]] Andrey Rahmatullin
> What I meant is: it is a common knowledge that you need to write an
> initscript for each specific distro even though most of them use sysvinit,
> but does this apply to systemd unit files too?
It's an explicit goal from systemd upstream that it should be possible
to use
]] Samuel Thibault
> Andrey Rahmatullin, le Mon 02 Apr 2012 19:21:59 +0600, a écrit :
> > On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 05:14:25PM +0400, Игорь Пашев wrote:
> > > > And the third advantage of it, is that upstream people is starting to
> > > > ship
> > > > systemd unit files.
> > > It is not advantage.
On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 06:49:24PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On 02/04/12 18:03, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> > What I meant is: it is a common knowledge that you need to write
> > an initscript for each specific distro even though most of them use
> > sysvinit, but does this apply to systemd un
On 02/04/12 18:03, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> What I meant is: it is a common knowledge that you need to write
> an initscript for each specific distro even though most of them use
> sysvinit, but does this apply to systemd unit files too?
dbus has a different init script for each distro, but one
On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 03:23:21PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > > > And the third advantage of it, is that upstream people is starting to
> > > > ship
> > > > systemd unit files.
> > > It is not advantage. it is crap. I believe no one can write and support
> > > init/systemd/whatsoever script
Samuel Thibault writes:
> Andrey Rahmatullin, le Mon 02 Apr 2012 19:21:59 +0600, a écrit :
>> That's right, nobody can write initscripts for all distros because they
>> are incompatible. Isn't this problem solved by systemd?
> No, it was mentioned previously that systemd does not aim at being a
Andrey Rahmatullin, le Mon 02 Apr 2012 19:21:59 +0600, a écrit :
> On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 05:14:25PM +0400, Игорь Пашев wrote:
> > > And the third advantage of it, is that upstream people is starting to ship
> > > systemd unit files.
> > It is not advantage. it is crap. I believe no one can write
On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 05:14:25PM +0400, Игорь Пашев wrote:
> > And the third advantage of it, is that upstream people is starting to ship
> > systemd unit files.
> It is not advantage. it is crap. I believe no one can write and support
> init/systemd/whatsoever scripts sutable for many distributi
2012/4/2 Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez
> And the third advantage of it, is that upstream people is starting to ship
> systemd unit files.
It is not advantage. it is crap. I believe no one can write and support
init/systemd/whatsoever scripts sutable for many distributions and their
versions.
All
On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 02:18:17PM +0200, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
> On 21/03/12 16:52, YunQiang Su wrote:
> > It' said that the 2 main advantage of systemd are parallel and
> > much simpler configuration file.
> >
>
> And the third advantage of it, is that upstream people is starting to
On 21/03/12 16:52, YunQiang Su wrote:
> It' said that the 2 main advantage of systemd are parallel and
> much simpler configuration file.
>
And the third advantage of it, is that upstream people is starting to ship
systemd unit files.
> Is it possible to implement an init system for kFreeBSD an
Russ Allbery wrote:
> Josselin Mouette writes:
>
> > I’ve not seen many people interested specifically in upstart in this
> > discussion, apart from Canonical employees.
>
> For the record, I'm interested specifically in upstart because I think
> that alignment with Ubuntu is a major win for Deb
On Sun, Apr 01, 2012 at 10:19:44AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>
> But isn't Ubuntu switching to systemd?
>
> https://plus.google.com/115547683951727699051/posts/MuB3MkCnieK
>
The guy's reality distortion field is amazing. "Last bastion", heh.
Interesting wording for "all but two distributio
On Mar 31, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> I’ve not seen many people interested specifically in upstart in this
> discussion, apart from Canonical employees.
I am interested in upstart and I am not a Canonical employee, but
I refrained from discussing which init system is better because the
urgent go
Hi,
On Sat, 31 Mar 2012, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Josselin Mouette writes:
>
> > I’ve not seen many people interested specifically in upstart in this
> > discussion, apart from Canonical employees.
>
> For the record, I'm interested specifically in upstart because I think
> that alignment with Ubu
Josselin Mouette writes:
> I’ve not seen many people interested specifically in upstart in this
> discussion, apart from Canonical employees.
For the record, I'm interested specifically in upstart because I think
that alignment with Ubuntu is a major win for Debian in terms of the
ecosystem and
Russ Allbery wrote:
> Samuel Thibault writes:
> > It is apparently trying to be a *Linux* standard, being adopted by all
> > distributions.
>
> That's not at all clear to me. It seems more to be trying to be a good
> init system used by Fedora, and beyond that it's left to people to make up
> th
[Thomas Goirand]
> By the way, does anyone know a way to count the numbers of init
> script with have archive wide? It'd be nice to know how much work it
> would be to rewrite absolutely all init.d scripts, and how many
> source package this involves.
I did a count of binary packages with init.d
On 31/03/12 17:40, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 03/30/2012 09:46 AM, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
>> This can be the solution we are looking to tie together the different
>> init systems.
>>
> Hi,
>
> Others have already expressed their view that using a *new* format
> for the init scripts i
On 03/30/2012 09:46 AM, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
> This can be the solution we are looking to tie together the different
> init systems.
>
Hi,
Others have already expressed their view that using a *new* format
for the init scripts isn't something they want. I wouldn't like to have
to u
Josselin Mouette writes:
> I’ve not seen many people interested specifically in upstart in this
> discussion, apart from Canonical employees.
When the "People's Front of systemd" have met the "Campaign for a Free
sysvinit" on the field of debian-devel, and there are noone left save a
few penguin
Le vendredi 30 mars 2012 à 20:49 +0200, Tollef Fog Heen a écrit :
> > What you think about extending this GSoC project to also implement the
> > translation from systemd unit files to upstart ones? it is worth ?
[snip]
> This means I'm not going to invest time in it, but if somebody shows up
> wi
Le samedi 31 mars 2012 à 00:18 +0200, Samuel Thibault a écrit :
> > For Linux? Not particularly.
>
> If it's *not* for solving everyone's use case, then it's not good for
> making it a default init implementation.
Because it’s a well-known fact that sysvinit solves everyone’s use case.
--
.'
On 2012-03-31 01:16:42 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2012-03-30 10:44:07 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > I don't think your diagnosis of this is correct, in that I don't think
> > wicd is what's doing this. I was getting things like that with Network
> > Manager as well, and usually rebooting
On 2012-03-30 10:44:07 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Vincent Lefevre writes:
> > On 2012-03-29 13:07:56 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> >> Well, it seems like you should file bugs if you can, because a lot of
> >> these are not universal problems and therefore probably aren't known
> >> issues.
>
Samuel Thibault writes:
> It is apparently trying to be a *Linux* standard, being adopted by all
> distributions.
That's not at all clear to me. It seems more to be trying to be a good
init system used by Fedora, and beyond that it's left to people to make up
their own minds, although of course
On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 12:18:20AM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> If it's *not* for solving everyone's use case, then it's not good for
> making it a default init implementation.
You cannot ever solve everyone's use cases. What systemd (and upstart)
aim to do is to solve all use cases that sysvi
Russ Allbery, le Fri 30 Mar 2012 10:41:05 -0700, a écrit :
> Samuel Thibault writes:
> > Russ Allbery, le Thu 29 Mar 2012 23:41:40 -0700, a écrit :
>
> >> It's focused on being clean, supportable, and fully integrated with
> >> Linux capabilities, *not* to solving everyone's use case, even to the
Tollef Fog Heen, le Fri 30 Mar 2012 15:40:55 +0200, a écrit :
> > > The maintenance of systemd is actually quite the opposite of a standard.
> >
> > That sentence is quite frightening.
>
> Is it? It's not like the maintenance of the kernel, KDE or GNOME is
> done in the manner you maintain a stan
]] Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez
Hi,
> What you think about extending this GSoC project to also implement the
> translation from systemd unit files to upstart ones? it is worth ?
My interest in translating systemd units to sysvinit scripts is because
it'll enable us to have higher-quality init scr
Vincent Lefevre writes:
> On 2012-03-29 13:07:56 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Well, it seems like you should file bugs if you can, because a lot of
>> these are not universal problems and therefore probably aren't known
>> issues.
> I did several months ago:
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/
Samuel Thibault writes:
> Russ Allbery, le Thu 29 Mar 2012 23:41:40 -0700, a écrit :
>> It's focused on being clean, supportable, and fully integrated with
>> Linux capabilities, *not* to solving everyone's use case, even to the
>> detriment of being universal.
> So that directly conflicts with
On 30/03/12 08:18, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> ]] Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez
>
>> > On 20/03/12 07:14, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
>>> > > FWIW, I have a proposal for a GSoC task this year to write a
>>> > > systemd-to-initscript converter,
>>> > > http://wiki.debian.org/SummerOfCode2012/Projects#SysV-in
]] Samuel Thibault
> > The maintenance of systemd is actually quite the opposite of a standard.
>
> That sentence is quite frightening.
Is it? It's not like the maintenance of the kernel, KDE or GNOME is
done in the manner you maintain a standard. Heck, probably just about
no software in Debia
On 2012-03-30 08:39:38 +0200, Salvo Tomaselli wrote:
> > Well, wicd has its own bugs, such as preventing a laptop from
> > suspending.
> are you talking about a bug from 2008 that has been fixed for ages?
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/wicd/+bug/306210
No, this is not the same bug (in my case, wicd
On 2012-03-29 23:23:52 -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
> On Thursday, March 29, 2012 04:09:57, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > Well, wicd has its own bugs, such as preventing a laptop from
> > suspending.
>
> Hmm. That sucks. I'd like to debug why you're running into this. However
> I've been using wic
On 2012-03-29 13:07:56 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Well, it seems like you should file bugs if you can, because a lot of
> these are not universal problems and therefore probably aren't known
> issues.
I did several months ago:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=637267
http://b
Russ Allbery, le Thu 29 Mar 2012 23:41:40 -0700, a écrit :
> systemd's goal wasn't to become a standard that supported things
> people were already doing.
There must be a misunderstanding somewhere, then, and that needs further
explanation: the feature comparison page produced by Lenhart says
exac
]] Stéphane Glondu
> Le 30/03/2012 08:18, Tollef Fog Heen a écrit :
> > I doubt you'll get upstreams to write metainit files. I think we'll
> > have upstreams providing systemd files and so I think metainit will
> > basically be #15 in http://xkcd.com/927/.
>
> Actually, it's more systemd that
OoO En ce milieu de nuit étoilée du vendredi 30 mars 2012, vers 03:54,
Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez disait :
>> FWIW, I have a proposal for a GSoC task this year to write a
>> systemd-to-initscript converter,
>> http://wiki.debian.org/SummerOfCode2012/Projects#SysV-init_file_creator_from_systemd_
Stéphane Glondu writes:
> Le 30/03/2012 08:18, Tollef Fog Heen a écrit :
>> I doubt you'll get upstreams to write metainit files. I think we'll
>> have upstreams providing systemd files and so I think metainit will
>> basically be #15 in http://xkcd.com/927/.
> Actually, it's more systemd that
> Well, wicd has its own bugs, such as preventing a laptop from
> suspending.
are you talking about a bug from 2008 that has been fixed for ages?
https://bugs.launchpad.net/wicd/+bug/306210
--
Salvo Tomaselli
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of
Le 30/03/2012 08:18, Tollef Fog Heen a écrit :
> I doubt you'll get upstreams to write metainit files. I think we'll
> have upstreams providing systemd files and so I think metainit will
> basically be #15 in http://xkcd.com/927/.
Actually, it's more systemd that looks like #15.
Cheers,
--
St
]] Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez
> On 20/03/12 07:14, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > FWIW, I have a proposal for a GSoC task this year to write a
> > systemd-to-initscript converter,
> > http://wiki.debian.org/SummerOfCode2012/Projects#SysV-init_file_creator_from_systemd_service_files
> >
> > The syste
On Thursday, March 29, 2012 04:09:57, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2012-03-29 02:43:33 +0200, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
> > $ sudo apt-get remove network-manager*
> > $ sudo apt-get install wicd wicd-curses wicd-gtk
> >
> > ^ wicd-kde ?
> >
> > $ wic
On 20/03/12 07:14, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> FWIW, I have a proposal for a GSoC task this year to write a
> systemd-to-initscript converter,
> http://wiki.debian.org/SummerOfCode2012/Projects#SysV-init_file_creator_from_systemd_service_files
>
> The systemd service files are covered by the «interfa
On 19/03/12 14:23, Jon Dowland wrote:
>> I just had a look, and no, that's not what metainit does.
>> > What it does is *generating* an init.d script, using the
>> > metainit syntax as input. IMO, just a normal shell script
>> > tiny library to simplify our init.d scripts would be enough.
> So it d
On Thu, 2012-03-29 at 13:07, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Mike Hommey writes:
> > On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 10:09:57AM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> >> Well, wicd has its own bugs, such as preventing a laptop from
> >> suspending.
> Works for me; I've never had any trouble at all suspending my laptop and
Mike Hommey writes:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 10:09:57AM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
>> Well, wicd has its own bugs, such as preventing a laptop from
>> suspending.
Works for me; I've never had any trouble at all suspending my laptop and
I've been using wicd for years. (The laptop tracks unst
On 2012-03-29 11:15:30 +0100 (+0100), Philip Hands wrote:
[...]
> I'd only use either to make flipping between wireless networks something
> where I don't need to keep the comandline incantations in my head
[...]
And indeed, I just "keep the commandline incantations in my head"
for ifupdown, wirel
On 2012-03-29 11:15:30 +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> I'd only use either to make flipping between wireless networks something
> where I don't need to keep the comandline incantations in my head
> anyway, so the last thing I need is NM noticing that I've plugged or
> unplugged an ethernet cable, and
On Thu, 29 Mar 2012 10:20:50 +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
...
> I could file bugs, but I have so many problems that I'm better off
> switching to NM.
Well, that's constructive -- well done.
I think you'll find that there are two groups of users (at least), one
that is relatively happy with the assu
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 10:09:57AM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2012-03-29 02:43:33 +0200, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
> > $ sudo apt-get remove network-manager*
> > $ sudo apt-get install wicd wicd-curses wicd-gtk
> > ^ wicd-kde ?
> > $ wicd-curs
On 2012-03-29 02:43:33 +0200, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
> $ sudo apt-get remove network-manager*
> $ sudo apt-get install wicd wicd-curses wicd-gtk
> ^ wicd-kde ?
> $ wicd-curses
>
> And enjoy your network without the NM mess :)
Well, wicd has its o
On Thu, 2012-03-29 at 15:35 +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez writes:
> > $ sudo apt-get remove network-manager*
> > $ sudo apt-get install wicd wicd-curses wicd-gtk
> > ^ wicd-kde ?
> > $ wicd-curses
> >
> > And enjoy your network witho
Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez writes:
> $ sudo apt-get remove network-manager*
> $ sudo apt-get install wicd wicd-curses wicd-gtk
> ^ wicd-kde ?
> $ wicd-curses
>
> And enjoy your network without the NM mess :)
... unless, of course, you're using gnome-shell,
On 23/03/12 13:35, Svante Signell wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 14:16 +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote:
>> > On Vi, 23 mar 12, 00:07:43, Svante Signell wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > Please, don't make things unbearably complicated in case something
>>> > > breaks!!! Network *should* work also in console mode
On 2012-03-18 00:53:37 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> I know almost nothing about systemd
>
> I'd like people to think twice before opt-in for systemd. I just
> taked with a friend working for redhat, and he told me how much
> he hates it. He told me that if *anything* goes wrong in the boot
> pro
On 03/17/2012 01:40 PM, Philip Hands wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 18:23:57 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> NAME=package-binary-file
>> DESC="package daemon description"
>>
>> [ -e . /usr/share/sysv-lib/debsysv-lib ] && debsysv-init-lib $@
>
> I'm happy to help with that ... although, I doubt we'r
Hi there!
On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 20:45:20 +0100, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> Writing configuration files with the shell is not going to be anywhere
> simple. In two years, it will be the same mess as now: everybody will
> have extended the "configuration" with its own functions and somebody
> wil
]] Stefano Zacchiroli
> It is not clear to me the status of similar policy work for systemd,
> although I see that systemd maintainers are participating in
> #591791. Again, if you're interested in Debian switch to systemd,
> please contribute to that work rather than arguing on -devel.
It's not
Martin Wuertele wrote:
> * Uoti Urpala [2012-03-23 19:44]:
> > IMO your [Steve Langasek's] upstart advocacy and anti-systemd FUD
> > crosses the line between having your own opinions and having your
> > own facts.
>
> There was neither FUD nor advocacy in Steves mail and no hostile
> attitude tow
* Uoti Urpala [2012-03-23 19:44]:
> IMO your upstart advocacy and anti-systemd FUD crosses the line between
> having your own opinions and having your own facts.
Could you please mind your words. Your style of discussion is very
hostile!
There was neither FUD nor advocacy in Steves mail and no
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 10:14:53AM +, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> There is a lot of feelings and temper involved in the current discussion
> of init implementations in Debian. I'd like to try to de-escalate by
> summarizing things in as objective and non-confrontational manner as I can.
Lars, than
> Whereas there's no indication that RHEL is switching away from upstart. I'm
> not sure why Debian should regard OpenSUSE as an opinion leader when picking
> its core technologies.
When it comes to the boot system we have collaborated quite a lot with Werner
Fink who is SuSE/OpenSuSE affiliated
On Friday, March 23, 2012 19:23:11, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 06:59:52PM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
> > On Friday, March 23, 2012 18:26:37, Michael Biebl wrote:
> > > On 23.03.2012 20:07, Chris Knadle wrote:
> > > > Right now the situation may be somewhat reversed, because in t
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 06:59:52PM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
> On Friday, March 23, 2012 18:26:37, Michael Biebl wrote:
> > On 23.03.2012 20:07, Chris Knadle wrote:
> > > Right now the situation may be somewhat reversed, because in the general
> > > case, daemons need to be patched to work correct
On Friday, March 23, 2012 19:06:48, Michael Biebl wrote:
> On 23.03.2012 23:59, Chris Knadle wrote:
> > Lennart Pottering during his talk said that daemons needed to be patched
> > to fully work with systemd, but didn't say specifically what they needed
> > to be patched for. If he had qualified i
On 23.03.2012 23:59, Chris Knadle wrote:
> Lennart Pottering during his talk said that daemons needed to be patched to
> fully work with systemd, but didn't say specifically what they needed to be
> patched for. If he had qualified it, I would have.
Can you provide any references?
--
Why is
On Friday, March 23, 2012 18:26:37, Michael Biebl wrote:
> On 23.03.2012 20:07, Chris Knadle wrote:
> > Right now the situation may be somewhat reversed, because in the general
> > case, daemons need to be patched to work correctly with systemd.
>
> This is simply not true.
>
> Only if you want t
On 23.03.2012 20:07, Chris Knadle wrote:
> Right now the situation may be somewhat reversed, because in the general
> case,
> daemons need to be patched to work correctly with systemd.
This is simply not true.
Only if you want to use socket activation, you need to patch your
daemon. But socket
On Thu, 2012-03-22 at 20:43 -0300, Fernando Lemos wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 8:07 PM, Svante Signell
> wrote:
> > Please, don't make things unbearably complicated in case something
> > breaks!!! Network *should* work also in console mode... Looking forward
> > to the which nasty bugs in the
On Friday, March 23, 2012 12:05:28, Matt Zagrabelny wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Ritesh Raj Sarraf
wrote:
> > Today, on my typical laptop, boot is not the most important task. It
> > is better to have something well working, fixable (being mere shell
> > scripts and that's what your
Steve Langasek wrote:
> The current state of upstart in Debian is a reflection of the upstart
> maintainers' respect for Debian and desire to not destabilize the
> distribution by triggering an avalanche of package conversions that could
> quickly take us past the point of no return for bit rot of
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:56:49AM +0100, Fabian Greffrath wrote:
> >Please let's not forget that this is not about systemd: we have not even
> >started yet the flame war to decide if we should use systemd or upstart.
> Well, In find the overall reception of systemd in upstream projects
> and the
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:
> Today, on my typical laptop, boot is not the most important task. It
> is better to have something well working, fixable (being mere shell
> scripts and that's what your friend is also pointing). sysvinit serves
> this purpose well.
boo
Roger Leigh, le Fri 23 Mar 2012 10:44:31 +, a écrit :
> Debugging the core sysvinit or systemd code does
> require programming expertise, but it only needs doing once.
> Once it's tested and known to work well, the chance of a
> user running into problems with it is very small.
In the case of
Timo Juhani Lindfors, le Fri 23 Mar 2012 14:15:00 +0200, a écrit :
> Samuel Thibault writes:
> > the particular script that poses problem. With a deamon like systemd,
> > it's rather all-or-nothing.
>
> This gives me the impression that systemd would be a single monolithic
> binary but isn't vcon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Saturday 17 March 2012 10:23 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> I'd like people to think twice before opt-in for systemd. I just
> taked with a friend working for redhat, and he told me how much he
> hates it. He told me that if *anything* goes wrong in
Hi
Dne Fri, 23 Mar 2012 13:35:34 +0100
Svante Signell napsal(a):
> On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 14:16 +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> > On Vi, 23 mar 12, 00:07:43, Svante Signell wrote:
> > >
> > > Please, don't make things unbearably complicated in case something
> > > breaks!!! Network *should* work
On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 14:16 +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> On Vi, 23 mar 12, 00:07:43, Svante Signell wrote:
> >
> > Please, don't make things unbearably complicated in case something
> > breaks!!! Network *should* work also in console mode...
>
> I'm not a big fan of Network Manager, but this i
Le vendredi 23 mars 2012 à 00:07 +0100, Svante Signell a écrit :
> Speaking about buggy software: Today the libpcre3 update broke a lot of
> functions on my computer
This is an interesting story, as libpcre3 being a really core part of
the system now means that it should stop being maintained in s
On Vi, 23 mar 12, 00:07:43, Svante Signell wrote:
>
> Please, don't make things unbearably complicated in case something
> breaks!!! Network *should* work also in console mode...
I'm not a big fan of Network Manager, but this is unfair: if you click
"Make available to all users" the connection
Samuel Thibault writes:
> the particular script that poses problem. With a deamon like systemd,
> it's rather all-or-nothing.
This gives me the impression that systemd would be a single monolithic
binary but isn't vconsole-setup.c that you mention actually part of a
small helper binary at /lib/sy
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:49:09AM +0100, Martin Wuertele wrote:
> * Marco d'Itri [2012-03-21 09:34]:
>
> > On Mar 21, Svante Signell wrote:
> >
> > > And how do you expect non-experts be able to solve problems when they
> > > pop up. Buying consultant services from the experts?
> > Non-experts
Tollef Fog Heen, le Fri 23 Mar 2012 10:27:02 +0100, a écrit :
> > What init scripts use from the shell is way less complex than what
> > systemd implements, and it's independant from what is needed to achieve
> > the boot. You can copy over a woking systemd, fine, your system can
> > boot, but you
Please let's not forget that this is not about systemd: we have not even
started yet the flame war to decide if we should use systemd or upstart.
Well, In find the overall reception of systemd in upstream projects
and the current state of upstart in Debian quite convincing. Even
OpenSUSE who w
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 05:04:09PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 03/23/2012 12:14 PM, Chris Knadle wrote:
> > [1] https://blip.tv/linuxconfau/beyond-init-systemd-4715015
> >
> This is very interesting, thanks for the link.
>
> What I found interesting, is when he says that all distributio
]] Thomas Goirand
> And also with release goals. If we decide to change sysvinit by something
> else (which ever it is), I guess it would be a wheezy+1 release goal
> (I really hope that nobody is seriously thinking about such radical
> change so close from the freeze...).
I'm working on getting
]] Samuel Thibault
> Tollef Fog Heen, le Thu 22 Mar 2012 15:47:45 +0100, a écrit :
> > > Stig Sandbeck Mathisen, le Thu 22 Mar 2012 13:35:15 +0100, a écrit :
> > > > Samuel Thibault writes:
> > > >
> > > > > Because the issue at stake might lie in systemd itself, not the unit
> > > > > file.
>
On 03/22/2012 07:10 AM, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> This I disagree with, Debian doesn't work by people sitting down,
> writing papers and then agreeing on a course of action. Debian works,
> mostly, by people putting in effort and then documenting how others can
> solve the same or similar problems.
On 03/23/2012 12:14 PM, Chris Knadle wrote:
> [1] https://blip.tv/linuxconfau/beyond-init-systemd-4715015
>
This is very interesting, thanks for the link.
What I found interesting, is when he says that all distributions are
switching to systemd. All but ... Ubuntu. But he pretends to have
goo
On Mar 22, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> So you believe that systemd
Please let's not forget that this is not about systemd: we have not even
started yet the flame war to decide if we should use systemd or upstart.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Wednesday, March 21, 2012 11:30:21, Andres Mejia wrote:
> On Mar 21, 2012 10:57 AM, "Svante Signell" wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 14:44 +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > > ]] Svante Signell
> > >
> > > > Regarding who is expert or not, can the people who considers
>
> themselves
>
> > >
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> A few people that would have to be expert in all the areas that systemd
> implements? There are a lot of knobs in the Debian sysv initscripts,
> which are there for a reason that has been determined by experts of
> the corresponding area during the pa
Le Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 12:07:43AM +0100, Svante Signell a écrit :
>
> Speaking about buggy software: Today the libpcre3 update broke a lot of
> functions on my computer, including start of gdm3. And since I'm using
> the network manager for ethernet (some stuff does not work without it),
> it was
On Thursday, March 22, 2012 19:07:43, Svante Signell wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-03-22 at 23:02 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Le jeudi 22 mars 2012 à 16:47 +0100, Samuel Thibault a écrit :
> > > A few people that would have to be expert in all the areas that systemd
> > > implements? There are a lo
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 8:07 PM, Svante Signell
wrote:
> Please, don't make things unbearably complicated in case something
> breaks!!! Network *should* work also in console mode... Looking forward
> to the which nasty bugs in the future are caused by systemd/upstart!
Wow. You *clearly* don't kno
Samuel Thibault writes:
> So you believe that systemd already implements all the important details
> that readahead+inetd+udev+autofs+fsck+quota+swapon+kbd+getty+etc. have
> polished over time?
I suspect there are corner cases that are not yet polished properly, which
is why people run it and re
On Thu, 2012-03-22 at 23:02 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le jeudi 22 mars 2012 à 16:47 +0100, Samuel Thibault a écrit :
> > A few people that would have to be expert in all the areas that systemd
> > implements? There are a lot of knobs in the Debian sysv initscripts,
> > which are there for
1 - 100 of 220 matches
Mail list logo
