Excerpts from Chow Loong Jin's message of 2013-06-12 11:06:54 -0700:
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 09:44:16AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 04:40:22PM +0800, Chow Loong Jin wrote:
Bitrot doesn't happen immediately, and even when it does happen, it will
take time before
On Sun, 09 Jun 2013 01:04:38 +0200, Michael Stapelberg
stapelb...@debian.org wrote:
since some people might not read planet debian, here is a link to my
first blog post in a series of posts dealing with the results of the
Debian systemd survey:
Hi Michael,
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 7:17 PM, Michael Stapelberg
stapelb...@debian.orgwrote:
Hi Ondřej,
Ondřej Surý ond...@sury.org writes:
and if I match this with the table at:
http://people.debian.org/~stapelberg/docs/systemd-dependencies.html I
get
the result that you will _not_
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 09:49:03AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
[...]
|While it is sad that those machines cannot profit from systemd, switching
|to systemd as a default has no downside either: Debian continues to
|support sysvinit for quite some time, so these machines will continue
|to work
Le 12/06/2013 09:49, Marc Haber a écrit :
On Sun, 09 Jun 2013 01:04:38 +0200, Michael Stapelberg
stapelb...@debian.org wrote:
since some people might not read planet debian, here is a link to my
first blog post in a series of posts dealing with the results of the
Debian systemd survey:
Hi Ondřej,
Ondřej Surý ond...@sury.org writes:
I still think you should also update the table with information if the
library is actually used in PID 1 (or in forked process) as hmh suggested:
It would be best to enhance
http://people.debian.org/~stapelberg/docs/systemd-dependencies.html
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 04:40:22PM +0800, Chow Loong Jin wrote:
Bitrot doesn't happen immediately, and even when it does happen, it will
take time before its rate reaches an unmanageable state. Plenty of time
to test a solution in the meantime I say. Basic autogeneration of
sysvinit and
Michael Stapelberg wrote:
Ondřej Surý ond...@sury.org writes:
I still think you should also update the table with information if the
library is actually used in PID 1 (or in forked process) as hmh suggested:
It would be best to enhance
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 09:44:16AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 04:40:22PM +0800, Chow Loong Jin wrote:
Bitrot doesn't happen immediately, and even when it does happen, it will
take time before its rate reaches an unmanageable state. Plenty of time
to test a
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 7:34 PM, Uoti Urpala uoti.urp...@pp1.inet.fiwrote:
Michael Stapelberg wrote:
Ondřej Surý ond...@sury.org writes:
I still think you should also update the table with information if the
library is actually used in PID 1 (or in forked process) as hmh
suggested:
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 7:36 AM, Tollef Fog Heen tfh...@err.no wrote:
]] Thomas Goirand
If what you say above is right (I have no opinion on that yet, I just
trust what you say), then this renders the systemd is modular argument
completely useless, because practically, the user wont be
]] Ondřej Surý
Tollef, it is still unclear to me as well.
Ok, I'll try to be clearer then.
You said:
I'd like to align with upstream here (and in general): If upstream says
a component is optional, that's a configuration I'd in general want to
support. If upstream says a component
Hi Ondřej,
Ondřej Surý ond...@sury.org writes:
and if I match this with the table at:
http://people.debian.org/~stapelberg/docs/systemd-dependencies.html I get
the result that you will _not_ compile systemd with:
libselinux.so
libpam.so
libwrap.so
libaudit.so
libkmod.so
because they
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Vincent Bernat ber...@debian.org wrote:
❦ 9 juin 2013 11:45 CEST, Bjørn Mork bj...@mork.no :
You do of course not have to agree. This is my personal opinion only.
But I believe it is useful to read Jamie Zawinski's view on screensavers
and toolkit
Le 2013-06-10 10:18, Ondřej Surý a écrit :
systemd does not rely on a toolkit. So, most of the arguments
listed by
Jamie do not hold. I suppose that you are mostly worried by libdbus
since other libraries are already used in other critical
daemons.
Personally I would be more worried about
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Vincent Bernat ber...@luffy.cx wrote:
Le 2013-06-10 10:18, Ondřej Surý a écrit :
systemd does not rely on a toolkit. So, most of the arguments
listed by
Jamie do not hold. I suppose that you are mostly worried by libdbus
since other libraries are already
On Mon, 10 Jun 2013, Thomas Goirand wrote:
On 06/10/2013 03:21 AM, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
Thomas Goirand z...@debian.org writes:
In this blog post, you tell that it's possible not to use all the
components of systemd. Then, the immediate question that pops to my
mind: what are *your*
On 06/11/2013 02:23 AM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Mon, 10 Jun 2013, Thomas Goirand wrote:
On 06/10/2013 03:21 AM, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
Thomas Goirand z...@debian.org writes:
In this blog post, you tell that it's possible not to use all the
components of systemd. Then, the
Thomas Goirand wrote:
On 06/11/2013 02:23 AM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Mon, 10 Jun 2013, Thomas Goirand wrote:
Then which component would you install, and activate by default? Which
component will you make only installable if the user decides to do it
actively (for example
]] Thomas Goirand
If what you say above is right (I have no opinion on that yet, I just
trust what you say), then this renders the systemd is modular argument
completely useless, because practically, the user wont be able to
choose. Which is why I was asking specifically Michael about this,
Michael Stapelberg stapelb...@debian.org writes:
since some people might not read planet debian, here is a link to my
first blog post in a series of posts dealing with the results of the
Debian systemd survey:
http://people.debian.org/~stapelberg/2013/06/09/systemd-bloat.html
I was hoping
Hi Bjørn,
Thanks for your well-put mail. As far as I understand it, your concern
is that libraries might exit() (either due to actually calling exit() or
due to having a bug) and therefore take pid 1 with them.
I am sure that the systemd developers are very aware of this fact. They
even
❦ 9 juin 2013 11:45 CEST, Bjørn Mork bj...@mork.no :
You do of course not have to agree. This is my personal opinion only.
But I believe it is useful to read Jamie Zawinski's view on screensavers
and toolkit library dependencies, and try to figure out how that can be
relevant to systemd
On 06/09/2013 07:04 AM, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
Hi,
since some people might not read planet debian, here is a link to my
first blog post in a series of posts dealing with the results of the
Debian systemd survey:
http://people.debian.org/~stapelberg/2013/06/09/systemd-bloat.html
In
Hi Thomas,
Thomas Goirand z...@debian.org writes:
In this blog post, you tell that it's possible not to use all the
components of systemd. Then, the immediate question that pops to my
mind: what are *your* intentions then, in Debian (or, said in another
way, what would you like to do if you
On 10 June 2013 07:21, Michael Stapelberg stapelb...@debian.org wrote:
Hi Thomas,
Thomas Goirand z...@debian.org writes:
In this blog post, you tell that it's possible not to use all the
components of systemd. Then, the immediate question that pops to my
mind: what are *your* intentions
]] Robert Collins
On 10 June 2013 07:21, Michael Stapelberg stapelb...@debian.org wrote:
Hi Thomas,
Thomas Goirand z...@debian.org writes:
In this blog post, you tell that it's possible not to use all the
components of systemd. Then, the immediate question that pops to my
mind: what
On 06/10/2013 03:21 AM, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
Hi Thomas,
Thomas Goirand z...@debian.org writes:
In this blog post, you tell that it's possible not to use all the
components of systemd. Then, the immediate question that pops to my
mind: what are *your* intentions then, in Debian (or,
Hi,
since some people might not read planet debian, here is a link to my
first blog post in a series of posts dealing with the results of the
Debian systemd survey:
http://people.debian.org/~stapelberg/2013/06/09/systemd-bloat.html
--
Best regards,
Michael
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Please note that I am not advocating for or against systemd, but...
With regards complexity and whether it is intrinsic or not, Rich
Hickey puts forward a more rigorous definition of complexity, and how
it is sometimes in tension with easiness...
30 matches
Mail list logo
