On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 19:09:39 -0400
Miles Fidelman mfidel...@meetinghouse.net wrote:
Brian wrote:
On Tue 21 Oct 2014 at 15:01:18 -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 17:19:08 +0200
Liam Proven lpro...@gmail.com wrote:
A blog post explaining why it isn't mandatory, the utter
On 10/21/2014 09:22 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Don Armstrong wrote:
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Miles Fidelman wrote:
which is immediately followed by completely inaccurate information,
including:
--
With jessie, it will become /easier/ to choose the init system, because
*neither init system is
Am Mittwoch, 22. Oktober 2014, 07:04:12 schrieb Jape Person:
On 10/21/2014 09:22 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Don Armstrong wrote:
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Miles Fidelman wrote:
which is immediately followed by completely inaccurate information,
including:
--
With jessie, it will
On 10/22/2014 07:41 AM, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 22. Oktober 2014, 07:04:12 schrieb Jape Person:
On 10/21/2014 09:22 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Don Armstrong wrote:
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Miles Fidelman wrote:
which is immediately followed by completely inaccurate information,
On Wed 22 Oct 2014 at 02:00:34 -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 19:09:39 -0400
Miles Fidelman mfidel...@meetinghouse.net wrote:
Brian wrote:
On Tue 21 Oct 2014 at 15:01:18 -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 17:19:08 +0200
Liam Proven lpro...@gmail.com
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Don Armstrong wrote:
Furthermore, the effect of this patch is trivially obtained by using
a late_command to remove systemd-sysv and install sysvinit-core.
except for the various reported issues with all the things aptitude
wants to remove when
On 10/22/2014 07:04 AM, Jape Person wrote:
/snip/
I haven't paid a lot of attention to threads concerning systemd because of the
(unfortunate, though occasionally entertaining) hyperbole and innuendo employed
by so many. . . .
On 10/22/2014 02:42 PM, Doug wrote:
On 10/22/2014 07:04 AM, Jape Person wrote:
/snip/
I haven't paid a lot of attention to threads concerning systemd because of the
(unfortunate, though occasionally entertaining) hyperbole and innuendo employed
by so many. . . .
A blog post explaining why it isn't mandatory, the utter futility of
the fork and more besides, clearly and simply.
http://www.vitavonni.de/blog/201410/2014102101-avoiding-systemd.html
--
Liam Proven • Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk •
Liam Proven wrote:
A blog post explaining why it isn't mandatory, the utter futility of
the fork and more besides, clearly and simply.
http://www.vitavonni.de/blog/201410/2014102101-avoiding-systemd.html
Would be nicer if it was accurate.
For example, it talks about version pinning as a way
On 21 October 2014 17:40, Miles Fidelman mfidel...@meetinghouse.net wrote:
Liam Proven wrote:
A blog post explaining why it isn't mandatory, the utter futility of
the fork and more besides, clearly and simply.
http://www.vitavonni.de/blog/201410/2014102101-avoiding-systemd.html
Would be
On 10/21/2014 11:19 AM, Liam Proven lpro...@gmail.com wrote:
A blog post explaining why it isn't mandatory, the utter futility of
the fork and more besides, clearly and simply.
http://www.vitavonni.de/blog/201410/2014102101-avoiding-systemd.html
Doesn't address - and nothing can
is Avoiding systemd isn't hard -
which is immediately followed by completely inaccurate information,
including:
--
With jessie, it will become /easier/ to choose the init system, because
*neither init system is essential now*. Instead, there is an essential
meta-package init, which requires
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Miles Fidelman wrote:
which is immediately followed by completely inaccurate information,
including:
--
With jessie, it will become /easier/ to choose the init system, because
*neither init system is essential now*. Instead, there is an essential
meta-package init,
alliance with.
But putting the author's agenda aside for a moment, he pins his
Avoiding systemd isn't difficult mantra on pinning. Umm, what happens
three years from now if Ian Jackson's GR votes against choice? Oops!
And once again, I thank Ian Jackson for doing the right thing, in spite
Liam Proven:
A blog post explaining why it isn't mandatory, the utter
futility of the fork and more besides, clearly and simply.
http://www.vitavonni.de/blog/201410/2014102101-avoiding-systemd.html
At least in Sid libsystemd0 is a dependency of the essential package
bsdutils
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 23:17:56 +0200
tor...@riseup.net tor...@riseup.net wrote:
If one doesn't want systemd/libsystemd0, then Debian is not a good
choice (having to tinker all the time one can just as well run one of
the KISS distros).
imho, of course.
Debian *was* a KISS distro. That's
On Tue 21 Oct 2014 at 15:01:18 -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 17:19:08 +0200
Liam Proven lpro...@gmail.com wrote:
A blog post explaining why it isn't mandatory, the utter futility of
the fork and more besides, clearly and simply.
Brian wrote:
On Tue 21 Oct 2014 at 15:01:18 -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 17:19:08 +0200
Liam Proven lpro...@gmail.com wrote:
A blog post explaining why it isn't mandatory, the utter futility of
the fork and more besides, clearly and simply.
Don Armstrong wrote:
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Miles Fidelman wrote:
which is immediately followed by completely inaccurate information,
including:
--
With jessie, it will become /easier/ to choose the init system, because
*neither init system is essential now*. Instead, there is an essential
I agree that a fork is too radical, hard to maintain without money and
blah blah blah...
We just need uselessd + new udev to kick systemd entirely.
Then, if a problem appear, lets fix it. And if a new software
appearing depending on systemd as PID1, I'll not use it, simple as
that.
Again, I do
On 21/10/14 at 03:01pm, Steve Litt wrote:
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 17:19:08 +0200
Liam Proven lpro...@gmail.com wrote:
A blog post explaining why it isn't mandatory, the utter futility of
the fork and more besides, clearly and simply.
Le 10/05/2014 21:49, Cameron Norman a écrit :
Greetings John,
El Sat, 10 de May 2014 a las 9:05 AM, John johnrchamp...@wowway.com
escribió:
After following the discussions of systemd (including everything on
debian-devel), I find myself appalled at the rude and domineering
attitudes of
On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 03:47:47PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
This one.
The systemd package contains other dbus services that you don't want to try
to exclude from a desktop system; and libpam-systemd provides necessary
integration with policykit on those same systems.
So basically what
After following the discussions of systemd (including everything on
debian-devel), I find myself appalled at the rude and domineering attitudes of
almost all systemd's defenders. I don't trust them. Accordingly, I'd like to
keep systemd off my machine (sid) to the extent practical until
Greetings John,
El Sat, 10 de May 2014 a las 9:05 AM, John johnrchamp...@wowway.com
escribió:
After following the discussions of systemd (including everything on
debian-devel), I find myself appalled at the rude and domineering
attitudes of almost all systemd's defenders. I don't trust them.
Hi John,
On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 12:05:25PM -0400, John wrote:
After following the discussions of systemd (including everything on
debian-devel), I find myself appalled at the rude and domineering
attitudes of almost all systemd's defenders. I don't trust them.
Accordingly, I'd like to keep
27 matches
Mail list logo
