is one of my concerns: Once Debian GNU/Linux has systemd as
default, noone will an longer provide init scripts, let alone tested
init scripts, which will severely hurt non-Linux kernels in Debian.
While entirely true, I think it
On Wed, 29 May 2013 13:10:57 -0700, Russ Allbery r...@debian.org
wrote:
Using an imperative language for a descriptive purpose is a bad mismatch
of tools and has been ever since the practical effect of init scripts has
become fairly standardized.
Some init scripts in Debian build dynamic
On 30/05/13 11:19, Marc Haber wrote:
On Wed, 29 May 2013 13:10:57 -0700, Russ Allbery r...@debian.org
wrote:
Using an imperative language for a descriptive purpose is a bad mismatch
of tools and has been ever since the practical effect of init scripts has
become fairly standardized.
Some
Marc Haber mh+debian-de...@zugschlus.de writes:
Russ Allbery r...@debian.org wrote:
Using an imperative language for a descriptive purpose is a bad
mismatch of tools and has been ever since the practical effect of init
scripts has become fairly standardized.
Some init scripts in Debian
On Thu, 30 May 2013 12:32:59 +0100, Simon McVittie s...@debian.org
wrote:
On 30/05/13 11:19, Marc Haber wrote:
On Wed, 29 May 2013 13:10:57 -0700, Russ Allbery r...@debian.org
wrote:
Using an imperative language for a descriptive purpose is a bad mismatch
of tools and has been ever since the
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 08:35:52PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
Please leave the FUD at the door. Writing upstart jobs is not difficult;
while there are some gotchas currently with process lifecycle (which will be
fixed soon), there is also very complete documentation (for these
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 12:32:59PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
On 30/05/13 11:19, Marc Haber wrote:
On Wed, 29 May 2013 13:10:57 -0700, Russ Allbery r...@debian.org
wrote:
Using an imperative language for a descriptive purpose is a bad mismatch
of tools and has been ever since the
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 09:38:40AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
development (because unlike the systemd developers, the upstart developers
aren't trying to sell anyone a bill of goods about how their existing units
are perfect and nothing will ever need to be patched downstream). But there
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 09:12:58PM +0200, Olav Vitters wrote:
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 09:38:40AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
development (because unlike the systemd developers, the upstart developers
aren't trying to sell anyone a bill of goods about how their existing units
are perfect
On Thu, 30 May 2013 08:42:49 -0700, Russ Allbery r...@debian.org
wrote:
Get rid of some of that complexity because it is pointless (you'll find
that much of it is working around inadequacies in sysvinit).
Explain.
Get rid of
more of it by building a static configuration from the dynamic
Marc Haber mh+debian-de...@zugschlus.de writes:
Russ Allbery r...@debian.org wrote:
Get rid of some of that complexity because it is pointless (you'll find
that much of it is working around inadequacies in sysvinit).
Explain.
For example, all the PID file handling is working around the
On May 28, 2013, at 11:49 PM, Marc Haber mh+debian-de...@zugschlus.de wrote:
On Sat, 25 May 2013 11:27:36 -0700, Russ Allbery r...@debian.org
wrote:
(The shading of meaning between those two options could be clearer. I
took it as a measure of enthusiasm and personally answered I welcome
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 5:11 AM, Mark Symonds wrote:
If Upstart makes it into Debian
Upstart is already in Debian.
Dependency based init already works well, to replace it with a hive of bugs
does not make sense. OpenRC is the only one which claims to be reverse
compatible,
if this is
On Fri, 24 May 2013 09:09:32 -0700, Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org
wrote:
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 08:40:19AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
On Thu, 23 May 2013 12:50:00 -0700, Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org
wrote:
Also worth noting:
~/systemd$ find . -name '*.c' | grep -vE
On Sat, 25 May 2013 11:27:36 -0700, Russ Allbery r...@debian.org
wrote:
(The shading of meaning between those two options could be clearer. I
took it as a measure of enthusiasm and personally answered I welcome
systemd in Debian because, regardless of whether it becomes the default,
I'm happy to
Marc Haber mh+debian-de...@zugschlus.de writes:
Russ Allbery r...@debian.org wrote:
(The shading of meaning between those two options could be clearer. I
took it as a measure of enthusiasm and personally answered I welcome
systemd in Debian because, regardless of whether it becomes the
On Wed, 29 May 2013 09:30:47 -0700, Russ Allbery r...@debian.org
wrote:
Marc Haber mh+debian-de...@zugschlus.de writes:
Would you also be happy to test and support both systemd unit files
_and_ init scripts?
I'm happy to provide both, integrate patches, etc., although I think init
scripts are
Marc Haber mh+debian-de...@zugschlus.de writes:
Russ Allbery r...@debian.org wrote:
I'm happy to provide both, integrate patches, etc., although I think
init scripts are awful and my level of personal motivation to work on
init scripts compared to anything else (whether it be systemd or
What are the results Michael?
ken.
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 5:19 PM, Michael Stapelberg
stapelb...@debian.org wrote:
Hello,
In the past, we have had multiple heated discussions involving
systemd. We (the pkg-systemd-maintainers team) would like to better
understand why some people dislike
Ken Barber k...@bob.sh writes:
What are the results Michael?
He posted them to debian-devel, but also:
http://people.debian.org/~stapelberg//2013/05/27/systemd-survey-results.html
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Hi,
Thanks for participating, everyone!
find the results at:
http://people.debian.org/~stapelberg/2013/05/27/systemd-survey-results.html
Another discussion is really not necessary at this point. Quote from the
page:
I know this is a controversial topic. Please don’t start yet another
❦ 24 mai 2013 12:29 CEST, Dmitrijs Ledkovs x...@debian.org :
The best way to run daemons under upstart is in foreground, then
correct PID is tracked and the complete stdout/stderr is properly
collected and stored in /var/log/upstart/$job.log (even early boot
output).
The best way to run a
Michael Stapelberg wrote:
In the past, we have had multiple heated discussions involving
systemd. We (the pkg-systemd-maintainers team) would like to better
understand why some people dislike systemd.
Therefore, we have created a survey, which you can find at
Bob Proulx b...@proulx.com writes:
The wording of one of the questions in the survey is problematic.
What is your general sentiment towards having systemd in Debian (not
necessarily as default)? Choose one of the following answers
[ ] I welcome systemd in Debian, everything is fine
On 05/24/2013 01:20 AM, brian m. carlson wrote:
rsyslog is priority important and is the default syslog implementation
in Debian. It's also the default in Fedora. I think we can be
confident that it gets lots of real-world use.
I am fully aware of that. I was mainly talking about the other
On 05/24/2013 01:15 AM, brian m. carlson wrote:
I can use only parts of coreutils if I desire.
The same is true for systemd. Ubuntu is using parts of systemd
without actually using the daemon itself.
Also, coreutils does not
start services on startup that I do not need.
Aeh, what the heck
On Fri, 2013-05-24 at 04:21 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
On 05/23/2013 03:15 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
I have the (possibly wrong) impression that OpenRC is less advanced
technically than systemd and upstart, and lacks many of their advantages
For example, according to
On Thu, 23 May 2013 23:18:04 +0200, Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org
wrote:
Le jeudi 23 mai 2013 à 22:06 +0200, Marc Haber a écrit :
Yes, systemd trying to replace so much of traditional UNIX tools at
once and so blatantly breaking the One job one tool principle that
has made our platform so
On Thu, 23 May 2013 12:50:00 -0700, Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org
wrote:
Also worth noting:
~/systemd$ find . -name '*.c' | grep -vE 'tests|test/|intl/|udev/' \
| xargs wc -l | tail -n1
149081 total
$ find . -name '*.c' | grep -vE 'tests|test/|intl/|udev/' | xargs wc -l \
| tail
Steve Langasek vorlon at debian.org writes:
Sorry you ran into trouble with upstart.
Not a DD, just a happy Debian user, hope you'll excuse me, but on the topic
of Upstart, I have some technical comments on why, surprisingly, I think it
may not be mature enough yet.
A couple of years ago I was
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 03:22:12AM +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote:
2013/5/24 brian m. carlson sand...@crustytoothpaste.net:
Gentlemen,
This is well-worn territory on -devel. Please bear in mind the OP's wish
not to open this can of worms again.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 04:07:06AM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
On 05/23/2013 03:55 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
How on earth does that contradict with the fact that 40%, i.e.
the minority of all contributions are done by the original
author. 40% still means that 60% of the code
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 03:22:12AM +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote:
Ubuntu carries patches downstream to make logind work without systemd
but with upstart instead, but I don't think that doing that is a sane
solution.
Various GNOME code incorrectly checked for systemd-as-init before using
logind.
If
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 12:50:00PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
A large number of contributors to an *init system* is not
something that should be a goal in and of itself
Then
Furthermore, the statistics for systemd are themselves a distortion
isn't really relevant here, let's please not
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 04:07:06AM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
I'm still not convinced. Don't trust the lies from Lennart, the git
clone tells the truth:
As a mostly lurker, I think there was already a request to be a bit more
polite on this mailing list. The is a big difference between
On 05/24/2013 02:19 PM, Svante Signell wrote:
What is the status of packaging OpenRC for Debian? Is there a group
doing that, is help needed?
Ok, if you ask...
Currently, the package can build and install, at least on Linux flavors
of Debian.
Once installed, it will unfortunately not
On 05/22/2013 06:19 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 03:39:00PM +0200, Bernd Schubert wrote:
On 05/22/2013 04:50 AM, Uoti Urpala wrote:
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
I went through the various init systems threads again during the last
few days. My understanding of the consensus so
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 09:11:55AM +0200, Gergely Nagy wrote:
Also, post-raring, systemd is available in Ubuntu aswell, and in some
cases, you can check for systemd at runtime, needing no modification to
the package *at all*.
What's available in
Adam Borowski kilob...@angband.pl writes:
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 09:55:41AM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
On 05/23/2013 06:56 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
As you may know, systemd is developed by a large amount of
contributors
How on earth does that contradict with the fact that
On 2013-05-24 02:16, brian m. carlson wrote:
Yes, systemd uses separate processes, but they are not independent.
They cannot be independently turned off. If I decide I do not want the
journal features, however useful others might think they are, I should
not have to resort to chmod and
On 23 May 2013 10:37, Ole Laursen o...@hardworking.dk wrote:
Steve Langasek vorlon at debian.org writes:
Sorry you ran into trouble with upstart.
Not a DD, just a happy Debian user, hope you'll excuse me, but on the topic
of Upstart, I have some technical comments on why, surprisingly, I
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 11:29:27AM +0100, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
Blog posts are interesting to read, but at times I'd like to look up
reference manuals which are more than bear minimal man pages. Whilst
systemd ships manpages, the website has either incorrectly formatted
wiki-pages and/or
On 24/05/13 11:29, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
As far as I understand (correct me if I am wrong), systemd instead of
counting/tracking forks uses cgroups to keep track of the started
processes.
systemd uses cgroups to track which processes are part of this
service?, which means the services may be
Matthias Urlichs wrote:
Steve McIntyre st...@einval.com writes:
Matthias wrote:
Please also keep in mind that many upstream projects ship systemd service
files. Therefore, most of the systemd work is already done too.
Most? Really? Do you have stats for that?
Given the fact that
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 08:40:19AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
On Thu, 23 May 2013 12:50:00 -0700, Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org
wrote:
Also worth noting:
~/systemd$ find . -name '*.c' | grep -vE 'tests|test/|intl/|udev/' \
| xargs wc -l | tail -n1
149081 total
$ find . -name
Dmitrijs Ledkovs xnox at debian.org writes:
Also on technical merits although more philosophically, with Upstart you're
expressing yourself in an event-based DSL rather than writing configuration
files. It's pretty generic. But unfortunately, that means it's also not
entirely straightforward,
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 12:29:07PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
On 24/05/13 11:29, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
As far as I understand (correct me if I am wrong), systemd instead of
counting/tracking forks uses cgroups to keep track of the started
processes.
systemd uses cgroups to track which
On 05/24/2013 04:15 PM, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 04:07:06AM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
On 05/23/2013 03:55 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
How on earth does that contradict with the fact that 40%, i.e.
the minority of all contributions are done by the original
Thomas Goirand z...@debian.org writes:
I don't understand the OP's post in the first place. What did he need to
know that wasn't discussed before?
The opinions of all the people who have opinions but are uninterested in
wading through huge threads to express them, don't read debian-devel at
Thomas Goirand z...@debian.org writes:
On 05/23/2013 01:45 AM, Josselin Mouette wrote:
I understand it will be a pain for Ubuntu if Debian picks a different
init system. I don’t think this is relevant for the discussion, though.
It might be very relevant for many of us that our package works
On 23/05/13 at 12:28 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
On 05/22/2013 04:53 AM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
- Neither systemd nor upstart are likely to be ported to kfreebsd soon,
as they both rely on many Linux-specific features and interfaces.
Though it should be easy enough to port OpenRC to
Lucas Nussbaum lu...@debian.org writes:
- there are 300+ upstart job files ready to be imported from Ubuntu
FWIW, there are a similar (if not more) number of systemd service files
we can look at and import from: Fedora, openSUSE, Arch and possibly a
few others too. (This I find to be a great
On 05/23/2013 06:56 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
* As you may know, systemd is developed by a large amount of
contributors.
If you are tired of seeing the same arguments,
Personal insults is something you call arguments? You have a weird
method of discussion ...
don't post things which
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 09:55:41AM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
On 05/23/2013 06:56 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
As you may know, systemd is developed by a large amount of
contributors
How on earth does that contradict with the fact that 40%, i.e.
the minority of all
Le jeudi 23 mai 2013 à 11:43 +0200, Adam Borowski a écrit :
Did you include the stats for all projects systemd wants to replace as well?
For just one piece:
* busybox-syslogd
* dsyslog
* inetutils-syslogd
* rsyslog
* socklog-run
* syslog-ng-core
For the Xth time (with X becoming rather
On 05/23/2013 11:43 AM, Adam Borowski wrote:
Did you include the stats for all projects systemd wants to replace as well?
For just one piece:
* busybox-syslogd
* dsyslog
* inetutils-syslogd
* rsyslog
* socklog-run
* syslog-ng-core
Well, how many of these are actually used in the real world?
Le mercredi 22 mai 2013 à 15:05 -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
There certainly have been cases of fd.o changes being dropped into Debian
without dealing with the integration questions. mime - .desktop is a prime
example of this. .desktop is clearly far superior - but that doesn't mean
it's
Josselin Mouette writes (Re: Debian systemd survey):
Le mercredi 22 mai 2013 à 15:05 -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
There certainly have been cases of fd.o changes being dropped into
Debian without dealing with the integration questions. mime -
.desktop is a prime example
On Thu, 23 May 2013 14:17:43 +0200
Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org wrote:
So if your comment is a
fair critique of upstart proponents, then mine is an equally fair critique
of systemd proponents.
I’m not criticizing the fact that upstart comes from Ubuntu. I disagree
with the idea of
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 09:22:22PM +0200, Martin Wuertele wrote:
Actually it's just a response to the ongoing insulting by joss to
variouse participants on mailinglists. As usual he has a way of mailing
that i find disgusting.
I don't find yours to be much better.
You know why many projects
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 09:11:55AM +0200, Gergely Nagy wrote:
Also, post-raring, systemd is available in Ubuntu aswell, and in some
cases, you can check for systemd at runtime, needing no modification to
the package *at all*.
What's available in Ubuntu are the systemd dbus services, the
On May 23, 2013, at 02:17 PM, Josselin Mouette wrote:
I’m not criticizing the fact that upstart comes from Ubuntu. I disagree
with the idea of having Ubuntu as the sole origin of innovation in the
project. It gives bad habits to both Debian and Ubuntu if the natural
thing to do to make things
* Philipp Kern pk...@debian.org [2013-05-23 15:39]:
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 09:22:22PM +0200, Martin Wuertele wrote:
Actually it's just a response to the ongoing insulting by joss to
variouse participants on mailinglists. As usual he has a way of mailing
that i find disgusting.
I don't
On Wed, 22 May 2013 19:40:57 +0200, Matthias Klumpp
matth...@tenstral.net wrote:
Please also keep in mind that many upstream projects ship systemd service
files. Therefore, most of the systemd work is already done too.
Are those any better than init scripts shipped by upstream? How many
Debian
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 07:07:16PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
Please also keep in mind that many upstream projects ship systemd service
files. Therefore, most of the systemd work is already done too.
Are those any better than init scripts shipped by upstream? How many
Debian packages use
2013/5/23 Marc Haber mh+debian-de...@zugschlus.de:
On Wed, 22 May 2013 19:40:57 +0200, Matthias Klumpp
matth...@tenstral.net wrote:
Please also keep in mind that many upstream projects ship systemd service
files. Therefore, most of the systemd work is already done too.
Are those any better
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 09:55:41AM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
don't post things which
have already been debunked as well. You are doing the very same thing
that you are complaining about: I already posted in this list the git
log stats, and Lennart owns more than 40% of all the
On Thu, 23 May 2013 19:34:09 +0200, Matthias Klumpp
matth...@tenstral.net wrote:
P.S: @all: Please keep in mind that systemd is not just an init
system, but contains many other bui?ding blocks to create an operating
system, e.g. journald to create better syslogs (it forwards messages
to
On 05/23/2013 03:55 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
On 05/23/2013 06:56 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
* As you may know, systemd is developed by a large amount of
contributors.
If you are tired of seeing the same arguments,
Personal insults is something you call arguments? You have a
On 05/23/2013 03:15 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
I have the (possibly wrong) impression that OpenRC is less advanced
technically than systemd and upstart, and lacks many of their advantages
For example, according to https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=391945
which is linked from
On Thu 23 May 2013 12:50:00 Steve Langasek wrote:
78% is not a minority. But this isn't the statistic that gets
trotted out by people advocating for systemd; instead, they always
cherry-pick the statistics that paint it in the most favorable
light. Because systemd advocates are not trying to
Le jeudi 23 mai 2013 à 22:06 +0200, Marc Haber a écrit :
Yes, systemd trying to replace so much of traditional UNIX tools at
once and so blatantly breaking the One job one tool principle that
has made our platform so successful is one major part of the
acceptance issues that systemd has in
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 11:18:04PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le jeudi 23 mai 2013 à 22:06 +0200, Marc Haber a écrit :
Yes, systemd trying to replace so much of traditional UNIX tools at
once and so blatantly breaking the One job one tool principle that
has made our platform so
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 02:10:57PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
On 05/23/2013 11:43 AM, Adam Borowski wrote:
Did you include the stats for all projects systemd wants to replace as well?
For just one piece:
* busybox-syslogd
* dsyslog
* inetutils-syslogd
* rsyslog
* socklog-run
2013/5/24 brian m. carlson sand...@crustytoothpaste.net:
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 11:18:04PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le jeudi 23 mai 2013 à 22:06 +0200, Marc Haber a écrit :
Yes, systemd trying to replace so much of traditional UNIX tools at
once and so blatantly breaking the One job
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 01:45:46AM +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote:
2013/5/24 brian m. carlson sand...@crustytoothpaste.net:
The Unix Way is to use separate processes
for separate tasks.
...and this is what systemd does! It's not like we have an
event-logger, hotkey-handling and
2013/5/24 brian m. carlson sand...@crustytoothpaste.net:
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 01:45:46AM +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote:
2013/5/24 brian m. carlson sand...@crustytoothpaste.net:
The Unix Way is to use separate processes
for separate tasks.
...and this is what systemd does! It's not like we
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
[...]
by people advocating for systemd; instead, they always cherry-pick the
statistics that paint it in the most favorable light. Because systemd
advocates are not trying to win on technology, they're trying to win on
marketing.
Please don't make
On 22/05/13 at 05:50 +0300, Uoti Urpala wrote:
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
I went through the various init systems threads again during the last
few days. My understanding of the consensus so far is the following:
- Both systemd and upstart bring many useful features, and are a
clear
On 05/21/2013 10:53 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
- Neither systemd nor upstart are likely to be ported to kfreebsd soon,
as they both rely on many Linux-specific features and interfaces.
What about launchd? Wouldn't it be possible to port that to
Debian/kFreeBSD? It's designed to run in a BSD
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz glaubitz at physik.fu-berlin.de writes:
On 05/21/2013 10:53 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
- Neither systemd nor upstart are likely to be ported to kfreebsd soon,
as they both rely on many Linux-specific features and interfaces.
And this is one more reason to
Uoti Urpala wrote:
A related point which I think is very important is the effect of
Debian's decision on the larger community. Having Linux distributions
permanently split in systemd and upstart camps would have major costs
for the overall Linux community.
Actually, in the EU this is called
]] Lucas Nussbaum
If I were you, I would be very worried about the risk that the decision
will be taken not by looking at which one is the best, but by looking at
which one is de-facto supported in Debian. In that area, systemd is very
late, since:
- AFAIK nobody has started the effort to
Le mercredi 22 mai 2013 à 08:16 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
- there are 300+ upstart job files ready to be imported from Ubuntu
When you compare the time it takes to write an upstart job file or a
systemd unit file, to the time it takes to proprely test it, I don’t
think this argument makes
On 22/05/13 at 08:22 +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
As Debian, we have two different problems:
1. We need to decide which init systems we want to support, and how.
2. We need to decide which init system should be the default.
We will have a GR about that.
(I assume that by about that, you
On May 21, Lucas Nussbaum lu...@debian.org wrote:
We don't need to select a single init system at this point, and it would
As the maintainer of a package which is strongly tied to the init
system, I disagree.
Then, something I failed to find in the discussion was a discussion of
how sysvinit
On 05/22/2013 04:50 AM, Uoti Urpala wrote:
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
I went through the various init systems threads again during the last
few days. My understanding of the consensus so far is the following:
- Both systemd and upstart bring many useful features, and are a
clear improvement over
Hi!
On Wed, 2013-05-22 at 09:15:03 +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
On 05/21/2013 10:53 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
- Neither systemd nor upstart are likely to be ported to kfreebsd soon,
as they both rely on many Linux-specific features and interfaces.
What about launchd? Wouldn't
1 - 100 of 134 matches
Mail list logo
